The US needs a new democratic system, the two party thing has basically failed.
Fuck Israel
It's not a two party system.Dilbert_X wrote:
The US needs a new democratic system, the two party thing has basically failed.
It's not the party system that's failed. It's the lack of external controls on special interests that has allowed it to be corrupted. Absent a fix of that, it doesn't really matter how many parties hold seats in the Legislative Branch or which one controls the Executive.
ATG: I think there's a movement starting that is somewhat related. It is to repeal the 17th Amendment. The beauty is that Congress doesn't have to be involved--it can be done via the State Legislatures. Who knows if it will gain traction, but one can hope that Washington will get the message that the people are not happy...and have not been for quite some time.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The democratic process in the US inevitably leads to a two party system, as most 'first past the post' systems around the world do.
Or you can argue with 200 years of your own history, up to you.
Or you can argue with 200 years of your own history, up to you.
Fuck Israel
You can argue with the UK's system, then. It is (and has been--for longer than 200 years) effectively a two-party system, as well.Dilbert_X wrote:
The democratic process in the US inevitably leads to a two party system, as most 'first past the post' systems around the world do.
Or you can argue with 200 years of your own history, up to you.
Most democracies are effectively two-party systems. Any others are generally also-rans who occasionally pop up above the noise (a la Ross Perot in the US in '92). That doesn't mean that they are actually two-party systems, because they aren't. They are open to as many parties as can exist--just like the US.
Effective political parties incorporate the issues that are important to the people they purport to represent. In so doing, two parties will generally cover the vast majority of the people.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The Greens make a good case here for a minor party playing a substantial and stable role in parliament. They make up a quarter of the local legislature here.FEOS wrote:
You can argue with the UK's system, then. It is (and has been--for longer than 200 years) effectively a two-party system, as well.Dilbert_X wrote:
The democratic process in the US inevitably leads to a two party system, as most 'first past the post' systems around the world do.
Or you can argue with 200 years of your own history, up to you.
Most democracies are effectively two-party systems. Any others are generally also-rans who occasionally pop up above the noise (a la Ross Perot in the US in '92). That doesn't mean that they are actually two-party systems, because they aren't. They are open to as many parties as can exist--just like the US.
Effective political parties incorporate the issues that are important to the people they purport to represent. In so doing, two parties will generally cover the vast majority of the people.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman