Globally, Broad Support for Representative and Direct Democracy

[Dill]

(10-18-2017, 05:16 PM)hollodero Wrote: I do not argue against minority rights. These rights, however, do not include that their votes count more than the votes of other citizens. It cannot be part of minority rights to say, oh you live in that region, your voice needs protection from the larger group of people living somewhere else by making yours more decisive at the voting booth. That's not what minority rights is about.

In a young, unstable democracy with different ethnics groups, I could understand that approach. To avoid oppression. But it is not and can not be seen as oppression when you want protection against an alleged majority in a voting booth voting differently than you'd approve of. And you cannot base that demand on the claim that others do live in a "BS echo chamber".

Well, James Madison begs to differ with you. If you live in Rhode Island then your voice does need protection from populous New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. So yes, you get two senators and New York gets two senators. Without those two senators the role of your state at the federal level is practically nil. Justwin was correct to insert the state between the federal government here.

I did not read Justwin's "echo chamber" comments as justification for senatorial representation and the electoral college. He was addressing why country folk seem more conservative than city folk, if I understand him.