I prefer bringing up that in US “democracy” some votes count more than others. When trump won, more people voted for Clinton and for some reason yanks seem to be totally ok with this.
Isn’t that true for any representative democracy especially when gerrymandering is allowed? In Aus you can easily have a party win more than 50% of the vote but not get in because the votes were concentrated in vast-majority seats.
It absolutely isn’t. There is no inherent reason why votes can’t be added up and tallied in a straight forward way in a representative democracy.
It’s not inherent to representative democracy but let’s be honest most systems we use have flaws like that, including Europe.
(An exemple in Europe would be choosing only one individual to vote. Which divide voters of two close candidates and lower both of their score.)
And that’s probably why we feel like most representatives democracy can’t escape some of thoses problems.
Mathematically though there is some systems that have been proven to not have those same flaws.
Problem is, of course how hard it is to fix a system that can only be changed by the people that it favors.
We are not ok with this, but changing the way it works is a herculean task. The people that it currently works for are very invested in keeping it that way.
But why is nobody even protesting it? Seems kind of a cornerstone of democracy, no? How could anything coming out of this system have any legitimacy?
The media has done a pretty good job convincing the vast majority of Americans that we are the pinnacle of democracy and any change to that is either fascism or communism. Wanting a better system is intentionally painted as un-American.
Because it’s easier for people to pretend already being busy (focusing on and protesting nonsensical and completely irrelevant shit) vs actually focusing on the primary and relevant things that are actually impacting their lives.