this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
-25 points (9.7% liked)

Minneapolis - St. Paul Metro

555 readers
1 users here now

About

A community for leftists and progressives within the Minneapolis - St. Paul Metro Area, including all suburbs and exurbs.

Community banner courtesy of @maven@lemmy.zip ❤️

Guidelines

  1. Be nice

  2. Comment substantively

  3. Probably some other stuff

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] criitz@reddthat.com 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I would say a group making a decision that applies to everyone inherently involves some people's preferences being inflicted on others. All the electoral college does is shift that power from one subgroup to another. You can argue that you prefer that we give more weight to lower population areas to balance their influence via the electoral college, and others could argue that it's better to maximize overall representation via a popular vote. But neither of you could claim to eliminate "someone far away deciding things" for some people.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I don't think that the total number of "preferences being inflicted on others" is a constant. The more people leave each other alone, the fewer preferences are being inflicted (unless you count the preference against having preferences inflicted, which I suppose some people would). The electoral college isn't inherently a libertarian institution, but it does at least keep the national government from acting with effectively no concern for the preferences of people who live in small states. (If only there was a way to protect the people in small states without giving them the outsized influence over the people in big states that the electoral college does...)