On Political Parties

Is The Two Party System Obsolete?

Two major political parties control the politics of 50 states. These parties draft platforms that try to represent the needs, wants, desires, and ambitions of over 250 million citizens. In order to do this, each party paints itself in broad strokes so as to appeal to as many voters as possible.

The problem with this approach is the parties try to stand for everything in general terms but stand for very few things in specific terms. Each part has become too general in an effort to gain support. Each party expects obedience from its elected members even as they change specifics of the party’s tenets. Each party is about power and if a few people are helped or appear to be helped - so much the better. Our political parties control who runs for the higher offices and if an outsider should overcome the odds, they unite to destroy or discourage the upstart. Politics belongs to them - it is their exclusive battleground.

The parties set the agenda. They compete with each other for the minds of the electorate. In the process, issues are only a means to an end - winning. Personal beliefs must be sacrificed on the party’s altar of ideology and current hot-topic rhetoric. Unfortunately the political parties reflect the inattention of the American public and especially its voting public.

We have created the parties and we have gladly given our power to the party. Each party has grown accustomed to that power and exalted position. They each believe only their solution is best. If the polls indicate most of us disagree with them then the campaign to educate us to their view begins. We have become pawns in their power plays. They no longer care if we believe them only that they can control us.

Election to a political office should be and honor not a reward for party loyalty. We need elected officials that are proud of the people they represent and want to serve those people. We need officials that owe their allegiance to the people rather than to the party.

Those officials that dare to represent their people instead of their party are quietly denied the party’s machinery and money. Money controls our elections and who can run for any office. The higher the office the more money needed. Only rarely does an individual control the party elite by drawing enough support to cause the party to need him or her. Even then the party tries to distance themselves so the person cannot become more important that those who control the party without public recognition.

To place all of the blame on the parties and those that control the parties is unfair. They are only doing what comes naturally. Power seeks power. We the electrocute, are the ones at fault. We continue to believe even when our experience tells us otherwise. We refuse to try to change a system that borders on uselessness because we have no other choice. Independent candidates have almost not chance against the parties’ political muscle and money. We are given few choices because we allow and tolerate campaigns best described as mud wrestling. Issues are secondary to character assassination. The current system is broken because we the people are not being served. Candidates tell us what we want to hear but do what the party dictates once elected. The survival of the party is a top priority, second only to the survival of this nation - I hope.

Now that I have complained and griped - do I have a solution? I think so. We must demand more representation. We must demand that our Representatives and Senators represent us, not the party line. We must wrest control of the political system and return power to the masses. To do this we must back candidates based on their statements rather than their party. We must insist on issue oriented campaigns. Truth must be required - not half-truths. A candidate’s character should be considered important, not just the promises he or she makes.

We must insist on more and better candidates. Not necessarily someone in politics as a career. We must insist on more parties - two is too few to properly represent the people. Our diversity should be celebrated by parties that cater to various segments of our population. We should have a Hispanic party, a union party, a teachers’ party and other ethnic-based and issue-oriented parties. Yes, this would increase decisiveness of our government but it would also increase our individual representation and power while decreasing the two-party power structure. We would be offered more choices - some good - some bad. Perhaps less would be done because our government might be less effective but if the issues are important enough to the majority of the people, we could force our will on our Representatives.

The two party system will insist we would be worse off but in reality only the power of the two parties would be eroded and reined in by our opinions. All parties would be more answerable to the individual voter and less to the party elite. The more we expect the government to do for us, the more power we give that government and the less freedom and power we as individuals have. Government is only too happy to control our lives - for our own good.

Government is a body of laws and not to be feared. It’s the interpretation of and the selective enforcement of those laws that should concern us. In other words: Government shouldn’t worry us but those people that represent that government should. So the less effective the government the less chance of governmental abuse.

In all honesty, our two party system does offer differing opinions. Opinions from the far right, from the far left, and various positions between these two extremes. These opinions while needed are insufficient to represent the diversity of the American voters. We need more opinions - not fewer. We need men and women of courage to vote their promises, their pledges; to protect their electorate not their party. We need more parties to force more cooperation, more thoughtful discussions and decisions, more answers and less rhetoric.

The two existing parties should welcome these additional parties; it gives them someone else to blame besides themselves when things don’t go their way. With only two parties, the party in power blames the party out of power for everything including the weather. One obstructs the other for their own benefit while we suffer for their egos and party-centered attitudes.

Not all opinions are politically motivated, some are honest disagreements. The problem is how to tell the difference between honesty and opportunism. With only two parties it is becoming harder to tell but with more parties, more opinions, we could better determine the truth. The more complex the problem the less likely two views can contain the best answer.

Author: Don Miller
Posted: Nov. 2002

Email the Author Send a Response

2002 Articles

2002 Articles Home

On Obsession
Harry P. Movie
Priests & The Law
On The Parties
Greatest Invention
Artificial Minds
On Religion II
On Religion
On Oneness
On Morality
Letter To Friend
On Karma
Religious Freedom
On Rituals
On Masters
On Magic
On Society
On Reparations
On Profiling