Majority rule is not always a good thing. WAS Re: Another country heard from...

[Haggridd]

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "northbysouthwest50" 
<northbysouthwest50 at y...> wrote:

> 
> Why don't we just have a poll on TBAY?  We would ask the people 
here 
> what should be done.  I don't know if a final decision has been 
made, 
> but I think it would be easier to decide what to do by considering 
> what most people in the group want to do.  So why not put up a 
poll 
> that says whether people want to leave TBAY the way it is, whether 
it 
> should be on its own list, or maybe whether it should be 
> discontinued.  
> 
> North

One of the problems that had to be addressed by the Framers of the 
U.S. Constitution was how to preserve the rights of the minority in 
a political struggle, which, in case you haven't noticed, is what is 
going on right now on the list vis-a-vis TBAY and Filks.  It is one 
thing for the majority to decide questions that do not threaten the 
very existence of a genre; it is quite another to exile a 
significant minority of listees.  The Framers addressed this in at 
least two ways:  First, some questions were removed from the realm 
of majority rule, e.g., no state could be deprived of its equal 
representation in the Senate.  No amendment can be adopted to change 
this  Or (to our shame)  no law could be enacted to regulate the 
slave trade until twenty years after the adoption of the U.S. 
Constitution.   Second, extraordinary majorities were required for 
some issues, like ratifying treaties or overturning a prsidential 
veto of legislation or, indeed, amending the U.S. Constitution in 
the first place.

I think that simple majority rule here would trample the 
legitimately expected rights and privileges of current listees, 
honored by list practice over time.  If we seek to change them at 
all, we should seek some kind of super-majority to ratifiy these 
removal of previous practices.

Haggridd