The evolution of democracy can be seen as how to

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: t vs presidential, coalition, pr, smd…  ­Even if individual decision ­makers have their own clear rank ­ordered preferences, as a group, they may not.  ­This is called Condorcet’s Paradox. Note you can have this paradox w/ only a few decision ­makers and options  ­Then what happens if thousands of people try to make decisions?  ­The evolution of democracy can be seen as how to solve this paradox Implications  ­So when a group decides something:  ­Somebody is excluded: fairness is infringed  ­Somebody gives in: freedom  ­You decide nothing: stability  ­Fairness: everyone should have some say  ­What kind of political systems are you most likely to observe:  ­Canada, Australia, UK  ­Freedom: Everyone should be free to have their own sincere preferences.  ­By guaranteeing fairness and freedom you’re losing stability You decide nothing  ­This happens when everyone is guaranteed to have fair representation and their sincere preferences  ­Real world ex: China,, international states on nuclear weapons negotiations  ­Death lock situation  ­Political system: international society  ­In order to...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 02/26/2014 for the course POLI 220 at University of British Columbia.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online