• dnoods@vlemmy.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This might be an over simplified approach to a complex problem, but why can’t we just eliminate political parties altogether? I know people will always form groups/organizations/fraternities/etc, but only giving them two (realistic) options just forces them into camps that they might not fully agree with. Sure, you can argue that there are plenty of independent parties to choose from, but when it comes election time, it’s always either “Option A”, “Option B” or your vote doesn’t matter. At the very least, remove the two party system and any other systems that reenforces them.

    • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      The whole US political system forces a two party system. You would have to completely change how we do elections to eliminate two parties. The other reason we are stuck in the two party system is because the majority will have total sway and hurt if you shatter into smaller parties. It also doesn’t help our system is unequal with Wyoming having 1 senator for every 250k people and 1 representative for 500k. Then dc having nothing and Delaware twice the population having the same power as Wyoming

    • randon31415@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nebraksa tried that. Made it illegal to display political party names or endorsements on state elections.

      Also had a constitutional amendment to the state constitution that if a politician voted against term limits, the phrase “this candidate voted against term limits” would be printed below their name on ballots.

    • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      A two-party system will pretty much always emerge in a first-past-the-post electoral system like ours. You want to get past that bifurcation, you’d need to change electoral structure, which is why even Teddy Roosevelt couldn’t get a 3rd party off the ground successfully.

    • Draedron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If there is one thing american politics doesnt need it is even fewer parties. It needs more choices. Other countries dont have the issue of only having option A or B. There is a C, D, E, F etc.

    • WetBeardHairs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d be all for it, personally. But humans are innately tribal. “That person is different - I don’t recognize them - I don’t trust them.”

      • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Humans doing something innately can be stopped. We shit wherever, instinctively. We have to be trained to do it differently. Our tribalism can work that way too, but it requires a system people believe listens to them, is fair, and will keep them safe.