To the Counsellors of Peace
Once I saw a nice Irish girl wearing a "One Million Volts"-lettered T-shirt. She had a nice boy friend, too.
They however looked like a kind of Germanic, though if they had confessed that they had marginally blood of ancient Romans, I would not have wondered.
Most of Japanese have also traits of southern Asians and northern Asians, each in himself or herself.
SECTION I: A Key to Success of the Vatican
Before Christianity was infiltrated into Europe, namely Germanic communities mainly in today’s France, Germany, and England, marriage was a matter between two families or clans.
A young man and a young woman expected to marry each other had no decisive right to say anything on their own marriage.
A young woman was obliged to move from her father’s mastery to her husband’s mastery through marriage.
This is a tradition of the Germanic society.
However, in the Roman Empire, marriage was a matter between a man and a woman. What is required for establishment of marriage is bipartite agreement between the two. Therefore, legal procedures and ceremonies were not necessary observed when a man and a woman married lawfully to be admitted by the society.
However around the 12th century, the mode of marriage changed clearly in Europe, namely Germanic communities mainly in today’s France, Germany, and England.
Through wider diffusion of Christianity, the mode of marriage was changed to be akin to that of the ancient Roman Empire.
Conversely, as Germanic women around the 12th century came to opt for individual-base marriage rather than family-relationship-base marriage, further infiltration of Christianity was driven into every corner of people’s life in Europe.
It is European women, a majority of whom have been Germanic, that allowed for the success of the Vatican in Europe due to the merit the religion had in terms of marriage.
(As for the Celtic people, I may like to deal with them later.)
Nonetheless, the Vatican had adopted a policy to be the sole master of each individual, rather than each family and clan; accordingly a marriage should be based on bipartite agreement between a man and a woman, which was so convenient for the Church.
Anyway, around the 12nd century with a new mode of marriage, the Germanic people, once regarded as barbarians living in the north of the Alps, started to step forward toward the contemporary success and glory of their civilization.
SECTION II: This Week’s Political Model
The issue is around the single-seat constituency system.
Suppose there are five constituencies and two parties A and B. From a region consisting of the five constituencies, five members of a legislative assembly are expected to be elected.
Yet, you may think one member from each constituency is rational even if the ratio of votes between two rivals is 51% to 49% in each constituency (since it is a tradition of Anglo-Saxons, isn’t it?).
The party A might win all the five constituencies with a margin of 51% to 49% in every constituency.
Or the party B might win in two constituencies by a margin of 51% to 49% in each, so Party A would have three lawmakers and Party B two, while the total votes in the region are shared by A and B as 51% and 49%. It looks indeed very reasonable.
However, it is risky. It includes a possibility of a drastic bias to happen to allow for a sweep by one party. One party can get all the five seats by accident or any uncertain factor, while the total votes in the region are shared almost evenly, say, by Party A and Party B with 52% and 48% of votes, respectively.
So, the multiple-seat constituency looks more stable and reliable to mirror a true state of voters’ choices.
For example, the Governor of Tokyo is an ex-LDP national lawmaker Mr. Shintaro Ishihara. But, the five members of the House of Councilors of the national Diet from Tokyo consist of two of the DPJ, one of the LDP, one of New Komeito Party, and one independent.
Now, my model is separation of representation of a constituency and representative’s voting discretion in a legislative assembly.
If you are a member of Party A and has been elected as the sole representative in a constituency with a voting margin of 51% to 49%, you can be surely a lawmaker representing the constituency but you are obliged to honestly reflect the choice of the voters of your constituency in your voting actions in the legislative assembly.
Specifically, you have to vote for a bill in favor of those who voted for you in a ratio of 51% but also for those who voted for your failed rival in 49%.
The share of the vote in an election must bind a representative in his/her legislative activities in the parliament or the congress.
If you are elected with the share of 99% in a certain constituency, you can act 99% for your own party; but you must also act 1% for supporters of your failed rival through your voting activities in the legislative assembly.
I call this system the separation of representation of a constituency and representative’s voting discretion in a legislative assembly.
Even President Mr. Barack Obama must act 48% for the Republicans as he represents the whole United States of America and the whole united citizens of America.
***************************************************
That is all for today.
(Oh I wish I had been a king in Europe in the 12th century, representing all the peasants and pagans and introducing the absolute will of the God, since there is only one version of the Gospels, the St. Peter’s version, due to the betrayal of Judas and the Jewish-Roman wars.
http://www.fukuchan.ac/music/j-folk3/kiminohitomiwa10000v.html )
Pro 12:20 Deceit is in the heart of them that imagine evil: but to the counsellors of peace is joy.
Pro 12:21 There shall no evil happen to the just: but the wicked shall be filled with mischief.
Pro 12:22 Lying lips are abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight.
Pro 12:23 A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness.