I'm not entirely convinced the problem is the notwithstanding clause. I think the problem is that anti-trans fearmongering has found a political foothold. I mean honestly at the end of the day, you need a certain threshold of the population to support these kinds of policies for them to get enacted. And once too many people are bigots in a democracy, nothing can protect minorities. Bigotry is the thing we should have prevented.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

First-past-the-post fails to protect marginalized communities as bigoted minority governments in terms of vote share can get all the power with only 39% of the vote. Look at Modi for example.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well, I certainly agree with that, we can improve our electoral system a bit. There are limits on this of course, given there are mathematical proofs that there can't be any perfect voting scheme (with more than 2 parties).

Still though, 40% of voters being bigots is already an incredibly massive problem, trying to save minorities by changing the voting system, reducing provincial powers (removing the notwithstanding clause), or otherwise carefully balancing things, it all seems like a bandaid at this point.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

that there can't be any perfect voting scheme (with more than 2 parties).

I agree that no electoral system is perfect however there are countries functioning fine with 10 parties in their parliaments like Denmark and they tend to perform better on issues than we do.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

True, though they are better educated, more socialist, and import less American politics. I daresay this causes them to elect better leaders.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That is thanks to having fairer rules in their democracy. Did you know Quebec caps political donations to $50 a year.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Is that bad somehow?

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I did not state that.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

True, I just assumed that your first and second sentenced were in juxtaposition.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

We’re very envious of Quebec as here in BC the contributions limits are set at $1.4K, no wonder why struggling families are often being ignored in our politics.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

Damn I didn't know it was that high here.