|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:03 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mithridates wrote: |
...Oh, and from your own source:
| Quote: |
| Gerrymandering is most common in countries such as the United States of America where elected politicians are responsible for drawing districts. |
This seems like a no-brainer to me. |
By the way, Mithridates, what can you tell us about districting in other countries? How representative, clean, and corrupt-free they all are, for example...
Someone once said that politics is simply a dirty business -- that is, across time and space. The United States is no different than others in this regard.
Don't be so surprised to discover this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| mithridates wrote: |
...Oh, and from your own source:
| Quote: |
| Gerrymandering is most common in countries such as the United States of America where elected politicians are responsible for drawing districts. |
This seems like a no-brainer to me. |
By the way, Mithridates, what can you tell us about districting in other countries? How representative, clean, and corrupt-free they all are, for example...
Someone once said that politics is simply a dirty business -- that is, across time and space. The United States is no different than others in this regard.
Don't be so surprised to discover this. |
| Quote: |
| Among western democracies, only Israel and the Netherlands are not susceptible to gerrymandering in the national government, as they employ electoral systems with only one (nationwide) voting district. Other countries, such as the UK and Canada, attempt to prevent gerrymandering by having the constituency boundaries set by non-partisan organisations such as the UK's Boundary Commission. Gerrymandering is most common in countries such as the United States of America where elected politicians are responsible for drawing districts. |
Like I said, a no-brainer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| Like I said, a no-brainer. |
So, then, is it fair to say that you have satisfied yourself, based on the assertion you found in a link another poster referenced (a superficial Wikipedia entry, no less), that, among the western democracies, "only countries such as the United States" suffer from "Gerrymandering" or, presumably, any other form (directly related or otherwise) of political corruption in elections and election machinery (such as districting), and are, indeed, democratically representative "of the people" and nothing else, and hence problem free (and also presumably, morally superior)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| mithridates wrote: |
| Like I said, a no-brainer. |
So, then, is it fair to say that you have satisfied yourself, based on the assertion you found in a link another poster referenced (a superficial Wikipedia entry, no less), that, among the western democracies, "only countries such as the United States" suffer from "Gerrymandering" or, presumably, any other form (directly related or otherwise) of political corruption in elections and election machinery (such as districting), and are, indeed, democratically representative "of the people" and nothing else, and hence problem free (and also presumably, morally superior)? |
Yes that's right. I'm satisfied based on a superficial entry on Wikipedia that the US suffers from gerrymandering and that other countries are morally superior. I also decided based on no evidence that because some countries have less gerrymandering than the US that the rest of the political process there must also be 100% squeaky clean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Back on topic, here's an interesting part from the Wikipedia talk page (removed because it was unsourced but interesting nevertheless):
| Quote: |
Another possible method of avoiding further gerrymandering is to simply avoid redistricting altogether by continuing to use existing political boundaries such as state, county, or provincial lines. Doing this makes further increasing electoral advantage by changing boundaries becomes impossible, however any existing advantage may become deeply ingrained. The United States Senate, for instance, has far more competitive elections than the House of Representatives due to the use of existing State borders rather than gerrymandered districts, however the Senate is also the most malapportioned legislative body in the developed world.
Consequently, many electoral reform packages advocate fixed or neutrally defined district borders to eliminate this manipulation. One such scheme of neutrally defined district borders is bioregional democracy which follows the borders of terrestrial ecoregions as defined by ecology. Presumably, scientific criteria would be immune to politically motivated manipulation, although of course this is debatable as scientists are people with political interests too.
The problem with geographically static districting systems (which is not what most reform packages suggest) is that they do not take in to account changes in population, meaning that individual electors can grow to have vastly different degrees of influence on the legislative process. This is particularly a problem during times of large population movements, and was especially prominent in the United Kingdom during the industrial revolution. See also Reform Act and rotten borough.
For this reason, scientists have proposed algorithmic ways of dividing constituencies. Desirable criteria for the outcomes are:
the system should be simple enough to be understood by most of the general population;
the constituencies must be connected (i.e., each in a single piece);
the constituencies should not be too elongated;
the constituencies should have the same population or at least almost the same. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher:
I think you've really picked the wrong target here if you think Mithridates is pushing some sort of anti-American agenda.
