A fascinating reply, Jesse, and I enjoyed reading it much. Of course we are not of the same mindset here, but let me make sure that I mention once more that I liked your reply. You are able to present yourself and your ideas well (and you do it in so many fewer words than I ever can).
As I see it, there are two forms of democracy, and the other format that we do not have was actually invented/devised by none less than Thomas Jefferson. He created a very enlightened voting system, which many nations in the world are using today (but not all are using it in the pure version).
It also means that the US Constitution and the Founding Fathers need to be viewed in light of the Enlightenment.
Very few would have a problem seeing the Framers as delivering us the Enlightenment message. Yet what happened was that the 13 colonies could not agree on the Enlightened agenda as a group. In effect, the US Constitution got set up at first without enshrining the highest Enlightened ideals.
As counter measure, because the Framers were disappointed once they had their 'desired' result of creating one Federation, they wrote the Amendments commonly known as the Bill of Rights. These amendments are fully part of the US Constitution.
As a result, we have an articulated US Constitution with the first part being based on separate-but-equal (13 States each other's equals, today 50 States), while the latter part is based on denouncing separate-but-equal (embracing equality in its Enlightened reality). Two parts that declare something different, an articulation therefore.
And that, dear Jesse, means we have voting formats required in our nation where the Federal elections can (must) be based on separate-but-equal (for instance, two senators per State), while all other elections (for State and local levels) should (must) be based on voter equality in outcome.
Only Thomas Jefferson's clean voting system fits the Ninth, Tenth and Fourteenth Amendments. Winner-take-all does not fit the Bill of Rights, but we do have specific descriptions for the Federal level in our highest document that must be followed first (for the Federal level only).
In conclusion, we can see that the States stole away the equal rights of voters and forced people to vote in that winner-take-all system, while the US Constitution clearly does not support that for any other level than the Federal level. The States pushed a two-party system through our throats, for had they followed the US Constitution, then their political diversity (three, four, five parties in each state) would have 'trickled up' to the Federal elections, and we would have had our third empowered party for sure today.
Insult to injury, the States also made it verboten for local voting to be based on true political freedom. These State Powers That Be simply did not want anyone anywhere anyhow to get familiar with the system that Thomas Jefferson devised. They did not want people to realize that they had been screwed royally by the States and pushed inside restricted voting systems that kept more power in the hands of the few (or the two parties).
Your turn. : - )
