Rethinking Proportional Representation
Another reason why I remain sceptical of its usefulness
Authors
I have long been sceptical of the argument that proportional representation (PR) is a better alternative to First Past the Post (FPTP). Proportional representation does have its benefits. But its equally important to understand its drawbacks. The commonplace support for shifting to PR at the margins is a specific case of a general phenomenon I call the ‘tyranny of context’. The status quo appears unworkable in this phenomenon because we know its pitfalls too well. On the other hand, a reform from another context appears attractive because we don’t understand it at all.
One pitfall of the PR system we should be particularly worried about is that it accords disproportionate power to fringe elements. One may argue that it is a feature, not a bug. But recent events in Israel which follows the PR system remind us of the dangers.
Jewish Power, a far-right political party recently returned to the government after Israel resumed its strikes in Gaza. This party had resigned in Jan protesting the ceasefire. Given the PR system, the ruling coalition was dependent on Jewish Power’s political to pass the annual budget. So, after its main demand to resume strikes in Gaza was agreed, the party got back into the government.
Further reading: My post on the three drawbacks of the PR system, and Yascha Mounk’s argument that Proportional Representation is not an answer to America’s Problems
None of this suggests that it’s only the PR system to blame. Nevertheless, it reminds us that the PR system is not without drawbacks, and can accentuate divisions by bolstering the fringe. We should be cautious.