Americans are deliberately and explicitly indoctrinated from a very young age to believe our system is the best system in every way: most democratic, most free, etc. It’s not surprising that even the slightest challenge to those beliefs would be met with blank stares by many Americans.

Heh, blank stairs if you're lucky. In my experience you're more likely to be called a traitor or god forbid a communist.

We've literally been brainwashed from birth to believe that we have, by far, the best government that's ever been built. It's a major part of the school system.

Cognitive dissonance around the idea that there is room for improvement is inevitable.

I'm surprised that this attitude survives along side the attitude of "the government sucks at everything and it should be made as small as possible" that seems to be so pervasive in the US.

And I'm surprised that I get the same blank stares from Americans that have lived for a decade in Europe. It's like they've never contemplated any other way of electing. Of course it's not true about everyone. I'm generalizing a lot here, but it still surprises me.

Most people who believe the “the government sucks at everything and should be as small as possible” probably still worship the Constitution and “the forefathers” and believe it’s completely compatible.

Well I guess I am not part of most people, as I believe Government is inherently inefficient, and should be microscopic..

I also believe that "whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." -- Lysander Spooner

Lysander Spooner is not taught in public schools civics courses, as far as I know.

Probably not, but he should be

No Treason should be required reading

To be fair, the UK did have the "Alternative Vote Referendum" where we got the second-worst voting system proposed as an alternative to the worst voting system (FPTP). That might explain why nobody thinks "alternative voting systems" are any good; they just think of instant run-off.

This frustrates me to no end. IRV has a 6% improvement of VSE over plurality. But STAR and RP have 15% improvements. Not only that, but both are strongly resistant to spoiler effects and the trend to two coalitions dominance (in the States that's the two party system, outside the states that's two major parties being the dominant ruler over their coalitions).

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks it is because IRV doesn't effectively change things. The realist in me thinks it is just trendy.

For others: See me other comment (it is large, you can't miss it) explaining these topics in more detail (with links!)

Interesting! Was this done on purpose to discredit the voices for change, or was it just incompetence or a compromise or something like that?

Incompetence or compromise, I think. Hanlon's razor.

Using terminology like FPTP may be the problem, I had to look it up, and still feel the description doesn't match the term.