Worldwide multi-party election
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:18:43 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  International What-ifs (Moderator: Dereich)
  Worldwide multi-party election
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Worldwide multi-party election  (Read 3082 times)
Crumpets
Thinking Crumpets Crumpet
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,586
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.06, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 29, 2015, 12:50:30 AM »

If we had elections on a world-wide basis, similar to EU Parliament elections, what parties would emerge? What would their ideologies be? Who would win in what countries, and who would win a plurality of seats? What kind of coalitions would be formed?

Here are some possible parties I can think of:

Liberal Party (centrist): Moderately liberal economically, center-left on social issues. Does well in North America, Europe, Oceania, and the greater "West" generally.
Social Democratic Party (center-left): Moderate socialists, does well in parts of Europe.
Christian Labor Party (left-wing): Socialist, Catholic base. Dominant in Latin America
People's Party (right-wing): Supports nationalism, devolution, autonomy, with a strong pro-Russian flavor. Does well in parts of the former Soviet Union, especially Russia.
Islamic Justice Party (Big-tent): Supports (Sunni) Islamic interests, with a combination of left-wing economics and right-wing social policy. Dominant in Sunni-majority Areas.
Non-Aligned Party (left-wing): Big on development, "third-world" interests. Supports economic justice and fair trade. Main base of Support in Africa, with some support in South Asia and Latin America.
The Followers (right-wing): Shi'a party, closely associated with Iran.
Maoist Party (far-left): Basically the "China party," and not necessarily trying to speak for all Maoists, but rather trying to promote the Chinese agenda.
People's Congress (big tent): India's counterweight to China, no coherent ideology beyond promoting Indian interests.
The United Left (far-left): Loose amalgamation of various communist movements around the world - doesn't get much done, but can rely on the support of countries like Cuba and Vietnam.
Indigenous People's Party (left-wing): Supports indigenous people around the world, anti-colonialist.
Zionist Party (big tent): Meant to be the party for Jews around the world, but support is largely concentrated in Israel.
Juche Party (left-wing): North Korea's party
Qutbist Party (right-wing): Party for far-right Islamists
Global Greens (left-wing): Greenies, get some votes in Scandanavia
People's Front (far-right): Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and their ilk.
Action Party (left-wing): Pirate party, Occupy, anarcho-socialists, strong feminists, etc.
The Five Rhinoceros Movement (big tent, center-left): Joke party, protest votes
Logged
Zuza
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 359
Russian Federation
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2015, 08:58:36 PM »
« Edited: November 29, 2015, 09:50:49 PM by Zuza »

Many depends on voting system.

If there will be proportional elections with a threshold on a global level, then we, of course, won't see Zionist Party, Juche Party and most probably even a Shi'a party (Shi'a Muslims make up at best 2-3 % of the world population, they are divided internally and not all of them would vote along religious lines). Latin American leftists will probably either unite with social democrats or form a worldwide coalition of reformed communists and democratic socialists. Greens could join social democrats or split between social democratic, democratic socialist and liberal coalitions. Only India and China could afford to have national parties running in global elections without being a part of any international party/coalition.

If there will be proportional elections on national level without a global threshold (like the EU parliamentary elections) or any kind of majoritarian elections, then already existing parties will continue to run the show (of course, political landscape will change drastically in a countries where there are no currently free competitive multi-party elections, though in many of them currently ruling party would still have a good chance to obtain majority of seats), and in the parliament most of them will form very loose coalitions, probably along the already existing internationals. Regional factor would be big as well: e. g. while many African parties will formally join Socialist or Liberal International, most of them could at the same time form a pan-African group, and division between developing and developed world (or, more likely, more developed and less developed parts of developing world, since developing world would dominate the world parliament due to it's huge population size) probably will be more significant in most cases than ideological differences (especially taking into account how many parties only nominally belong to their declared ideology). But while there will be quite a few of international coalitions of various kinds, it will take a lot of time until a truly worldwide parties (rather than a loose groupings of national parties) will emerge. Even in the EU, national parties still play more important role than pan-European ones.

Speaking about your list of possible parties: some of them will be too insignificant to worth mention, while at the same time you forgot about Christian democratic / conservative party similar to European People's Party which would unite major centre-right parties in Europe and possibly other parts of the world (the USA, Canada, Latin America etc.).

