Fairvote Canada
What is This Group is About?
De Quoi Parle ce Groupe?
The unofficial non-partisan Lemmy movement to bring proportional representation to all levels of government in Canada.
🗳️Voters deserve more choice and accountability from all politicians.
Le mouvement non officiel et non partisan de Lemmy visant à introduire la représentation proportionnelle à tous les niveaux de gouvernement au Canada.
🗳️Les électeurs méritent davantage de choix et de responsabilité de la part de tous les politiciens.

- A Simple Guide to Electoral Systems
- What is First-Past-The-Post (FPTP)?
- What is Proportional Representation (PR)?
- What is a Citizens’ Assembly?
- Why Referendums Aren't Necessary
- The 219 Corrupt MPs Who Voted Against Advancing Electoral Reform
Related Communities/Communautés Associées
Resources/Ressources
Official Organizations/Organisations Officielles
- List of Canadian friends of Democracy Bluesky
- Fair Vote Canada: Bluesky
- Fair Voting BC: Bluesky
- Charter Challenge for Fair Voting: Bluesky
- Electoral Renewal Canada: Bluesky
- Vote16: Bluesky
- Longest Ballot Committee: Bluesky
- ~~Make Votes Equal / Make Seats Match Votes~~
- Ranked Ballot Initiative of Toronto (IRV for municipal elections)
We're looking for more moderators, especially those who are of French and indigenous identities.
Politiques de modération de contenu
Nous recherchons davantage de modérateurs, notamment ceux qui sont d'identité française et autochtone.
view the rest of the comments
Thank you for the clarification on what happened in Alberta and Manitoba.
Most of this is what I said though, our issue is cultural as well as political and despite STV certainly being preferable, we should not construct it as though it would actually represent eveyrone. I am a severe minority in Canada ideologically speaking, my energy is not best spent in the work to implement a voting system that would still privilege groups I am not allied with and siphon resources from groups that I am. I would benefit from STV in that smaller parties that I align more closely with would have a chance to develop some actionable politics and maybe its inability to resolve that cultural dissonance would make more people question the underlying cause of our system's failure.
If you are a liberal that subscribes to welfare liberalism, this is something you would understandably attribute more gravity to. I don't discourage its implementation, I ask people to consider the needs of people around them when they spend their energy on this before something else.
We can work on multiple issues at the same time. We won’t solve any issues if we keep saying “there are more important things to focus on” as slavery survived for way too long in North America because of this line of reasoning.
PR represents 95% of the vote instead of 30-40% with FPTP. That’s much fairer and provides the proper nuance Canada actually has.
You’re focusing on treating the symptoms not the root cause of the problem as research shows that countries with pr have lower wealth inequality.
Okay, I've been trying to be gentle but now you've actually used misinformation here and I can't just let that slide.
Slavery is a poor example to promote state reform as a solution, enslaved peoples couldn't vote and anti-slavery movements lasted hundreds of years without the state as an option for safety. Chattel slavery was only possible because it was codified into state law specifically to secure definition of personhood and race into the state. Resistance to enslavement did not begin or end when white citizens got uncomfortable with it, it was around the entire time and they knew it was wrong the entire time. Chattel slavery did not end because some white people in positions of power got the ick and listened to voters, it took centuries of bloody conflict and daily resistance to force them to concede. To suggest that the untold millions of people across the Americas who died defending their humanity did not use the right tools because the state was not a vector for abolition is cruel, self-serving, and markedly liberal in its orientation.
Even if what you said was accurate, it completely erases the fact that forced labour exists today in the United States and is still organised along racist lines. The prison industrial complex through the War on Drugs was a direct response to Black Liberation movements that correctly refused to accept civil rights and assimilation as the end of racism in America. Half a century later, African Americans are still a deeply oppressed group in the US and you're arguing that they should focus on voter reform before community action and mutual aide. Y'know, the methods that successfully achieved civil rights in the first place? You chose an example that demonstrates exactly why oppressed peoples cannot depend on state reform to end their oppression.
No, voting is not the "root cause" of our problems in a settler-colonial state where genocide and climate destruction extends beyond its own constitution. In order to say that it is, you argue that the state does in fact have absolute power over people. That is not only wrong, it is oppression. People are not limited to the state for solutions to their problems, and very often they are required to force the state to negotiate to even get an inch.
I do not doubt that STV would make people feel more trust in the voting system and it might even allow for a degree of social welfare policy that is currently not possible in Canada. It does not solve our problems and for many of us, it does not even address it. Ireland and Australia aren't magically decolonial because people have a more "nuanced" form of representation.
You are clearly privileged and I seem to be right that your focus is on policies that benefit you specifically. I said it is understandable for people to value STV because of its potential to reintroduce welfare liberalism into their life. Just because it benefits you more than me does not mean you have the right to try and dominate other people's actions by asserting whatever you want is also the most important thing for us to do.
Disappointing.
That’s a whole lot of strawmanning and sealioning. I don’t want to engage with a bad faith user arguing against making a democracy fairer. If your party cannot reach past 5% of the threshold, it's a campaigning issue not a democracy issue. I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re a tankie attempting to hijack political conversation to serve your self serving interests.
Only posting this to make the few people who come across this aware that this mod banned me for challenging their claim to know what's best for minority groups they are not a part of (for democracy, you see).
OP, you straight up lied about enslaved people to argue that working within the state should never be questioned by oppressed peoples. Inadvertently, you have demonstrated that these arguments are fundamentally racist in how they appropriate the resistance and activism of minority groups to misremember history as a series of struggles within a state rather than against it. That narrative is certainly appealing to privileged groups who do not have to risk any more than the mild effort it takes to say the right thing at a safe time.
Also, "tankie" in reference to my argument for anarchic tactics of mutual aid and direct action is full mask-off on your politics (you couldn't even fathom that I was discussing politics outside of parties). You're a self-interested liberal who would gladly trample over groups lower in the hierarchy than you if that meant that you get what you want. You tried to silence one right now with the middling power you have when they said something you didn't like and went on to claim they're just a morally bad person for doing so.
Embarrassing display, even in private.
Double voting yourself is proving the case that you're a tankie. You don't care about democracy at all but to force your way no matter what.