The 1 & 2 party systems are the only ones avoiding the pitfalls of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem.
http://www.udel.edu/johnmack/frec444/444voting.html But what about 2.5 parties? By this I mean guys running but with no possibility of winning .. the so called third party candidates in the US? They are often seen as spoilers, by taking away votes from the two possible candidates in a 2 party system. But to the point, No I don't think China's system is the future. The world appears to like multiparty systems, increasingly with "fair voting" tossed in with some sort of recursive run-off schemes. So I wonder what's it like in a true multi-party system like most of Europe has? Is it effective? interesting? confusing? fun? Are the populations aware of Arrow? Does it avoid grid-lock? -- Owen On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote: > > I watched the party congress in China today and thought what a difference > to the US election. In the US there was a year long multi billion dollar > campaign for each party, in China none at all. In the US we have a simple > two party system, in China a single party system. What do you think? Is > China's model the future? > > -J. > > > > Sent from Android > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
