Might We Be Better off without Political Parties?

Political parties are a damned nuisance. Are they necessary?

Talking recently with a Republican, he frequently spouted familiar nonsense. Many of his statements seemed so demonstrably wrong that it was hard to believe that he believed them. Mine likely struck him the same way.

But he’s a smart guy. If we had to solve some practical problem, we could collaborate effectively, using our different skills to fashion a reasonable solution. On some governmental issue, absent the party system, we might forge a reasonable compromise.

Party loyalties make us speak less frankly and listen less openly. We may think a national leader is too mired in resentment over a loss to address current issues properly, but if he’s a major force in our party, we avoid disagreeing openly. We may think another national leader we generally admire approved assassinating more people in other countries than is either legal or strictly necessary, but we know our “enemies” in the other party will swoop down on any criticism we make, like a hawk snatching a mouse.

Biden is a good but imperfect man and president. Why deny his flaws, or unduly exaggerate his positive qualities. (I make mistakes often. Even my perfect wife makes occasional mistakes.) Once our climate emergency became a political loyalty test, our slim chances to take serious action evaporated.

Parties get in our way. They’re also the first step to an emotional division among people analogous to rooting loyally (blindly) for opposing football teams. We’re fellow citizens of the United States. You and I. We share a wonderful country that often errs; and, as a rampaging elephant does more harm than a rampaging mouse, our country’s missteps can have out-sized consequences.

I learned in college that the party system was essential. Parties provide informal caucuses and training grounds for political leaders, and organize financial and other support for those leaders; and, as the world grows more complex, maybe we need huge parties facilitating communications among folks with somewhat similar views.

Still, maybe we’d be better off without parties. Maybe we’d do better with a dozen rather than two. Conventional wisdom holds that multi-party systems are more nuanced, but that having just two, with a strong executive, allows faster response to emergencies. (What if the two-party system becomes the dangerous emergency?)

Maybe parties were fine once but a danger now. Many people seriously believe that our national leaders are a conspiratorial band of child-molesters. (How they could all maintain a successful criminal conspiracy for years is beyond me, as is why adults want to have sex with kids.) Others say the parties are just a show, distracting us from the longstanding conspiracy of the powerful to cheat and control the rest of us. (Certainly the elite keeps making our inequitable system more inequitable. The rich get richer no matter who’s in power.)

I don’t have an answer. Certainly if one large, cohesive group is bent on destroying democracy, I’d want a large, cohesive group opposing that. But we should each recognize in ourselves any tendency to coast on “the party line” rather than search for truth, or to suppose (let alone allege) that folks whose actions have bad consequences necessarily sought those consequences.

I’ve met few truly evil people, and good folks from every ideological corner. Rather than focusing on those “evil people” in some party, let’s find a way to come together to improve our world, for everyone.

                                                       - 30 - 

 

[The above column appeared yesterday morning, Sunday, 24 April, 2022, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website. A related radio commentary will air during the week on KRWG (90.7 FM) and KTAL-LP. (101.5 FM – http://www.lccommunityradio.org/), and will presently be available on demand on KRWG’s site.]

[A comment on the Sun-News site stated:

“The Republican Party - of which I was a member for most of my adult life - quickly devolved into a quasi-terrorist, organized crime syndicate under trump. Almost everything they say is a lie, leading up to THE BIG LIE, in fealty to trump. Very few Republican leaders dare to resist loyalty to THE FATHER OF LIES/REPUBLICAN PARTY LEADER.

“The GOP is a Party in decline, desperate to cling to power by any means and has resolved itself to mendacity and violence in a failed coup against the US Congress. Truth, justice and the American Way no longer exist in GOP culture; the few Republican leaders like Cheney, Romney and Kinzinger are outliers punished by trump's minions.

“Goodman's nostalgic perspective on the two party system is wishful thinking hoping to build a bridge with a Republican Party flirting with Fascism having considered imposing martial law to maintain power during the insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021; that too failed.

“About half the U.S. voters wanted to believe in Trumpism and its hegemonic hyperbole to 'Make America Great Again'. And then they lost an election, attacked Democracy writ large and maintain their faith in Trump. Republicans are lying, sore losers devoid of leadership. There can be no reconciliation with sworn enemies of the United States.”

Yeah. That’s what one voice is repeating in my head as I write such a column. Flat facts are, Mr. Trump and his co-conspirators are attacking democracy in illegal ways, and are not open to discussion. Yep. So there’s no point in talking across the divide.

But where does that lead? [asks another inner voice] Perhaps we know: to the kind of open, unrestricted animosity that led to Senator Sumner’s caning in the Senate and ultimately to civil war. In Berkeley or Manhattan, it’s perhaps easier to dismiss a substantial minority of our citizens. You don’t see as much of them. Yes, I think Trump should be punished for his crimes, if/when he’s tried and convicted. Yes, some significant share of his followers are fellow racists or folks who’ve somehow become convinced that saving fetuses is so supremely important that we should let our country and world go to seed if necessary; but all are fellow citizens, and many Trump supporters are basically decent folks. If you don’t talk with them, what’s your plan? Get a gun and wear a bulletproof vest, as folks who disagree over politics start sniping at each other? Lose an election to the Trumpists and cry righteously at home? Lose an election to Trumpists and start shooting? I’m curious. What’s the end game?

I agree it’s important to be incredibly vigilant and protect our democracy and our decency against every Trumpian threat? But then what, if we stop talking?]

[A second comment, received privately, read:

“Our system is deliberately designed to thwart democracy.  It is specifically designed to create conflicts and encourage deadlocks. Our definition of liberty is the absolute freedom to do whatever you want without regard to damage inflicted on others.  Our system basically creates a permanent deadlock to prevent our government from ever being effective in administration of genuine justice.  It was designed to protect the rich FROM justice under the shell of the corporate charter.”

Certainly much in the system, including the Electoral College, the U.S. Senate, and the way the House would choose a President in an indecisive election, if it ever had to (by vote of state delegations, with dozens of representatives (plus each state’s two senators) in New York, Pennsylvania, or California having one vote per state, equal to the vote by New Mexico’s three representatives (plus two senators)) are all distinctly antidemocratic, and, collectively, worth a separate column. But good luck changing anything!]