Majority Voting – A Critique Preferential Decision-Making – An Alternative

Peter Emerson

Journal of Politics and Law, 2024, vol. 17, issue 1, 47

Abstract: The basis of western democracy is the almost universal belief that controversies shall be resolved by the will of a majority. And quite right too. Unfortunately, this leads many to take decisions by a majority vote, with proposed amendments and then the motion itself all approved or rejected in simple yes-or-no ballots. Other more accurate voting systems have long since been devised, and yet binary voting prevails, not only in democracies, but also in theocracies and autocracies; it is ubiquitous, in politics, business and law. Accordingly, this article analyses its weaknesses, discusses its origins, relates a little history, and refers to some of its worst consequences. It then goes on to describe a non-majoritarian methodology, to compare majority voting to other decision-making voting procedures, and finally to talk of a world where the words ‘majority’, ‘minority’ and ‘veto’ may fade from the political lexicon.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jpl/article/download/0/0/49843/53887 (application/pdf)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jpl/article/view/0/49843 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ibn:jpl123:v:17:y:2024:i:1:p:47

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Politics and Law from Canadian Center of Science and Education Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Canadian Center of Science and Education ().