franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (12/08/85)
In article <303@brl-tgr.ARPA> wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) writes: >To me, the difference becomes meaningful and worthy of support if the >percentage figures are more like 90% - 10%, and just maybe 80% - 20%, >but certainly not down to the 70% - 30% level. (It seems obvious that >something or someone that 30% of the population do NOT want should never >be adopted, or elected, or whatever the appropriate verb is in the >particular case.) > >Think of how much better, happier, and simpler our lives would be if the >ONLY things that governments would do, and the ONLY people that were in >positions of authority, were those that had the support of 80% of the >populace! Life would be even better if we made that "90%". The idiotic >concept that one vote over the 50% mark is a meaningful determination as >to how to run our society and live our lives is simply disgusting. So 50% of the population wants Reagan as president, 40% wants Mondale, and 10% doesn't want to have a president (I doubt the percentage is that). Does that mean we shouldn't have a president? 90% of the population thinks we should. This is representative of the problem generally. Quite often, there is overwhelming support for doing *something*, but no consensus on *what*. Also, it isn't always clear what constitutes doing something, and what constitutes doing nothing. Democracy is the worst possible system, except for all the others. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108