Maoist Party (far-left): Basically the "China party," and not necessarily trying to speak for all Maoists, but rather trying to promote the Chinese agenda.

Though Communist Party of China could try to form some kind of global coalition, Maoists (except CPC itself which is now Maoist in name only) are too weak, and most of them seem to prefer guerilla warfare to participation in legal elections... and I'm curious how many Maoists in the world outside China still view China as a Communist state? More likely, CPC will try to join The United Left (AFAIK Vietnam is as capitalist as China, so if The United Left accepts Vietnamese Communists, they should accept Chinese ones too).

Indigenous People's Party (left-wing): Supports indigenous people around the world, anti-colonialist.

Most of the indigenous peoples are either too small to form even remotely significant voting bloc, or already have their own independent state (so they don't need any anti-colonialism), or don't express desire to have a party that represents specifically their interests, and they are very different culturally and sometimes have contradicting interests... though there probably could be an alliance of separatist movements (similar to the already existing Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization) and it could also include some non-separatist ethnic or regionalist movements.

People's Congress (big tent): India's counterweight to China, no coherent ideology beyond promoting Indian interests.
Zionist Party (big tent): Meant to be the party for Jews around the world, but support is largely concentrated in Israel.

So you think that in India and Israel most of the significant parties will merge into one? Why? Even if this will happen, an opposition to this dominant party will emerge very soon, and after a several elections voters will become tired of the ruling party and opposition will win... In fact, India already was a dominant-party state before the 70s, so the story can repeat itself there. More likely, India and Israel would stay with roughly the same parties as now, though, of course, most of them will have the same or very similar position on many issues affecting Indian or Israeli national interests. Depending on the electoral system, there could be a single Zionist list running outside of Israel to attract some of the Jewish diaspora votes, but even this is unlikely.


By the way, how many people would vote for these guys in a free multi-party elections? In China and many other authoritarian regimes the ruling party is popular and have a good chance to gather majority of votes, but we can only guess what will happen in NK after it's unprecedented information isolation will be lifted or at least after people will be allowed to form opposition parties and freely criticize government (which is a prerequisite for a competitive election). Even if NK will become as democratic as China now, it will be a huge change with unpredictable and probably catastrophic outcome for the Kim dynasty (and, very likely, the entire country too). So I doubt there will be a "Juche party" at all. Though, maybe, the Workers' Party of Korea will survive, reform itself and expel the most odious members; in that case it could re-brand itself as a communist or social democratic party, or abandon socialism entirely and pose itself just as a Korean nationalist party.

Qutbist Party (right-wing): Party for far-right Islamists

How exactly far-right? To the extent of ISIS? Looking at al-Qaeda and ISIS currently fighting each other in Syria, I'm not sure they could form a single party (even if we assume they will be allowed to run in the elections). Though, maybe, you meant less extreme Islamists, like Egyptian al-Nour. Well, there will probably be enough room between your Islamic Justice Party and ISIS for such party.
Logged
Asian Nazi
d32123
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,523
China


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2015, 09:27:31 PM »

I'm curious how many Maoists in the world outside China still view China as a Communist state?

The answer is very very few.  Most reject Deng Xiaoping Theory and thus the vast majority of the actions taken by the Party since the 1980s.

There are quite a few legitimate old-school Maoists and Neo-Maoist New Left types both inside China as well as the Chinese diaspora who reject Deng Xiaoping Theory too.
Logged
Zuza
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 359
Russian Federation
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2015, 09:36:05 PM »

I'm curious how many Maoists in the world outside China still view China as a Communist state?

The answer is very very few.  Most reject Deng Xiaoping Theory and thus the vast majority of the actions taken by the Party since the 1980s.

There are quite a few legitimate old-school Maoists and Neo-Maoist New Left types both inside China as well as the Chinese diaspora who reject Deng Xiaoping Theory too.

