Trends in fairness and complexity

Electoral trends

This simple graph illustrates something I’ve been thinking about lately. In one corner we have the the least fair situation that happens to be dead simple: despotism. We’d like our system of governance to be a little more equitable than that, so we walk over to the right and start running into complexity.

In some cases, we can move along the fairness axis without increasing complexity (e.g. recognizing an individual’s right to vote regardless of race or gender requires no augmentation of the electoral infrastructure). However, most changes increase both; The systems we put in place to improve representation tend to be more complex that living without them.

That being said, I recognize that electoral reform (specifically voting reform) will increase the complexity of our system. Fortunately, this is refinement in the right direction: a little more fairness at the cost of a little more complexity.

Electoral complexities Democratic equalities
Despotism None. None.
Current system
  • The ability to vote requires an electoral infrastructure, volunteers to officiate the ballots, spoiled ballot standards.
  • Assembly of representatives, their salaries, a physical building to hold sessions.
  • Many more.
  • Citizens have a say in government function.
  • Representatives can be voted out of power by a consolidated majority.
  • Everyone’s votes are counted equally.
  • Many more.
Refinements proposed in voting reform
  • Ballots are extended to collect more than first-order preferences (e.g. ratings ballots).
  • Plurality’s “candidate with the most first-order preferences” is replaced with more a more refined aggregate function.

2 Responses to “Trends in fairness and complexity”

  1. Ratel  on August 13th, 2009

    Great description, I drew out something similar once but never followed it through. I wish more people would see electoral reform this way. There are some people who are attached to particular systems and aren’t willing to settle for improvements that aren’t perfect. We all need to recognize there is no such thing as a perfect democratic system and that the goal is progress towards more fairness, not some particular implementation of PR or any other type of reform.

    thanks.

  2. Brad Beattie  on August 13th, 2009

    I definitely have my systems I prefer over STV (at the moment it’s Ranked Pairs using ratings ballots), but I’m on board with anything that moves us along that historical trend towards fairer systems.

    I’m thinking lately that smaller steps are in order, by which I mean instituting electoral reform at municipal levels. BC-STV recently failed with only 39% support, but Vancouver was 47% for it, Victoria 59%. I’m preparing a presentation for Vancouver’s city council. Maybe that’s the next step. *shrug*


Leave a Reply