Munich Social Science Review Mssr Volume 6

This volume continues the discussion of the Dutch project of “improving democracy” of Munich Social Science Review (MSSR), Volume 3, and the theoretical and empirical analysis of the issue of democracy in general. It concludes with four shorter contributions discussing Katharina Kohl’s art work “Questioning the Personnel” (Personalbefragung) which, as pointed out by Claudia Postel, “refers to the relations of power in democracy. ...Through Katharina Kohl’s work, the NSU murder series and the collective failure of the institutions responsible for safeguarding democracy and its citizens have been rescued from oblivion to serve as a means of education and enlightenment – in the sense of strategic decisions for a future-orientated change management.” Dieser Band setzt die Diskussion des niederländischen Projekts, die „Demokratie zu verbessern“, aus Volume 3 der Munich Social Science Review (MSSR) fort und liefert einen generellen Beitrag zur theoretischen Analyse der Demokratie und demokratischer Institutionen. Er schließt mit vier kürzeren Artikeln zu Katherina Kohls künstlerischer Arbeit „Personalbefragung“. Diese Arbeit, so führt Claudia Postel in ihrem Artikel aus, „bezieht sich auf Machtbeziehungen in der Demokratie...Durch Katharina Kohls Arbeit, wird die NSU-Mordserie und das kollektive Versagen der Institutionen, die die Demokratie und die Bürger schützen sollten, vor dem Vergessen bewahrt, um so der Bewusstseinsmachung und der Aufklärung dienen zu können.

This volume sets out with a discussion of the Dutch project of improving democracy and ends with a discussion of the Robot revolution. It contains contributions such as Peter Brouwer and Klaas Staal, The Future Viability of the Dutch Democracy; Hannu Nurmi, Remarks on “The Future Viability of the Dutch Democracy;” George Tsebelis and Jesse M. Crosson, Can the Dutch Electoral System be Improved Upon? Ryan Kendall, Decomposing Democracy: A Comment on “The Future Viability of the Dutch Democracy;” Peter Emerson, Can Rights Be Wrong? Towards a Less Majoritarian More Inclusive Democracy; Jan Oreský and Prokop Čech, Alternative Voting, Alternative Outcomes: 2018 Presidential Election in the Czech Republic; G. M. Peter Swann, Stalemate by Design? How Binary Voting Caused the Brexit Impasse of 2019; Florian Follert, Improving the Relationship between Citizens and Politicians; Sascha Kurz, Which Criteria Qualify Power Indices for Applications? - A Comment on “The Story of the Poor Public Good Index;” Matthias Weber, Thoughts on Voting Power and the Public Good Index; Claude Hillinger, The Case of Utilitarian Voting Christian Klamler, Utilitarian Voting - Some Empirical Evidence; Chris Hudson, Robots: Present and Future; and Bruce Morley, Robots Are Coming. Review of “John Hudson, The Robot Revolution: Understanding the Social and Economic Impact”

This timely book presents a critique of binary majority rule and provides insights into why, in many instances, the outcome of a two-option ballot does not accurately reflect the will of the people. Based on the author's first-hand experience, majority-voting is argued to be a catalyst of populism and its divisive outcomes have prompted countless disputes throughout Europe and Asia. In like manner, simple majority rule is seen as a cause of conflict in war zones, and of dysfunction in so-called stable democracies. In order to safeguard democracy, an all-party power-sharing approach is proposed, which would make populism less attractive to voters and governments alike. In geographically arranged chapters, well-tested alternative voting procedures (e. g. non-majoritarian Modified Borda Count) are presented in case studies of Northern Ireland, Central Europe, the Balkans, the Caucasus, Russia, China, North Korea and Mongolia.

First multi-year cumulation covers six years: 1965-70.

In this volume Iurie Stamati analyzes the archaeological discourse on the place of the old Slavs in the medieval history of Moldova of the Soviet period.