Thanks, Dave, I think you do see my perspectives indeed.
— -
I am starting to see slightly better how your mind works as well. It looks like you are not discriminating between the small level and the large level, and I do not consider that correct.
This is what I am reading: Start with good people at the small level, and then the large level (raised from the small level) will automatically also be good.
This article is part of my ten-article series about the big picture structure of the human mind and the universe we live in. You’ll have to look for the reasoning why it is incorrect to assume that Above is as Below in the second section of the article. It is a possible, but artificial position. I hope you recognize how it is understandable to think that way, but illogical from a structural perspective.
Each level behaves (to some extent) independently. As such, the idea that if the basics at the small level are good, then the outcomes of the larger level must also be good is explained as a fallacy.
Naturally, I do not mind if you keep thinking what you believe is true, but I am then not with you in that idea.
— -
Back to politics: the best outcomes are forged in those situations where the internal forces can be expressed in such a manner that no single bad force can overtake the whole.
The tiny Slovak group wanting the army to attack Hungary can declare their ideas loud and clearly, so the other Slovak people can make fun of them. It’s harmless in PR because they will never rule. I do not know of any nation with PR that went to war (other than in a collective NATO setting).
In district voting, these negative sentiments cannot be expressed. They are suppressed and will come out in different ways. British xenophobia, for instance, was expressed in Brexit. An entire nation cut its well-forged ties with the EU because of its dislike of foreigners and immigrants. Next, and I think this is funny, the UK wants the best deals possible for themselves in their negotiations.
It’s actually a good example how the lower level (national level) and the higher level (international cooperation) are not one and the same; they function at different levels. Agreements like the WTO or collaborations like the EU take place at a level higher up than national levels, and they warp the national levels. This can be good warping; this can be bad warping.
NAFTA (including its new version) is one of these agreements where things are not organized well. Businesses of the three nations are given freedoms while the people of these three nations are not given more freedoms. In the EU, at least, freedom of business and movement of people are both instilled.
Crux of the matter is that pesky thing called equality, Dave. If there is no equality at the basis (and district voting does not have equality as basic, I hope I showed that to you loud and clear), then the overall outcome will have a warp to it that will come to bite us in the butt sooner or later.
I hope you understand the following well: the overall level will not have equality as its outcome, ever, but by starting with equality, the warping in the outcome will be acceptable, whereas when we do not start out with equality at the basis (meaning: each vote is expressed by an actual representative that the voter can point his or her finger to), then the warping can become bad. People must be made equal in systems first, or the outcomes will have warps that are out of control.
American examples of warps that go too far are child hunger, health insurance/health care, education, transit (Canada does ‘well’ on transit, US does not), income inequality, imprisonment, addiction epidemics, just to name a few.
Thank you for this further communication.
