2 ms·
Not going to engage with the hyperbole (except to say that things are actually pretty good, historically, and party-based democracies have outperformed other fo
by ajross 3y ago
Not going to engage with the hyperbole (except to say that things are actually pretty good, historically, and party-based democracies have outperformed other forms of government almost universally).
But this has to be addressed:
> Abolish political parties now
You can't. "Parties" are just agreements. I want something, she wants something else, you want something different still, etc... I decide to vote with her because she'll support my stuff in return, where you won't. Now we have a party. That's all that a party is, they naturally arise any time you have any kind of collective decision making (not just democracy: treaty coalitions are just geopolitical "parties", etc...).
The two party system, likewise, is a natural evolution of first-past-the-post/winner-take-all voting. If you need 50% to do anything, then you need to get your party to be bigger than that. And the folks left out need to band together in order to get what they want. So the two sides naturally seek (via compromise, coercion, etc...) to an equilibrium where they both win about half the time. Anyone in a "third party" never wins anything.
- lupire 3y agoNot entirely true. Political parties are enshrined in many state governments, in the form of Parry registration and primary elections. Its frankly unconscionable.
- ajross 3y agoYou can eliminate those "unconscionable"[1] laws and it won't eliminate the parties though. Those are just regulations to prevent new parties from getting a foothold, but the existing parties predate the laws and will survive their passing just fine. Consider: there are no Whigs left, but the two party system hasn't changed. [1] Again, why the ridiculous hyperbole? It's not like this is some new evil plague; "parties" have been with us for thousands of years!
- adolph 3y ago> You can't. "Parties" are just agreements. That seems unimaginative. The agreement to create the party is recognized as some sort of incorporated being for the purpose of receiving and spending money. This could be shaped in various ways by taxing authority, or by retroactively changing the pay structure of officers, or by optimizing the valuation of different asset classes for the purpose of taxation. I'm sure others can think of even better ways to pursue abolition without expanding the already expansive controls on how people express the freedom of association.