This is not a pure democracy. Pure democracy is not a noble goal, it's mob rule.
differently based on their geographical location
I do. Borders give the people inside them self-determinism. They provide the market of ideas. The contain bad ideas long enough for others to learn from them. They protect good ideas long enough for others to see the effects.
Imagine what a huge problem it is for China to have it's people see the capabilities of an average American.
Setting out Aus and Germany as role models is... bad. They don't have even remotely free societies. They have class systems. The power classes get to protect their lives and families, while the rest need to find a phone and hope the police arrive in time. Their ideas of free speech are worse than worthless. Heck one is teetering on banning random numbers.
If I move 15 feet in the same country my vote should not become more powerful
Why? You are free to move. Maybe you think all countries are the same? That's not how a Union works. If you don't represent each state (see "why borders" above) then the Union fails. By every measure the US is incredibly successful. Emulating worse off countries isn't a good idea.
So, how is the EC not a rule of mob then except that it weighs some part of the mob greater than others?
And, because states are different you want that to reflect on the people in that a state that’s different should have citizens with weaker or stronger influence on politics?
You are also cherry picking issues to portray Australia and Germany as worse. The people there have more ways to influence government, their populations are more active in politics overall and the inequalities among classes is much smaller than in the US.[1] The US has a whole host of problems with civil liberties too, a lot of them introduced by politicians pandering to the more politically powerful, smaller states. When 22% of the population controls more than enough to win the election that will give rise to the distrust in government and drop in political paryicipation we see in America, a problem that’s gotten worse almost every year for the past 50 years.
And, I don’t really get it, you mention that people who feel unfairly represented can just move but you don’t think the same argument holds if a person from a smaller state would feel the same in a completely equal voting system? Why do people have to live in Rhode Island? Couldn’t they just move to Boston if they think their smaller state doesn’t have the appropriate influence?
differently based on their geographical location
I do. Borders give the people inside them self-determinism. They provide the market of ideas. The contain bad ideas long enough for others to learn from them. They protect good ideas long enough for others to see the effects.
Imagine what a huge problem it is for China to have it's people see the capabilities of an average American.
Setting out Aus and Germany as role models is... bad. They don't have even remotely free societies. They have class systems. The power classes get to protect their lives and families, while the rest need to find a phone and hope the police arrive in time. Their ideas of free speech are worse than worthless. Heck one is teetering on banning random numbers.
If I move 15 feet in the same country my vote should not become more powerful
Why? You are free to move. Maybe you think all countries are the same? That's not how a Union works. If you don't represent each state (see "why borders" above) then the Union fails. By every measure the US is incredibly successful. Emulating worse off countries isn't a good idea.