And why is it so difficult to accpet the possibility that gerrmymandering might be more of a problem in the USA than in other countries? All poltical systems have their strnegths and weaknesses. If I say "Canada, with its appointed senate, has more of a problem with unelected politicians killing legislation than do most countries", would that be anti-Canadianism, or just a statement of fact?
(Any Canadians who doubt that Canada has the problem described above can do a google on the history of Canada's abortion laws.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| mithridates wrote: |
| Like I said, a no-brainer. |
So, then, is it fair to say that you have satisfied yourself, based on the assertion you found in a link another poster referenced (a superficial Wikipedia entry, no less), that, among the western democracies, "only countries such as the United States" suffer from "Gerrymandering" or, presumably, any other form (directly related or otherwise) of political corruption in elections and election machinery (such as districting), and are, indeed, democratically representative "of the people" and nothing else, and hence problem free (and also presumably, morally superior)? |
as OTOH, Mith isn't bashing the USA. It seems lazy on your part too gopher. Can you not acknowledge this is a problem with politics here in the USA and needs to be changed?
Here's a generalization but what the heck: you seem to be too pre-occupied with defending anything remotely negative about the USA and love to say, "well, heck, is anywhere else better??" Who really cares if everywhere else is just as bad or worse. Let's strive to be even BETTER than everyone else. That's what the USA is supposed to be about right? Isn't that the great american belief? To be #1 in everything? (I'm not trying to sound sarcastic or cynical here either) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No.
These are not the responses of a mindless drone defending "the U.S.A."
I am trying to understand why this piece of information...
| Quote: |
| Republicans have done much to fortify their incumbents, including having district lines so carefully drawn that even in a tumultuous year only about 40 House races are seriously competitive... |
...is so "disturbing" to Mithridates.
In fact, this kind of news could only be "disturbing" to a political neophyte -- in any time or place. And I do not believe that Mithridates is (at least a total) political neophyte. (Also, Mithridates was not onto "gerrymandering" until Leslie turned him onto it; so citing his "point" about gerrymandering is anachronistic.)
It seems to me, then, that he is presenting this here for other purposes, just as my friend Laogaiguk was not sincerely asking for insight from "this moron-infested forum" when he posted this piece of negative news on the United States...
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=65054
And, by the way, the "no-brainer" that I see is the least common denominator when these two stories are compared -- or several if not most of the stories I have seen Mithridates post on the United States, for that matter (which are, admitedly, not many, but always showing the U.S. in a negative light nonetheless). That is, data selection is everything -- especially when it is always the same kind of data...
In any case, if I might contribute to the latest issue on the problems in U.S. politics this thread raises: sure, there has always been much corruption and gerrymandering in the U.S. politcial system. The U.S. could be made better by eliminating this.
But, again, is this really news to anyone at all who follows U.S. politics? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| mithridates wrote: |
How about not letting parties in power redraw districts? Just a thought.
|
Look up Iowa. It has a non-partisan board responsible for this. I think it is the only state that does it though. |
That's good to see, and quite recently done too:
http://www.centrists.org/pages/2004/07/7_buck_trust.html
Would gerrymandering have to be gotten rid of one state at a time in this way, or is there a federal solution as well? |
It's done at the State level, but an equal vote is guaranteed by the consititution so a good lawyer making the right argument might be able to get something done via the SC.
Personally, the unfair nature of gerrymandering is obvious. It is used to deprive citizens of the reperentation of their choice. Maybe the rule should be that gerrymandering can only be used to adjust for population, but every district must be drawn to reflect the political demographics of the State, county, whatever.
Iowa may have the best idea, but how do you protect against special interests/parties bankrolling members to stack the deck?
Last edited by EFLtrainer on Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
| mithridates wrote: |
| Like I said, a no-brainer. |
So, then, is it fair to say that you have satisfied yourself, based on the assertion you found in a link another poster referenced (a superficial Wikipedia entry, no less), that, among the western democracies, "only countries such as the United States" suffer from "Gerrymandering" or, presumably, any other form (directly related or otherwise) of political corruption in elections and election machinery (such as districting), and are, indeed, democratically representative "of the people" and nothing else, and hence problem free (and also presumably, morally superior)? |
Yes that's right. I'm satisfied based on a superficial entry on Wikipedia that the US suffers from gerrymandering and that other countries are morally superior. I also decided based on no evidence that because some countries have less gerrymandering than the US that the rest of the political process there must also be 100% squeaky clean. |
Ah, mith, you are so much more forgiving than I. Nice to see you toss the S-bomb, though.