Well, the picture is roughly how I imagined it.
Logged
SATW
SunriseAroundTheWorld
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,463
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2015, 05:39:46 PM »

The Zionist party would have my full support.
Logged
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,682
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 30, 2015, 05:49:56 PM »

What do US conservatives vote for?
Logged
Crumpets
Thinking Crumpets Crumpet
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,586
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.06, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 30, 2015, 07:47:52 PM »

Many depends on voting system.

If there will be proportional elections with a threshold on a global level, then we, of course, won't see Zionist Party, Juche Party and most probably even a Shi'a party (Shi'a Muslims make up at best 2-3 % of the world population, they are divided internally and not all of them would vote along religious lines). Latin American leftists will probably either unite with social democrats or form a worldwide coalition of reformed communists and democratic socialists. Greens could join social democrats or split between social democratic, democratic socialist and liberal coalitions. Only India and China could afford to have national parties running in global elections without being a part of any international party/coalition.

If there will be proportional elections on national level without a global threshold (like the EU parliamentary elections) or any kind of majoritarian elections, then already existing parties will continue to run the show (of course, political landscape will change drastically in a countries where there are no currently free competitive multi-party elections, though in many of them currently ruling party would still have a good chance to obtain majority of seats), and in the parliament most of them will form very loose coalitions, probably along the already existing internationals. Regional factor would be big as well: e. g. while many African parties will formally join Socialist or Liberal International, most of them could at the same time form a pan-African group, and division between developing and developed world (or, more likely, more developed and less developed parts of developing world, since developing world would dominate the world parliament due to it's huge population size) probably will be more significant in most cases than ideological differences (especially taking into account how many parties only nominally belong to their declared ideology). But while there will be quite a few of international coalitions of various kinds, it will take a lot of time until a truly worldwide parties (rather than a loose groupings of national parties) will emerge. Even in the EU, national parties still play more important role than pan-European ones.

When I came up with that list I was imagining a system where every country would be guaranteed a certain number of representatives, but they would be allowed to determine how to select those people on their own - thus some countries might to a proportional selection, some might do first-past-the-post, and others (like North Korea) would just have the government appoint them.

That's just what I was thinking, but if you have any other ideas of how a worldwide election should be conducted, I'd love to hear them.

Speaking about your list of possible parties: some of them will be too insignificant to worth mention, while at the same time you forgot about Christian democratic / conservative party similar to European People's Party which would unite major centre-right parties in Europe and possibly other parts of the world (the USA, Canada, Latin America etc.).

Definitely true.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 30, 2015, 09:55:27 PM »

Which party is for economic conservatives
Logged
Intell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,817
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -1.24

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2015, 07:39:36 AM »

My Votes:

US/Australia: Christian Labor Party
Nepal: Non-Aligned Party
India: People's Party or Non-Aligned Party
Logged
Zuza
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 359
Russian Federation
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2015, 12:08:45 AM »

When I came up with that list I was imagining a system where every country would be guaranteed a certain number of representatives, but they would be allowed to determine how to select those people on their own - thus some countries might to a proportional selection, some might do first-past-the-post, and others (like North Korea) would just have the government appoint them.

It's possible that not only North Korea but many, if not most, other countries (including many democracies) would prefer to simply appoint representatives if they would be allowed this. So this world parliament will start to somewhat resemble the UN General Assembly except that most countries will have more than 1 vote...
Logged
PJ
Politics Junkie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,789
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2015, 01:13:30 AM »

Not even the broad EU electoral coalitions make sense as ideologically homogeneous and united coalitions. Global politics at this this stage could not possibly become homogeneous enough to support even a very pluralistic multi party system.
Logged
PJ
Politics Junkie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,789
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2015, 01:21:03 AM »

I mean, even on the most basic issues, this is impossible to construct; how would the gun waving tea partiers in the US be expected to cohabitate with the Australian Liberals, who literally ban gun owners from joining their party, in a center right coalition. Or even the hilarious idea of an alliance between the Republicans and the Tories. I also doubt you could successfully unite all Sunni Muslims, Zionists, Indigenous peoples, and various sectarian interests into respective political groups.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2015, 02:04:21 AM »

I mean, even on the most basic issues, this is impossible to construct; how would the gun waving tea partiers in the US be expected to cohabitate with the Australian Liberals, who literally ban gun owners from joining their party, in a center right coalition. Or even the hilarious idea of an alliance between the Republicans and the Tories. I also doubt you could successfully unite all Sunni Muslims, Zionists, Indigenous peoples, and various sectarian interests into respective political groups.

