The problem with FPtP is that we have no choice to vote negatively

People, politicians will vote against their particular interests to protect the party and to damage their opposition. They will vote for measures which they don't fully approve of because no better alternative is on offer. They will vote for a bill, or law which they do not consider to be very good only because it is better than no law.

Political parties are more of a threat to individuals than they are of assistance. This means that people will be willing to vote for a politician if they are able to provide protection from the feared and hated party. For this, we will vote only for someone who is loyal to the opposition party. We vote for the Republicans to weaken the Democrats and the reverse is true. This is why political parties will form and individual politicians will join them.

Given this fact, does it then not make sense to allow voters better means to protect themselves, as clearly they wish to do. Politics is confrontational, we do not want to vote in favour of propositions, we want to vote in opposition to them...

The principle behind First Past The Post is that we choose the candidate we most like, but the truth of the situation is that people vote for the one that will provide them the best protection. We do not seek a (positive) representative it is a shield that is sought. Immediately we see that it is advantageous to collaborate; if we seek protection, then any group which organises together will drown out the minority politicians. If we don't know how the representative will vote, and we do not know that others will also choose that candidate the vote is split. A group can seize power by working together and only the formation of another group in response will provide a protection. Individual representative politicians are useless in protecting the electorate against a political party because even if the best opposition candidate in each constituency is a clear choice, a stand out candidate, they may not all collaborate n Parliament; they may side with the Government and betray the voters.

The small Government party must promise to provide enough Government Services so that they will attract votes to win. They must appeal to, and appease their enemy, in political terms.

The problem with FPtP is that we are not able to vote against, only positively. Proportional Representation offers a chance to vote against certain principles, in a way; we can protest.