Time to end the two party system?
The Two party system, which is the system that only the United States has adopted, is seriously flawed. It doesn't allow the people to really express their true beliefs, and in fact, limits the choices to two corrupt institutions.
For those who believe in freedom of expression, and freedom of choice, the answer is obvious, end the two party system. This would require coalitions to gain control of congress.
The reality is that if you're a Democrat, even if you're a fiscally conservative, socially moderate, and a touch internationalist, defined by having great respect and deference for the United Nations, you're never going to amount to much in the Democratic Party. You simply put, can't gain influence over the extreme left wing radicals that are the titular heads of the party.
If you're a Republican who believes in open and honest Government, smaller and less intrusive Government, and individual liberty, you're similarly doomed to spend your life slamming your head into the wall of the Blue Blood Republicans who want watered down versions of the Democratic Policies.
So what is the answer? As many parties as you like. If you think that the Democratic Party of today is too Conservative, join a party that is much further to the left. If on the other hand, you think that the Democratic Party is too Liberal, then a vote for the Conservative Democrats may be the way to go. Same with the Republicans.
Other nations do this, and it gives a better example of the people's attitudes. If the Conservatives sweep in with two or three different parties to the right of center, then there is little doubt that the people feel a more conservative line is expected of the Government.
In America, we pretend that the people's votes, are what we say they are. When President Obama was elected, the pundits, and legislators screamed that this was a clear sign that the people wanted extreme socialist principals to guide and build the Government.
When the Democrats took control of Congress, this was claimed to be the same thing, clear evidence that the people wants extreme socialist policies. Yet, the individuals who won the races, ran as Conservatives in Fiscal and International policies. For some reason, the fact that this gave the Democrats control isn't ever mentioned, or considered. These Democrats are labeled as Blue Dog's, but they have little or no influence in the party.
The same is true of Republicans, hard core conservatives are shunned by the party elite, as are the liberals at the other end.
So why not, why not go with the multi-party platform? If you have four parties, let's go with Extreme Liberals who believe in Government Control of everything. Fiscal Conservative Pro-Choice Candidates should go into that party, call it the Center-Left. For the Restricted Choice, in other words not funded by the Government, but available based upon States Choices in the matters, Center-Right. Then the more extreme Right wing, which with few minor exceptions, I would belong in.
That group would shrug helplessly when AIG, or GM says that their poor management of their business will cause them to go Bankrupt if we don't act right now. People like me would look at them and say. "Then I'm sure whoever comes after you, won't make the same mistake your company made, aren't you?" Sounds cruel, but that is the way the system is supposed to work. Nothing, is ever, too big to fail.
We would let the market sort it out, and let companies that are poorly managed, fail. We would have social programs designed to assist people back into society, not spending life dependant upon it. Workfare, where if you're on Welfare, you get job training to get you back into the self sufficiency. Unemployment with a possibility of additional jobs training to make you more competitive in the work force.
So coalitions would be formed, and it would probably swing back and forth between the Center Right, and Center left groups as to who held the most political power during any given time. However, this would eliminate the extremist's like Nancy Pelosi from wielding tremendous power that isn't reflective of the electoral base. We have no say who is the Speaker of the House, or the Majority Whip in the Senate. We the people should have some say, the second in line for the Oval Office, and if we have say over who the President, and Vice President is, shouldn't we have say in who the Speaker is?
I believe it's time for a more parliamentary set up to take root in the United States, and I think it will reduce, but never eliminate the dirty tricks and back room deals that permeate our current system.
For those who believe in freedom of expression, and freedom of choice, the answer is obvious, end the two party system. This would require coalitions to gain control of congress.
The reality is that if you're a Democrat, even if you're a fiscally conservative, socially moderate, and a touch internationalist, defined by having great respect and deference for the United Nations, you're never going to amount to much in the Democratic Party. You simply put, can't gain influence over the extreme left wing radicals that are the titular heads of the party.
If you're a Republican who believes in open and honest Government, smaller and less intrusive Government, and individual liberty, you're similarly doomed to spend your life slamming your head into the wall of the Blue Blood Republicans who want watered down versions of the Democratic Policies.
So what is the answer? As many parties as you like. If you think that the Democratic Party of today is too Conservative, join a party that is much further to the left. If on the other hand, you think that the Democratic Party is too Liberal, then a vote for the Conservative Democrats may be the way to go. Same with the Republicans.
Other nations do this, and it gives a better example of the people's attitudes. If the Conservatives sweep in with two or three different parties to the right of center, then there is little doubt that the people feel a more conservative line is expected of the Government.
In America, we pretend that the people's votes, are what we say they are. When President Obama was elected, the pundits, and legislators screamed that this was a clear sign that the people wanted extreme socialist principals to guide and build the Government.
When the Democrats took control of Congress, this was claimed to be the same thing, clear evidence that the people wants extreme socialist policies. Yet, the individuals who won the races, ran as Conservatives in Fiscal and International policies. For some reason, the fact that this gave the Democrats control isn't ever mentioned, or considered. These Democrats are labeled as Blue Dog's, but they have little or no influence in the party.
The same is true of Republicans, hard core conservatives are shunned by the party elite, as are the liberals at the other end.
So why not, why not go with the multi-party platform? If you have four parties, let's go with Extreme Liberals who believe in Government Control of everything. Fiscal Conservative Pro-Choice Candidates should go into that party, call it the Center-Left. For the Restricted Choice, in other words not funded by the Government, but available based upon States Choices in the matters, Center-Right. Then the more extreme Right wing, which with few minor exceptions, I would belong in.
That group would shrug helplessly when AIG, or GM says that their poor management of their business will cause them to go Bankrupt if we don't act right now. People like me would look at them and say. "Then I'm sure whoever comes after you, won't make the same mistake your company made, aren't you?" Sounds cruel, but that is the way the system is supposed to work. Nothing, is ever, too big to fail.
We would let the market sort it out, and let companies that are poorly managed, fail. We would have social programs designed to assist people back into society, not spending life dependant upon it. Workfare, where if you're on Welfare, you get job training to get you back into the self sufficiency. Unemployment with a possibility of additional jobs training to make you more competitive in the work force.
So coalitions would be formed, and it would probably swing back and forth between the Center Right, and Center left groups as to who held the most political power during any given time. However, this would eliminate the extremist's like Nancy Pelosi from wielding tremendous power that isn't reflective of the electoral base. We have no say who is the Speaker of the House, or the Majority Whip in the Senate. We the people should have some say, the second in line for the Oval Office, and if we have say over who the President, and Vice President is, shouldn't we have say in who the Speaker is?
I believe it's time for a more parliamentary set up to take root in the United States, and I think it will reduce, but never eliminate the dirty tricks and back room deals that permeate our current system.
posted by Max Conservative at 2:26 PM
1 Comments:
Many countries other than the US are 2 party dominant. None of them "adopted" the "two party system", it's a by-product of the first past the post electoral system which has advantages and disadvantages. Lack of public support is the only thing keeping other parties out of power.
Post a Comment
<< Home