Re: Social Committee proposal
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 01:35:21 +0100, Josip Rodin <email@example.com>
> I should also note that we have this sort of an effect already - if
> someone wishes to impose their ideas on others, for example to
> modify a certain package in a way that they think is right, they can
> usually achieve it by working hard enough and being patient enough
> to take over the package.
> Yet, we also have a tyranny of the minority effect, when e.g. a
> person with an uncommon opinion maintains a package in a way that
> contradicts with the wishes of others.
In both these cases, those that do the work make the
decisions. People who do not like it, and are willing to do the
work, can fork and offer alternatives.
We don't generally let the majority decude how the working
minority does its work.
> Both of these kinds of people are free to participate in public
> discussions and represent their point of view.
_anyone_ can participate in a public discussion, yes.
> Having various opinions represented through elected members of a
> committee will have various effects. It will dampen the effect of
> any small minority, including those who are otherwise dominant, if
> they couldn't elect a candidate who would represent their exact
> views most vocally; they could still counteract that by continuing
> to voice their opinions and convincing others to join and 'expand'
> their ranks. It would also support the election of candidates who
> enjoy support of the other kind of people, those who are otherwise
> disproportionally discriminated against.
This still means the tyrranny of the majority.
> Bear in mind that we use a Condorcet method to elect people, meaning
> that the elected people will more often lean towards consensus than
> not. That could well be sufficient to avoid anything approaching a
> tyranny of the majority. If not, the committee's powers would never
> be as far-reaching as to actually be able to alienate any minority
> too much.
No, condorcet still lets the majority rule -- all it does it
that it allows people to vote for more than one options, without
having them feel that they might be throwing their vote away as in
first past the post and otehr methods.
Condorcet does nothing to allay the tyranny of the majority, I
am sorry to say.
If we do have a social committee, there should be some
guidelines to protect the cultural rights of minorities, and to
favour diversity as opposed to the monoculture our mostly white,
euopean-descended, male voting population represents.
Unnamed Law: If it happens, it must be possible.
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C