BB: Good on ya.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
No.
These are not the responses of a mindless drone defending "the U.S.A."
I am trying to understand why this piece of information...
| Quote: |
| Republicans have done much to fortify their incumbents, including having district lines so carefully drawn that even in a tumultuous year only about 40 House races are seriously competitive... |
...is so "disturbing" to Mithridates.
In fact, this kind of news could only be "disturbing" to a political neophyte -- in any time or place. And I do not believe that Mithridates is (at least a total) political neophyte. (Also, Mithridates was not onto "gerrymandering" until Leslie turned him onto it; so citing his "point" about gerrymandering is anachronistic.)
It seems to me, then, that he is presenting this here for other purposes, just as my friend Laogaiguk was not sincerely asking for insight from "this moron-infested forum" when he posted this piece of negative news on the United States...
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=65054
And, by the way, the "no-brainer" that I see is the least common denominator when these two stories are compared -- or several if not most of the stories I have seen Mithridates post on the United States, for that matter (which are, admitedly, not many, but always showing the U.S. in a negative light nonetheless). That is, data selection is everything -- especially when it is always the same kind of data...
In any case, if I might contribute to the latest issue on the problems in U.S. politics this thread raises: sure, there has always been much corruption and gerrymandering in the U.S. politcial system. The U.S. could be made better by eliminating this.
But, again, is this really news to anyone at all who follows U.S. politics? |
Where did I say in my opinion on that article, ANYWHERE, anything bad about America? I posted a horrid story, that would surprise anyone in any Western country. Were you not surprised by it. It just happened to be in America. Just like you attacking Mith which several people have told you you were completely wrong. You just jump and any implication of anything bad about America. And you, Joo, Octavious Hite, Sundubuman and BWJD were the morons I was talking about. (EDIT, forgot FiveEagles, Rapier, bigverne, and I know I am forgetting other fundamentalists on this forum.) Thank you for proving that point for me.
Second, do you see any stories reporting ANYTHING in a positive light? ALmost all stories in the news are negative, about anything, including America.
Attacking Mith for anti-americanism 
BTW
On the other hand
That whole Senator thing sucks bad and should be changed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Attacking Mith for anti-americanism ... |
I don't attack Mithridates for antiAmericanism. Indeed, he has protested that he is not totally against the United States; he likes NASA.
By the way, why eighteen sarcastic smirks? Why not seventeen, or nineteen -- or twenty-five, for that matter? Is there a method to your madness...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| Attacking Mith for anti-americanism ... |
I don't attack Mithridates for antiAmericanism. Indeed, he has protested that he is not totally against the United States; he likes NASA.
By the way, why eighteen sarcastic smirks? Why not seventeen, or nineteen -- or twenty-five, for that matter? Is there a method to your madness? |
That's quite the deflection, I mean that! I didn't count them. I just clicked it many times. ??? If I were you I would bow out of this thread before you dig any deeper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| ...I mean that! I didn't count them. I just clicked it [eighteen] times. ???... |
Ah.
So you lost control of yourself and you were pounding your keyboard.
Whatever.
Back to the thread: On the Other Hand,
Your comment about the Canadian Senate is enlightening. Indeed, I have learned much about Canadian politics from you and a small handful of others, including esp. Bulsajo, who, unfortunately, have only spoken on Canadian affairs in passing while commenting at length on other threads that somehow or another were treating the U.S. and its problems.
I only wish that more Canadians would be like you and, although maintaining a healthy interest in world affairs, would start by identifying and suggesting constructive criticisms at home, where they are also needed, and, not to mention, where they can actually make a difference, before starting their protests against the United States and its issues like gerrymandering, for example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| ...I mean that! I didn't count them. I just clicked it [eighteen] times. ???... |
Ah.
So you lost control of yourself and you were pounding your keyboard.
Whatever. |
That is by far the lamest adhominem attack I have ever seen. Do you honestly expect people to take you more seriously and me less after that kind of a link? You have gone past pathetic now. BTW, "I just clicked it" tends to mean using a mouse, though I can see how that might be difficult as I didn't use the word "America" in that sentence.
And since you won't bow out, how was my article anti-American? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
