On the Importance of Smaller Parties

Day 1,982, 18:48 • Published in Ireland Ireland • by Damhnaic


« We can see indeed that in all the uncultivated nations
that haven’t yet had a full experience of the advantages
that come with beneficence, justice, and the social virtues,
courage is ·regarded as· the predominant excellence, the one
that is most celebrated by poets, recommended by parents
and instructors, and admired by people in general. »
-David HUME, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals.


Dear friends of the eWorld (and others),

On this congress election eve, I would like to speak with you of a political situation I believe eIreland shares with the global eWorld and it is the current state of smaller political parties.

As you might know, a few months ago ePlato decided to change the election process for congress candidates. The new system, based on nationwide proportional vote and no longer on regional vote, is, however, limited to the top 5 parties.

Thus, while I did appreciate the measure because it was considerably harder for a multi user to be elected (since beforehand you simply had to have 3-4 multis to vote for you in a region to be elected), it had a quite dramatic effect on the state of political parties.

1. Power to the Party President
2. Advantages to the bigger parties in elections
3. Reduction of political diversity



1. Power to the Party President

With the system change, there has been a significant increase to the power of the Party President since he is the one to decide the final party layout. As a consequence, the Party President can become the sole decision maker in the congress candidates lineup and can put his friends on top of the list, and the ones he doesn't agree about at the bottom of the list.

This change also made PTO easiers since electing only one people at the head of a party can prevent the entire legitimate party members to be elected on congress because of the President congress lineup choice, taking both the Party Presidency of the party and its congress seat. (Like it happened with ILP)

Finally, there is absolutely no way to remove a Party President from office, even if we realize he is a PTOer or anything else, giving them total impunity in their future usage of their powers.


2. Advantages to the bigger parties in elections

Furthermore, this gives an increased advantage to bigger parties over smaller parties in Congress Elections.

Indeed, it is now way easier for a two-clicker party member, unaware of the politics, to vote for the party, not having to do a candidate choice like before*. Making the bigger party have measurably more power, not based on active membership, but based on two-clickers hordes. (For example, a big party with 20 active members and 60 two-clickers/dead accounts will attract more two-clickers and have a bigger political power while a party with 20 active members, but no two-clickers, won't attract much two-clickers and have significantly less political power.)

Since the bigger parties, the ones who might attract two-clickers with aesthetics and appearances, have an increased chance to elected party members as congressmen, it makes the eCountry's congress determined by appearance and not on capacity/ideas. It makes the parties not revolving around propaganda but on quality candidates and idea to have an insignificant weight in congress where the numerous big party candidates will have a majority, making the congress more homogeneous with big party candidates.
______________________
*Moreover, if we realize two-clickers often join either the first or the second party, based on the party standing or on its aesthetics, it makes the whole thing ever worst. The major parties will attract more and more two-clickers which will give them more and more congress power; and they only have to make funny or attractive articles/logo/messages for it. Thus the system is making the promotion of party appearance and not party ideas, making big parties bigger.


3. Reduction of political diversity

The third section is the consequence of the two firsts.

Because party presidents have the final word on who makes it in congress and who doesn't, it reduces intern party diversity since the Party President won't be driven to put the ones he disagrees with on top of the list, thus making the party a mirror of its president choices. On the global scene of political parties, the advantages to bigger parties makes it less easy for smaller parties to make it in congress and makes a more homogeneous congress. Finally, the 'top 5' limitation for parties to be able to present congress candidates limits even more the possible views in congress, limiting it to the 5 bigger parties.

But we must not forget the capital importance of diversity in decision making. When big parties take all the place, there is no place for originality, these divergent opinions and idea have no ways of expression or influence in the decision making process.

« But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. »
-John-Stuart MILL, On Libery.

Moreover, this situation discourages the marginals to express their ideas. If they want to be in their party congress list to make it in congress they have to follow the party ideology and president, even if they disagree with him. It is a moral conformism by a systemic marginalization of divergent views:

« But the price paid for this sort of intellectual pacification, is the sacrifice of the entire moral courage of the human mind. A state of things in which a large portion of the most active and inquiring intellects find it advisable to keep the genuine principles and grounds of their convictions within their own breasts, and attempt, in what they address to the public, to fit as much as they can of their own conclusions to premises which they have internally renounced, cannot send forth the open, fearless characters, and logical, consistent intellects who once adorned the thinking world. The sort of men who can be looked for under it, are either mere conformers to commonplace, or time-servers for truth whose arguments on all great subjects are meant for their hearers, and are not those which have convinced themselves. Those who avoid this alternative, do so by narrowing their thoughts and interests to things which can be spoken of without venturing within the region of principles, that is, to small practical matters, which would come right of themselves, if but the minds of mankind were strengthened and enlarged, and which will never be made effectually right until then; while that which would strengthen and enlarge men's minds, free and daring speculation on the highest subjects, is abandoned. »
-John-Stuart MILL, On Liberty.

Our responsibility, if we want to ensure the best discernment** in our eCountry decision making, is thus to encourage individuals to express their originality, their eccentricities, and it is not by moral conformism and party centralization that such thing can be reached.
______________________
** Discernment requires multiple points to views to be able to figure out the best action to undertake, idea to adopt, etc. Thus, discernment is only clearer and enlightened with a bigger diversity of points of views.


Finally, the reason behind this article is, quite frankly, to ask you to consider supporting smaller parties in today's congress elections. While they don't have all the same advantages as bigger parties in ePlato's system, I think the views they bear would be a significant benefit for the congress, and thus for the country itself. While I do not have a solution to propose, I wanted to awaken the minds on these problematic. Maybe together we can find ways to diminish these consequences or we can go cry in ePlato's arms for yet another thing we want them to fix.

Cordially,


Previously publishe😛
*Mediocrity of Leaders, day 1957.
*Liberty of Discussion in Democracy, day 1955.