Do you think societies like Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Fiji, Syria, Bahrain; Israel/Palestine; Sudan; Cyprus; .... would be better off with an electoral system that forces political parties to seek support from BOTH communities?
One way of doing this is (to use the example of Iraq) ito have Shias vote among the top 10 Shia parties (1st 25%), non-Shias to vote among the top 10 non-Shia political parties (2nd 25%); Shias to choose among the top three Non-Shia political parties (3rd 25%); and Non-Shias to vote among the top three Shia parties (final 25% of seats in parliament).
An similar alternative could mean that all votes gained from the lower of the two subtotals count double - this could be used in presidential elections.
Further alternatives can be created using a relegation from eligibility for the group that has the most negative votes from the other community.
The point of these systems is to make cooperation and being nice to each other more likely between the two.
2007-01-03 05:37:24 · 9 answers · asked by Wise Kai 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Like 100% of worldwide war, strife, life gripped by blood letting and gut wrenching violence, there is no one big answer that nobodys thought of before, no holy grail, no eureka moment, all it needs is for the people involved (usually the guys) to stop. Must say though, incredibly well worked out Wise Kai - now simplify it and send it to President Bush ...oops, I mean Nouri Maliki.
2007-01-03 05:50:35 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Watson (UK) 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This almost sounds like Canadian politics where we vote one way for the city, one for province and yet another federally. If we voted for the Senate we'd have it 25% X 4! Talk about having your cake and eating it too!
Oh yeah... and this suggestion wouldn't work since really the problem is that divisions in thesecountries aren't the problem but that these states are the creation of 19th century European diplomats interested in only carving up the world amognst their own spheres of interest. Therefore, for example there are three countries in Iraq. They should split up. Then they will be nice to each other since they wont have to live together in the forced marriage.
2007-01-03 14:12:06 · answer #2 · answered by Riff 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Although I appreciate your point of a form of proportional representation, I think you chose the worst example with Iraq as it has not worked in Iraq and will not.
Iraq will break up into autonomous regions due the tribalism and sectarianism that the USA has unleashed.
After the USA leave their will be a civil war that will correct the system and a new Dictator will emerge as that is what the Iraqi's need and want - to be told what to do.
The same applies to Cyprus as they used to live in relative harmony but other external influences thought they knew better and we got the current result.
2007-01-04 09:46:44 · answer #3 · answered by ian d 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Different ethnic groups should not be forced to live together, as in "Iraq".
Iraq is a totally artificial country, created by Englishmen drawing lines on a map in the interest of BP.
2007-01-04 23:22:56 · answer #4 · answered by mo mosh 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dream On
2007-01-03 14:05:04 · answer #5 · answered by AndyPandy 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We can't get two political parties in America to work together. What makes you think that four-way power could possibly work?
.
2007-01-03 13:41:02 · answer #6 · answered by Shaft 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, this will not work for cultures that supports Monarchy.
2007-01-03 13:48:26 · answer #7 · answered by ? 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
At last a simple solution to all the chaos!
But hold on, I think i have spotted a flaw or two...........!!!
2007-01-03 13:41:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sounds Good, you can explain it to them and if they like it they won't shoot you.
2007-01-03 13:52:25 · answer #9 · answered by agius1520 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