by In the New York Times, Eric Maskin and Amartya Sen explain Condorcet’s system for electing candidates who truly command majority support. In this system, a voter has the opportunity to rank candidates. Maskin and Sen’s fictitious example of the American primaries illustrates the difference between a plurality system (as used in the primaries) and a majority system a la Condorcet (where the winner is the one who defeats any other candidate in pairwise comparison). They also point out that Kenneth Arrow’s famous “impossibility theorem” demonstrates that there is no perfect voting system, and majority rule is no exception. Specifically, as Condorcet himself noted, a majority winner might fail to exist … Such an outcome is quite unlikely in practice, but if it were to arise, a tiebreaking procedure would be needed.
Topics:
Dirk Niepelt considers the following as important: Impossibility theorem, Kenneth Arrow, Majority, Marquis de Condorcet, Notes, Plurality
This could be interesting, too:
Dirk Niepelt writes Does the US Administration Prohibit the Use of Reserves?
Dirk Niepelt writes “Report by the Parliamentary Investigation Committee on the Conduct of the Authorities in the Context of the Emergency Takeover of Credit Suisse”
Dirk Niepelt writes “Governments are bigger than ever. They are also more useless”
Dirk Niepelt writes The New Keynesian Model and Reality
In the New York Times, Eric Maskin and Amartya Sen explain Condorcet’s
system for electing candidates who truly command majority support. In this system, a voter has the opportunity to rank candidates.
Maskin and Sen’s fictitious example of the American primaries illustrates the difference between a plurality system (as used in the primaries) and a majority system a la Condorcet (where the winner is the one who defeats any other candidate in pairwise comparison). They also point out that
Kenneth Arrow’s famous “impossibility theorem” demonstrates that there is no perfect voting system, and majority rule is no exception. Specifically, as Condorcet himself noted, a majority winner might fail to exist … Such an outcome is quite unlikely in practice, but if it were to arise, a tiebreaking procedure would be needed.