To install click the Add extension button. That's it.
The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.
How to transfigure the Wikipedia
Would you like Wikipedia to always look as professional and up-to-date? We have created a browser extension. It will enhance any encyclopedic page you visit with the magic of the WIKI 2 technology.
Try it — you can delete it anytime.
Install in 5 seconds
Yep, but later
4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Why the UK Election Results are the Worst in History.
Norman Houston OBE on "Northern Ireland and BREXIT The Troubles, the Border & the Future"
Transcription
Hello Internet
The UK had an election we need to talk about
because after the debates finished, the people
voted and the ballots tallied the results
were this:
But parliament ended up looking like this:
Which isn't, exactly, representative. And
by not exactly, I mean at all.
Red earned 30% of the vote and 36% of the
seats, which is sort of close, but the rest
is madness: Orange earned 8% of the vote but
got one eighth of that while Yellow's 5% just
about doubled, and purple earned 13% and got
squat.
Meanwhile blue's 37% of the people booted
to 51% of the seats in parliament. The blue
boost is even bigger when you consider that
51% of the seats gives basically 100% the
control.
How'd this happen?
In the UK -- national elections aren't really
national, they're a bunch of local elections.
The UK is divided into constituencies, each
of which elects one member of parliament (M.P.)
to represent them. This local / national divide
is where the trouble begins.
Imagine a parliament with just three constituencies,
and it's easy to see how it wouldn't always
align with citizens. Some people think this
sort of result is fine -- “it's all *about*
winning local elections,” they’ll say.
“Each M.P. represents their constituency.”
And while the imbalance in this example is
dumb, but it's the same problem in the real
election and this same argument is given,
but there are two more problems with it in
reality land.
1) Few citizens have any idea who their MP
is, they just know what party they voted for
-- what party they want to represent their
views on the national level. And pretending
like it's a local election is a bit disingenuous.
-- in practice it's an election for now the
nation will run -- not really for who is going
to represent a tiny part of it.
and even if it were
2) The individual constituencies are worse
at representing their citizens than parliament.
Indulge this spreadsheet-loving nerd for a
moment, will you?
The difference between what a party earned
at the polls and what they got in parliament
is the amount of misrepresentation error.
If we calculate all the errors for all the
parties and add them up we can say the Parliament
as a whole has 47% percentage points of misrepresentation
error. That sounds bad looks like a utopian
rainbow of diversity compared to any local
election because the local elections have
*one* winner. Out of the 650 constituencies
647 have a higher representation error than
parliament. These are the only three that
don't and they're really unusual for having
so many of a single kind of voter in one place.
Most places look the The Wrekin which is dead
in the middle a mere one-hundred and one points
off. Note that the winning candidate didn't
reach a majority here. Which means more than
half of constituencies elected their MP with
a minority of voters.
The worst is Belfast South at the bottom of
the list. Hilariously unrepresentative. Less
than a quarter of the voters get to speak
for the entire place in parliament. This is
the the lowest percentage an M.P. has ever
been elected by.
So when people argue that the UK election
is a bunch of local elections 1) people don't
act like it, and 2) It's even more of an argument
that the elections are broken because they're
worse on this level.
These local elections are unrepresentative
because of the terrible 'First Past the Post'
voting system -- which I have complained mightily
about and won't repeat everything here -- go
watch the video -- but TL;DR it only 'works'
when citizens are limited to two choices.
Voting for any party except the biggest makes
it more likely the biggest will win by a minority
-- which is exactly what happened.
That citizens keep voting for smaller parties
despite knowing the result is against their
strategic interests demonstrates the citizenry
wants diverse representation -- but that successes
is the very thing that's made this the most
unrepresentative parliament in the history
of the UK.
People happy with the results argue the system
is working fine -- of course they do. Their
team won.
Government isn't a sport where a singular
'winner' must be determined. It's a system
to make rules that everyone follows and so,
we need a system where everyone can agree
the process is fair even if the results don't
go in their favor.
If you support a system that disenfranchises
people you don't like and turbo-franchises
people you do -- then it doesn't look like
you sport representative democracy, it looks
like you support a kind of dictatorship light.
Where a small group of people (including you)
makes the rules for everyone.
But as it is now, on election day the more
people express what they want the worse the
system looks which makes them disengaged at
best or angry at worst and GEE I CAN'T IMAGINE
WHY.
