Abstract
By voting we mean the following pattern of collective choice: There is a set of alternatives and a group of individuals. Individual preferences over the alternatives are exogenously specified and are supposed to be orderings.
The group is required to choose an alternative on the basis of stating and aggregating of individual preferences, or to produce a ranking of alternatives from the most preferred to the least preferred. In this paper concepts of manipulation as strategic voting (misrepresentation of true preferences) and dictatorship (voting procedure leads in all cases to social rankings that are identical with rankings of an individual) are investigated.
The connection between Arrow's and Gibbard-Satterthwaite's theorems is discussed from the viewpoint of dilemma between dictatorship and manipulability: there exists no voting procedure which satisfies at the same time non-dictatorship and non-manipulability.