Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants.

From	"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.misc
Subject	Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants.
Date	2025-10-03 14:14 +0200
Message-ID	<l9r4rlxvrj.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <10b30b0$5u19$14@dont-email.me> <rslfqlxchn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <10b887c$1j6sd$1@dont-email.me> <10b8i8j$1lehq$1@dont-email.me> <10bo88l$1htmk$6@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2025-10-03 12:24, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2025-09-27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> On 27/09/2025 09:45, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.misc The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In particular when the 1960s reactors were built the regulatory
>>>>>>>> framework was very light and governments wanted them built,. The real
>>>>>>>> death knell was Germany, the Green party, proportional representation,
>>>>>>>> and Chernobyl.
>>>
>>> (We're now at "blame proportional representation for being
>>> representative"!?)
>>>
>> The problem is that it isn't
>>
>> In that government the Greens as a small minority were necessary for a
>> more popular party to govern,. That gave them  disproportionate power
>> over the government.
> 
> Ok, this is something else that has indeed been brewing in the
> far-right, the idea that only something like first-past-the-post is
> legitimate, and I've seen this go in hand with blatant misunderstandings
> of how proportionally representative democracy works.
> 
> For one thing, I've see these comments applied to *governments* in
> countries where voters do not elect governments, not even the head of
> government.
> 
> In short, what you're missing here is that Greens + the more popular
> party is *more* representative than just that more popular party.
> 
> Maybe you'll see the problem once you stop considering the greens like a
> discardable party and start considering them as another party?

There are governments where a previously considered "centre" party 
allies with a far right wing party, smaller, and this party demands far 
right things, some of them illegal and thrown down in court later.

But this is considered proper by the same right wing party that 
considers improper an alliance with greens or far lefties (which are not 
doing illegal things).


...

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Nuclear plants. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-25 10:00 +0100
  Re: Nuclear plants. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-09-25 13:33 +0200
    Re: Nuclear plants. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-25 13:47 +0100
    OT: Re: Nuclear plants. Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-27 09:45 +0100
      Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-27 12:36 +0100
        Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-03 11:24 +0100
          Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-03 11:42 +0100
            Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-10-04 10:52 +0000
              Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-04 12:29 +0100
              Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-10-04 15:10 +0000
              Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-10-04 09:59 -0700
                Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-10-04 18:49 +0100
          Re: OT: Re: Nuclear plants. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-10-03 14:14 +0200

csiph-web