This is fixable, there are many, many better
ways the UK could vote -- here are two that
even keep local representatives.
And fixing voting really matters, because
this is a kind of government illegitimacy
score -- and it's been going up and may continue
to do so unless this fundamentally broken
voting system is changed.
The original county constituency comprised the eastern part of County Antrim, being carved out of the former Antrim constituency. From 1885, East Antrim consisted of the baronies of Belfast Lower and Glenarm Upper, that part of the barony of Antrim Upper not in the constituency of South Antrim, that part of the barony of Antrim Lower not in the constituency of Mid Antrim, that part of the barony of Belfast Upper consisting of the parish of Ballymartin and the parish of Templepatrick apart from the townland of Ballyutoag, and the town of Carrickfergus.
It returned one Member of Parliament 1885–1922.
The current seat was created in boundary changes in 1983, as part of an expansion of Northern Ireland's constituencies from 12 to 17, and was predominantly made up from parts of North Antrim and South Antrim. Since further revisions in 1995 (when it lost part of the district of Newtownabbey to the North Belfast constituency) it now covers the entirety of the districts of Larne and Carrickfergus, as well as part of Newtownabbey and Moyle.
Prior to the 2010 general election the Boundary Commission originally proposed two significant changes for East Antrim. In the south of the constituency it was proposed to transfer a further part of Newtownabbey to the North Belfast constituency whilst in the north the seat would have gained the Glens and Ballycastle in Moyle district from North Antrim. East Antrim would have been renamed 'Antrim Coast & Glens'. However this latter part of the proposal raised many questions, with some already arguing that the Glens have no natural ties to Jordanstown (and in 1995 the previous Boundary Commission cited this very reason when rejecting such a proposal).
Following consultation and revising the recommendations, the new boundaries for East Antrim were confirmed and passed through Parliament by the Northern Ireland Parliamentary Constituencies Order[2] as follows:
From Newtownabbey, the wards of Jordanstown, Monkstown, and Rostulla
History
1885 until 1922
The constituency was a strongly conservative then unionist area, where republican and nationalist candidates were not elected.
From 1886 to 1974 the Conservative and Unionist members of the United Kingdom House of Commons formed a single Parliamentary party.
From 1905 there was an Ulster Unionist organisation, but MPs sponsored by it are classified as Irish Unionists until the 1921 Northern Ireland general election made the partition of Ireland effective so that Irish Unionism ceased to be a realistic objective.
A victory for the Unionist candidate in 1918 by 15,206 votes to Sinn Féin's 861 votes demonstrated the virtual unanimity of the unionist support.
Consequently, Sinn Féin did not contest the 1919 by-election in the constituency.
Sinn Féin contested the general election of 1918 on the platform that instead of taking up any seats they won in the United Kingdom Parliament, they would establish a revolutionary assembly in Dublin. In republican theory every MP elected in Ireland was a potential Deputy to this assembly. In practice only the Sinn Féin members accepted the offer.
The revolutionary First Dáil assembled on 21 January 1919 and last met on 10 May 1921. The First Dáil, according to a resolution passed on 10 May 1921, was formally dissolved on the assembling of the Second Dáil. This took place on 16 August 1921.
The constituency is overwhelmingly unionist, with the combined votes for nationalist parties rarely exceeding 10%. However, there have been above average votes for parties outside the traditional unionist block, such as the Alliance and the Conservatives. In the local government elections for the equivalent area many votes often go to independent candidates or groups such as the Newtownabbey Ratepayers Association. While the SDLP sprung a surprise in 1998 by overtaking a DUP candidate to win the final seat due to Ulster Unionist transfers – the first time that any nationalist candidate has benefited in this way.
The main interest in Westminster Elections has been the contest between the Ulster Unionist Party and the Democratic Unionist Party. In 1983 the UUP were only 367 votes ahead of the DUP. As part of a pact to oppose the Anglo-Irish Agreement the DUP did not contest the seat until 1992 but they still failed to come close, though in the 1996 elections to the Northern Ireland Forum they were only slightly behind the UUP. But in the 2001 general election they achieved an astonishing result when they came with 128 votes of winning the Westminster seat, despite not having targeted it. In the 2003 Assembly election they followed this up by gaining two additional MLAs and outpolling the UUP for the first time.
The DUP remained eager to take the Westminster seat and in the 2005 general election they did so.