Our 2-party democracy compared to European multi-party coalitions
Interesting conversation today with a Dutchman who moved to the States 4 years ago. Even here in essentially provincial Tampa Bay, we have a genuine French patisserie/boulangerie run by a French couple. They offer coffee with their delectable pastries and breads (she specializes in the former and he bakes the latter).
This unique shop and its proprietors attract a small group of native European regulars, as well as some Americans, who sit around coffee and croissants to discuss political affairs. A discussion today with the man from the Netherlands inspired this cogitation.
It has seemed to me for a long time that our essentially two-party system, in producing a winner and a loser each time, engenders tremendous divisiveness and extremism. One party gains power and rushes to implement as much of its agenda as possible, causing fear and anger in its opponents. First chance the opposition gets, it gains power and tries to reverse what it can and enshrine its own preferences into law.
Over time, I believe this has become a destructive seesaw cycle that yaws ever farther from the center that might most improve the country. I voted one way and believe in my choice. But I realize that essentially half the country voted the other way and thinks it is on the right track. They can't all be wrong and uninformed. The key is that a voter votes for those parts of his party's platform that he likes but generally does not agree with all of his candidate's positions. Since this is true on both sides, it suggests that a compromise of the two platforms would satisfy many more voters than a unilateral enactment of one side's platform.
But who would unilaterally compromise on an issue? If you compromise but the other party does not, you give up territory and gain nothing. Some external force is needed to push both sides simultaneously to compromise in the middle.
The Western European political systems, at least in Holland, Germany and Italy and now to some extent the U.K., have multiple viable political parties. (One might argue there are too many in Italy, since they seem to change governments about every five days.) As a result, and because their parliamentary system allows them to throw out a government they don't like, the winning parties must form coalition governments which by definition involve compromise. No one party is fully in charge. Perhaps having strong third and fourth parties would help stabilize the political process in the U.S.
Just a thought.
This unique shop and its proprietors attract a small group of native European regulars, as well as some Americans, who sit around coffee and croissants to discuss political affairs. A discussion today with the man from the Netherlands inspired this cogitation.
It has seemed to me for a long time that our essentially two-party system, in producing a winner and a loser each time, engenders tremendous divisiveness and extremism. One party gains power and rushes to implement as much of its agenda as possible, causing fear and anger in its opponents. First chance the opposition gets, it gains power and tries to reverse what it can and enshrine its own preferences into law.
Over time, I believe this has become a destructive seesaw cycle that yaws ever farther from the center that might most improve the country. I voted one way and believe in my choice. But I realize that essentially half the country voted the other way and thinks it is on the right track. They can't all be wrong and uninformed. The key is that a voter votes for those parts of his party's platform that he likes but generally does not agree with all of his candidate's positions. Since this is true on both sides, it suggests that a compromise of the two platforms would satisfy many more voters than a unilateral enactment of one side's platform.
But who would unilaterally compromise on an issue? If you compromise but the other party does not, you give up territory and gain nothing. Some external force is needed to push both sides simultaneously to compromise in the middle.
The Western European political systems, at least in Holland, Germany and Italy and now to some extent the U.K., have multiple viable political parties. (One might argue there are too many in Italy, since they seem to change governments about every five days.) As a result, and because their parliamentary system allows them to throw out a government they don't like, the winning parties must form coalition governments which by definition involve compromise. No one party is fully in charge. Perhaps having strong third and fourth parties would help stabilize the political process in the U.S.
Just a thought.
posted by alison @ 12:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home