What would happen (well aside from the whole thing collapsing in about twenty minutes) would be a situation similar to India - an endless series of horse-trading before, during and after elections. Entire political systems would put themselves up to the highest bidder - we'll support your nominee if our favoured caste gets X cash. There would be of course the basic division between the global north and south, one favouring redistribution, the other favouring the status quo - we don't really know what sort of power this new hypothetical chamber has, so I'm assuming the organisation will set it itself.


A PR system with any threshold would be a disaster btw - 2% of 6billion props would be a huge number. It would be like that election in Russia where over half the votes were for Sub threshold parties.
Logged
JackV982
JackSchirmdog982
Rookie
**
Posts: 49
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2015, 08:10:43 PM »

Christian Labor Party
Logged
defe07
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 961


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 27, 2015, 10:06:46 PM »

Maybe a way to allocate the representatives proportionally in a more direct way would be to have a multi-tiered PR system with a party preferential ballot.

Say that you have 1,000 Representatives.

Now, you could do the following:

a) Allocate 500 to all parties proportionally, no threshold
b) Allocate 250 to all parties passing 5% of the vote
c) Allocate 200 to all parties passing 20% of the vote
d) Allocate 50 to the party with the most votes

Now, voters would need to rank the parties in order of preference, like Australia does for their Senate elections. In the first tier, there's no problem: every party gets a seat if they can get 1/500 of the votes (maybe less, depending on whether you're using St. Laguë, d´Hondt or the Hare Quota). But from the second tier on, if a small party doesn't reach the threshold, all those votes could go to a viable party. However, I don't know whether it should be batch-style or single-elimination (the latter could help small parties to coalesce their votes around a party that would have enough votes to be viable). This would continue for the third and fourth round. Smiley
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2016, 09:08:52 PM »

What do US conservatives vote for?
Logged
Classic Conservative
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,628


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2016, 06:39:15 PM »

Logged
Crumpets
Thinking Crumpets Crumpet
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,586
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.06, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2016, 05:07:00 PM »


I was thinking the Liberal Party in this scenario for more center-right people and the People's Party for more Trump-oriented types. But the point of this thread isn't to try to divvy everyone up into the parties I posted, it was to see what parties/groups other people could come up with as plausible options for a world congress.
Logged
Boston Bread
New Canadaland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,636
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.00, S: -5.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: March 21, 2016, 01:05:27 PM »

I'd be solidly SDP. Canada would be a liberal stronghold vis a vis the rest of the world though. Not that we would have any voice due to our small population.
Logged
Classic Conservative
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,628


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2016, 02:32:24 PM »

I wouldn't vote
Logged
Crumpets
Thinking Crumpets Crumpet
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,586
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.06, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2016, 11:20:04 PM »

Just to reiterate, I wasn't intending this to be a "who would you vote for?" thread, but a "what do you think would happen?" thread. But hey, whatever floats your boat...
Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,064
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: March 27, 2016, 11:37:01 PM »

What about people who are right of center in countries like the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, etc. Who do they vote for? They certainly wouldn't support any of the islamist right-wing parties,, and I kind of doubt them feeling at home in the pro-Russian People's Party or the more moderate Liberal Party.
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,669


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2016, 04:32:08 PM »

Just to reiterate, I wasn't intending this to be a "who would you vote for?" thread, but a "what do you think would happen?" thread. But hey, whatever floats your boat...

I wouldn't vote either for any of those choices.  And, that's significant, because there are enough people like me for there to be a movement conservative party as well.
Logged
Crumpets
Thinking Crumpets Crumpet
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,586
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.06, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2016, 05:24:39 PM »

Again - if you have a different idea of what parties would develop, post it. That was my intention for this thread at least.
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,669


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2016, 05:53:56 PM »

Again - if you have a different idea of what parties would develop, post it. That was my intention for this thread at least.

OK:

[/Conservative Values Partyb] (right wing): Essentially non-Trumpist, non-moderate hero Republicans and their equivalents abroad
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 14 queries.