When thinking politics, I've experienced personal evolution over the years. Probably most of us have. I used to be a big fan of the notion that our 2 party system is fundamentally flawed, and if we could only have legitimate third, forth, nth parties vying for our vote, then life would be much better. In other words, I used to be a disciple of the stuff I hear Arbi preachin': 2 bad choices stink, America has been going the wrong way for a long time, Democrat and Republican are false dichotomies, like being asked to chose which pocket you want to be picked from.
I knew Israel had a very different system, with lots and lots of parties. They change power more often. Their elections force people to build coalitions to get things done. The system seems much closer to the people than ours. It always sounded so nice.
Then I talked to a buddy of mine with a similar conservative/libertarian/constitutionalist bent, who had spent some time in Israel. He tells me that many people in Israel are not happy with how their govt. works. They think their system is broken, and they see the multitude of parties as the cause. They confirm what I thought was a good thing, that you need to build a coalition in order to get anything done. But they see this as a bad thing, because of the people and parties they need to build a coalition with.
Democracy and Republics both work the same way, in that you must get agreement with other people to get anything done. The problem with Israel seems to be this: Some of the other people are nutcase fringe groups, like Earth Firsters or the gay rights brigade or the peace at any cost people or the war-war-and-more-war party. So, you want to reform the tax system, or implement the next phase of the Palestinian conflict? You have to give these fringe parties something they want to gain their support. And if you don't, you don't form your coalition, and nothing happens.
So what do you think, those of us who would like to see our 2 party system replaced with an N party system? Would you like to have a cap on parties - say 4 or 5? Is there some kind of middle ground between American and Israeli political reality? Do you think anything's gotta be better than what we have now?
I don't really have any set belief to defend here, just looking for ideas.
LM
__________________
And I'd discuss the holy books with the learned men, seven hours every day. That would be the sweetest thing of all.
I don't really see the US as a two party system. The Constitution is "party agnostic". You will not find any mention of parties in there, and technically parties are not necessary for the functioning of our system. Since the Constitution was adopted parties have become a necessary annoyance, it seems - it's hard to gain the necessary funding and support to even get on the ballot without one. One fundamental difference between our system and the Israeli system is that their system is based on parties. You don't vote for a person for Prime Minister, you vote for a party who then chooses which of them will serve as prime minister. You don't elect members of the knesset, you vote for a party, which receives representation in the knesset based upon their percentage of the total vote. I don't like the concept of fractional representation. As you point out, if there was a Flat Earth party, and they got 1% of the vote, then you'd have a representative of the Flat Earth party helping to make law. Sort of a scary concept. I look on it sort of as "minority rules". They have to pander to the minority in that country in order to get anything done. Whereas our actual voting process is agnostic of parties. Come November, you will not be voting for the Democratic Party, Republican Party, Constitution Party, Green Party, or whatever. You will be voting for candidates from those parties. They may have been chosen by their parties and put on the ballet by them, but if candidates from the Constitution Party get 2% of the votes in House races, for instance, they do not get 2% of the representation in the house. They only get a representative in the house if one of them gets a majority of the vote in his district. This is rule by majority. If the Flat Earth party got any representatives in Congress, it would only be because a majority of voters in their districts subscribed to the tenets of the Flat Earth Society. So, our system works with the presence of multiple parties, but it does not require any parties at all. Now consider this: the two major parties have to engage in coalition making too. Why do you think that McCain is pandering to the conservatives now? Because he knows that he can't get elected without them. But at the same time he feels that he can't offend the liberal republicans or the middle of the road republicans. Or even, for that matter, the log cabin republicans. If he said anything even vaguely anti-homosexual, he would be out of the race. So the candidates of the two major parties are the results of the same sort of coalition making that you say is the weakness of the Israeli system.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
I'd love to see a law that made it necessary for the winner to have at least 51% of the vote.
So if there were 6 parties and no one got more than 51% of the vote, then the two highest candidates would have another "runoff" election.
__________________
no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing... the truth of God will go forth till it has penetrated every website, sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done
