A to C, B is missing.
Oct. 6th, 2008 03:22 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dsrtaoA: We have two political parties in the US. This leads to us-vs-them, poor compromises, and fewer viewpoints being heard in public. Many issues are bundled up together even though they have no coherent underlying philosophy.
C: We could have a dozen or so parties, each with a better philosophical grounding. Parties could afford not to have positions on some things when other issues are more important to them. Coalitions would be negotiated. More people would have better public airings of their positions.
The problem is B, the transition from A to C. If one major party fragments, the other immediately has an advantage. So they must both fragment simultaneously, or at least in a window of less than a year -- probably less than six months. Advantages in more general elections accrue to larger parties. It might be that there is no way to move from A to C without incurring temporary disadvantages so great that no semi-rational actor would willingly incur them.
C: We could have a dozen or so parties, each with a better philosophical grounding. Parties could afford not to have positions on some things when other issues are more important to them. Coalitions would be negotiated. More people would have better public airings of their positions.
The problem is B, the transition from A to C. If one major party fragments, the other immediately has an advantage. So they must both fragment simultaneously, or at least in a window of less than a year -- probably less than six months. Advantages in more general elections accrue to larger parties. It might be that there is no way to move from A to C without incurring temporary disadvantages so great that no semi-rational actor would willingly incur them.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-07 10:34 pm (UTC)Several states (like Italy) just don't have the wherewithal to invade countries as they did when they were a colonial power.
The reason the US government has been doing bad things for several decades is because our democratic institutions are not working properly. The wealthy have too much influence in the legislative process, they buy candidates by providing funds for campaigns and they influence public opinion by owning the mass media and many biased "think tanks".
If we had more clearly defined classes in this country multi-parties might make sense. As it is we have the WASP (white anglo-saxon protestant) party and the other party. Would things be better if we had an explicit black party or a Hispanic party? The problem is that the GOP masquerades as a party representing everyone, but doesn't.
Multi parties may be good or bad, it's not clear. What is clear is that having money vote instead of people isn't the way to get good government.