About Me

Aims of the Institute

The de Borda Institute aims to promote the use of inclusive voting procedures on all contentious questions of social choice.

This applies specifically to decision-making, be it for the electorate in regional/national polls, for their elected representatives in councils and parliaments, for members of a local community group, for members of a company board, for members of a co-operative, and so on. The appropriate methodology is the Borda count or rather, its modernised form, the Modified Borda Count (MBC) or "Borda preferendum"; (it is also known as consensus voting). 

pemerson@deborda.org

Search
Login
Powered by Squarespace

FAQ on Inclusive Voting Procedures > What is a Preferendum? > When there is a difference in quality or gravity between one outcome and another, (eg. Whether or not to go to war?) does this not highlight a weakness of the preferendum idea?

Search the FAQ for entries containing:

When the un Security Council debated Iraq in Oct. 2002 – Resolution 1441 – doubtless all fifteen members had their own views on what was the best policy: more or fewer sanctions and/or inspections and/or threats, and/or whatever.

For reasons unclear, only one option was allowed on the table… which then led to the ridiculous situation in which France voted in favour of something she did not like! She objected to the phrase “serious consequences” but nevertheless voted ‘for’… presumably because she thought it better than nothing.

In a multi-option setting, a French (and German) variation of the resolution would also have been on the ballot paper, maybe a Syrian one as well, an Irish one too perhaps, and the outcome of the subsequent multi-option vote might well have been a more accurate reflection of the fifteen members’ consensus viewpoint.

Last updated on September 19, 2008 by Deborda