58
this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
58 points (100.0% liked)
Canada
9648 readers
608 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Related Communities
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
- Calgary (AB)
- Comox Valley (BC)
- Edmonton (AB)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Guelph (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Windsor (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
- Main: c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- Montréal Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
- Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
💻 Schools / Universities
- BC | UBC (U of British Columbia)
- BC | SFU (Simon Fraser U)
- BC | VIU (Vancouver Island U)
- BC | TWU (Trinity Western U)
- ON | UofT (U of Toronto)
- ON | UWO (U of Western Ontario)
- ON | UWaterloo (U of Waterloo)
- ON | UofG (U of Guelph)
- ON | OTU (Ontario Tech U)
- QC | McGill (McGill U)
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
- Personal Finance Canada
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Buy Canadian
- Quebec Finance
- Churning Canada
🗣️ Politics
- General:
- Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- By Province (alphabetical):
🍁 Social / Culture
- Ask a Canadian
- Bières Québec
- Canada Francais
- First Nations
- First Nations Languages
- Give'r Gaming (gaming)
- Indigenous
- Inuit
- Logiciels libres au Québec
- Maple Music (music)
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The will of the people is the will of the people. Start imposing a super majority on things and watch as nothing gets done anymore.
Sometimes things getting done is a good thing.
Why does 50%+1 represent the will of the people?
Because that's exactly how democracy works, 50% +1 means a majority of the people want something, the rest had their chance to convince them otherwise, they can organize another vote later on to see if it's still the will of the people to do that thing at that point.
That's how some democracy sometimes works. Sometimes supermajorities are required in democracies. Who cares about what the majority wants? Why should that be the only thing that counts?
And who has the authority to decide what requires it and what doesn't? And how do you guarantee it's not abused?
Federal: "You need a simple majority to gain your independence" thinking the vote won't come close and using fraud to help the no side
Quebec: 0.59% away from a yes vote
Federal: "Oh shit! Clarity act!"
If another referendum happens and they determine it's 60% to win and it comes close they'll just move it to 65% the next time then 70% and so on. Just ripe for abuse!
This is a pretty naive vision of democracy, if I invite 4 friends over and 3 of them want to order shit instead of pizza, we're not eating shit.
Democracy isn't some magical decree from God that is a law of nature, people must consent to being governed.
Well in politics that's exactly how it works, the majority elects the far right, everyone has to eat shit.
And that's what leads to instability and ultimately the collapse of that government. The reality of the situation is that a narrow referendum to leave Canada will be met with incredible resistance and it's not going to happen.
A supermajority would be harder to resist both internally and externally. That's the point.
"and it's not going to happen"
Just like it didn't happen with Brexit? Just like Quebec wouldn't have become a country if it wasn't for fraud on the no side?
Brexit isn't apples to apples.
Just like it didn't happen with the Confederacy, and that was more than one state.
That platitude does not convince me of anything. Some things should obviously require a super majority, or require additional process beyond voting, or not be subject to a vote ad all.
Majoritarian rule is not the end all be all of a functioning democracy.
And who are you to decide what is worthy and what isn't of requiring a super majority? And who are the politicians to decide that?
It won't happen anyway as that would need to be enshrined in the Constitution and the reason why we don't open it is that it would start a shitshow AND it requires a super majority to make any changes to it.
The limits are decided as the society and its government are formed and as they develop. Just as you note, look at the process for amending the constitution or the fact that you can’t vote in unconstitutional laws.
It just a basic fact about well functioning democratic systems that you have limits to majoritarian rule.
There is a lot more to democracy than winners taking all in bare majority votes. There is absolutely nothing wrong with requiring super majorities for some process, or requiring consensus in some cases, in having some things decided by experts instead of by vote, or by using deliberation with no voting in some cases.
The important part of democratic governance is that we work together to develop and maintain well reasoned and functional systems that are stable and responsible to our changing needs, based on engagement and deliberation of the citizenry. Winner take all bare majoritarian voting is the least of it, honestly.
Edit: it’s helpful imo to skim https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy to get a sense of how varied and expansive democratic governance is.
But as I pointed out, the super majority required to amend the Constitution means that it will never change.
I'm now wondering if you are Canadian because yes we actually can.
I am not a constitutional lawyer (or any sort of lawyer), but my understanding (and what I meant to say) was that unconstitutional laws are subject to legal correction, so sure , we may vote in whatever we want, but that doesn’t meant the law will stand or take effect.
See e.g., http://www.revparl.ca/english/issue.asp
Section 33
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_33_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms
Of course I am aware of the "notwithstanding clause", but this is not relevant for the strict majoritarian view you were espousing, is it? Moreover, "it allows Parliament or provincial legislatures to temporarily override sections 2 and 7–15 of the Charter" and the parts of the Charter subject to override are limited: "rights such as section 6 mobility rights, democratic rights, and language rights are inviolable".
To my mind, this is clearly all further evidence of the fact that our government is organized via an intricate (and ever-evolving) system with various overrides and corrective measures and balanced powers, and that it is in no way simply reducible to strict, %50+, majoritarian rule.