The Scottish flag flying in the wind over a castle's wall under a grey sky. A cannon is emerging from a hole in the wall

The People’s Will?

Some thoughts on democracy, that are coming to my mind as a new referendum on Scottish independency, and a bit later possibly one about Catalunya’s might be on the horizon.

Whilst for bread & butter legislation, representative democracy seems to be a good idea, I do believe that major and highly consequential decisions should actually be decided by a referendum.

I am thinking of decisions that will invariably change a country’s destiny at least for decades, like the independence of territories, the joining or leaving certain organizations, e.g. EU and NATO or fundamental constitutional changes.

However: I do believe that such important decisions need a solid majority to go ahead or to be fully rejected.

There are core beliefs in societies which change slowly over time and there are mood swings. We know from changing poll results that many voters are not firmly convinced of one opinion or the other, and are likely to be swayed by charismatic leaders, propaganda, fears or current events into one direction or the other.

Therefore, in matters of utmost importance, I’d say a generous margin of error has to be taken into account, I’d say 10% in either direction. I consider a 60:40 vote a solid majority and one can trust to be expressing the electorate’s true intention.

A 52:48 vote is basically a coin toss with a random outcome and the decision in question should be tabled to be repeated in, say, 5 years.

If such a mechanism would have been applied for Brexit, it would likely had been avoided and as for the 2014 vote for scottish independence, Scots would have had the chance to vote again in 2019 and (maybe) 2024.

What do you think?

Would you rather seek a slim victory for your cause, with many people not truly convinced or would you rather take the chance to try again a few years later, and maybe lose momentum?

I personally find it very odd that this matter is never discussed when it comes to plebiscites where always 50% + 1 is seen as the ultimate expression of the people’s will.

In my opinion, near random decisions are not democratic.

Fediverse Reactions

Comments

4 responses to “The People’s Will?”

  1. @Mina All fair points, but why should the status quo be the default option in a less than 10% vote lead, if the majority don't support it?

    Perhaps, vote again next year, and every year thereafter, until there is a 10% majority either way would be the better default.

    1. @drgeraint

      Sincerely, you're advocating leaving the EU on year, applying to rejoin a year later, only to leave again the next year?

      Or capital punishment: You reintroduce it, execute some people and next year:

      "Sorry guys, you won't get your heads back"

      The status quo is the only sensible default.
      It's something that works ar least to a degree.

      However, mandatory repetition within a couple of years is crucial unless the propasal has been rejected in mass.

      @Mina@blog.minaspace.org

  2. @Mina Weil du den Brexit explizit ansprichst.
    Da gab es eine kleine Mehrheit pro brexit bei den abgegebenen Stimmen.
    Die Mehrheit der Briten hat aber nicht FÜR den brexit gestimmt. Das war eine Minderheit.

    Ich bin sehr dafür bei Abstimmungen von großer Tragweite „echte“ Mehrheiten einzuführen. Da wäre es vermutlich schon ausreichend dass mindestens 50% der Bevölkerung (nicht nur der Wahlberechtigten!) für eine Änderung stimmen muss. (1/3)

    1. Ich fand da den Vorschlag von Mafaalani gut, der vorschlägt bei Entscheidungen z. B. zum Sozialsystem Wahlstimmen mit dem Faktor der noch zu erwartenden Lebenszeit zu gewichten.
      Ich mit 55 hätte einen Faktor von vielleicht 20 und meine Nichte mit 20 hat eine Gewichtung von 60, weil sie im Gegensatz zu mir vielleicht 80 weden kann. (2/3)
      @Mina

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *