- Joined
- Apr 22, 2019
- Messages
- 55,575
- Reaction score
- 27,902
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
How do you suggest a political party handle when an issue has a clear moral position to defend the rights of a minority, but the majority holds another position and can be exploited for votes over it?
Should a party abandon morals routinely and just do what gets more votes? When and how should it do the unpopular but moral thing?
Try to answer the question in general - there are any number of examples which tend to drag the discussion to arguments about the example.
For a hypothetical, imagine the Americans with Disabilities Act had a majority against it saying 'screw them, we want the good parking places for ourselves'. A party could support the act on moral grounds, or oppose it to try to get more votes.
How can our country ever be 'great' or do much of the right thing if the answer is 'tyranny of the majority'? Wouldn't we still have segregation and even slavery?
Should a party abandon morals routinely and just do what gets more votes? When and how should it do the unpopular but moral thing?
Try to answer the question in general - there are any number of examples which tend to drag the discussion to arguments about the example.
For a hypothetical, imagine the Americans with Disabilities Act had a majority against it saying 'screw them, we want the good parking places for ourselves'. A party could support the act on moral grounds, or oppose it to try to get more votes.
How can our country ever be 'great' or do much of the right thing if the answer is 'tyranny of the majority'? Wouldn't we still have segregation and even slavery?