4 ms·
Ironically, while I am absolutely not a monarchist, it provides a kind of stability to British democracy, because it mostly transcends party politics, unlike ot
by MattPalmer1086 1y ago
Ironically, while I am absolutely not a monarchist, it provides a kind of stability to British democracy, because it mostly transcends party politics, unlike other presidential systems.
Indeed, the founding fathers of the US identified political parties as a threat to their republic.
- zdragnar 1y agoAnd yet, there were defacto political parties in the delightfully misnamed federalist and anti-federalists. It was this divide that led to the first political parties.
- MattPalmer1086 1y agoOh, they cannot be avoided really, except by a system where party allegiance cannot influence the choice (like hereditary power).
- mathiaspoint 1y agoArrow's theorem would cause them to emerge even then.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> this divide that led to the first political parties Maybe in Britain. Parties were definitely a thing going back to Roman politics.
- zdragnar 1y agoNo, I meant in the newborn US. The OP founding fathers reference is Hamilton and the Federalists who feared the harms of political parties, but ultimately couldn't reconcile with the anti-federalists who ultimately formed the democratic-republican party.