[acituan]

> The alternative to majority rule is tyranny of the minority

Being anti-majority doesn't mean pro-minority.

It is about decreasing the weight of merely being in the majority as an input feature to optimal decision making. It is protecting against pseudo-relevance majority can pose as an overemphasized decision making strategy. This doesn't mean all ideas that manifest as majority is irrelevant, not at all, it is protecting against the false positives.

Mind you a lack of steamrolling with majority alone forces a downstream integration of opponent thoughts.

Think it like a collective intelligence architecture that is trying to make sure we don't get stuck in local optima.

[comte7092]

That’s all well and good, but when these issues come up, people seemingly turn their brains off and repeat “tyranny of the majority” without evaluating the empirical reality of how these systems function in practice.

I’m amenable tot he notion that there should be some guardrails on simple majoritarianism, but it shouldn’t follow that all anti majoritarian rules are good.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

We do have guardrails. The constitution puts various things off-limits to any sort of majoritarian process of regular governing.

Should there be more things off-limits? Should there be less? Intelligent people could disagree, but the off-limits category already exists and there is a process to change what is in it.