Proportional Representation Applied To Party Government by T. R. (Thomas Ramsden) Ashworth;H. P. C. Ashworth
page 39 of 183 (21%)
page 39 of 183 (21%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
responsibility of parties." The assumption is here made that the
complete suppression of individuality is an essential feature of party government, whereas it is in fact a peculiar feature of American politics, due to "machine" control of nominations. The one point which Professor Commons has missed is that individual candidature can be permitted and representation still be confined to the two main parties. +Conclusion.+--The advocates of proportional delegation have failed to grasp the importance of the principles of organization and leadership, which underlie representation. Mr. Hare thought that the effect of doing away with organization would be to improve leadership. But he reckoned without his host--Human Nature. Organization cannot be dispensed with without destroying leadership and bringing on the strife of factions. FOOTNOTE: [1] Now Lord Avebury. CHAPTER III. THE PRESENT POSITION OF PARTY GOVERNMENT. +England.+--We have seen that the fundamental error of the proportionalists is that they have failed to distinguish between the two stages of representation. In constantly appealing back to the earlier parliaments they altogether overlook the fact that the functions which |
|