The Mess

This November, the American public will be going to their polling places and deciding whom they want to run this country for the next four years. According to the perceptions of most Americans, this means the choice between the Republican incumbent and the Democratic hopeful. Unfortunately, with the changing definitions of “liberal” and “conservative” coupled with the increasing polarization of each party’s views, this is increasingly turning into a choice between two Evils. Further, the radical ends of the spectrum on which these men’s values and view lie make it increasingly difficult to decide which is the lesser.

The continual warping of party beliefs and values certainly doesn’t help clarify matters any. A Jeffersonian Republican would be called a Democrat a short time later, and a Reagan or Goldwater republican would shudder to see what the neoconservatives have done with their political party. Classical liberals were strong proponents of individual rights or liberties (hence, “liberal”) to an extent that would make today’s community oriented welfare-state liberals cringe. The modern crisis in the bipartisan system comes from two effects of the recent changes in political ideology: The two parties are now so similar in many views and practices that choosing one or the other has very little effect inadvisable policies, and they differ so vastly on a few core issues that no common ground can be found.

Right now, both parties seem to support the theory that the government should play a large role in everyday life. The Republican Party is increasing the federal governments power in alarming ways in the name of national defense, and many citizens are voluntarily giving up their liberties to such a cause. The Democrats would also like to see the government play a bigger role, only instead of rescinding civil liberties they seem content to tell us how our hard earned money should be spent. Neither party seems to care about responsible spending habits in the government since the Democrats would like to raise taxes instead of reviewing where our current taxes go and Republicans, while reducing the tax burden (for corporations and investors anyway), increased spending by a record amount this term. Consequently, any citizen who is in favor of limited government powers and responsible allocation of tax revenue has nowhere to turn.

Apart from being so similar on issues such as increased governmental powers and irresponsible fiscal policy, the two sides scream over each other on certain issues with no logical premise. To illustrate this point, let’s look at two civil liberties each party would like to either promote or prohibit: The right to bear arms and the right for two consenting adults to form a union. Republicans are quick to tout the right for every law-abiding citizen to own a gun, yet refuse to allow homosexuals the same economic protections heterosexuals enjoy. Conversely, liberals have no problems granting gays the civil institution of marriage while denying the rest of the citizenry what the framers of the constitution considered the last defense against tyranny. Often, there seems to be no rhyme or reason to which liberties a party will defend and which hey would like to revoke. Again, where is the choice for a citizen who would like to defend both those rights?

The Solution

The only solution is the ascendancy of multiple political parties. In general, a voter can be either liberal or conservative in three arenas: Governmental, Economic, and Social. Governmental Conservatives believe in small government and states’ rights (like the Republican party did 25 years ago and the Democrats did 100 years ago) and Governmental Liberals believe in far-reaching federal government. Economic Liberals believe in the government’s ability to tax and spend for any reason they deem necessary while Economic Conservatives would severely limit that power and promote a more Laissez Faire economy. Social Liberals feel that anything consenting adults engage in that doesn’t directly harm anyone else (including homosexuality, gambling, prostitution, etc.) isn’t the government’s business while Social Conservatives promote a universal value system (usually Judeo-Christian) to be incorporated into our laws.

With these brief and general definitions out of the way, it is entirely possible to have 9 or more viable parties ranging anywhere from Contemporary Liberalism (Economic and Social Liberalism coupled with Governmental Conservatism) through Libertarianism (Governmental and Economic Conservatism with Social Liberalism) and onto Neoconservatism (Governmental Liberalism, Social Conservatism, and Economic moderacy) and any other combination you can think of. (pop quiz: where would socialism fit? Email me your solution ; D). This is the only way for each citizen to find a political candindate that more closely aligns with his or her own values, beliefs and ideals.

Now many will probably say that the two party system is so firmly entrenched in American Politics that it will never be dislodged. I hope this isn’t true, and that hope is fueled somewhat by modern English politics. England had a bipartisan system for as long as we have (hell, the Tories have been around forever) and are now seeing the emergence of a viable third party: The Labour Party. The Liberal Prime Minister Tony Blaire is disliked enough to have those who do not like the Tories or him a third option with the Labour Party. I had vast hopes that Bush’s incompetence and Kerry’s shiftiness would do the same for this country, but alas . . .. Many other democracies have more than two viable political parties, giving their voters a wider array of political possibilities.

Perhaps you are thinking, “well, I would vote third party but I don’t want to throw my vote away.” When people find out I voted third party in 2000 (no, not Nader) they often reply with that little maxim. Frustrates me to tears. If all the people who say that would have just done it, some third party would have national funding this year. I have a solution for this too. I propose a national petition/pledge. Somewhere people can go and pledge to vote for the candidate they think will do the best job, even if it is third party. Once people start building up, others will see that they are not alone, and may not be “throwing away” their vote. I will even volunteer my own web space for such a pledge once I get enough readers to justify a real domain name with dedicated server space. The more people who realize that voting for someone who is not a Republican or Democrat the more politicians will be forced to align their views with those of the people, rather than Special Interests. If they don’t they’d have a lot more competition who will.

Below is a list of links to various Ameican political parties in alphabetical order. Please find one that suits your individual beliefs. I’m not asking that you register as any one of them, just keep them in mind when signatures are being collected for candidates or you are filling out the most important tool in a democracy: the voting ballot.

STP

America First Party--Pat Buchanan's breakaway from the reform party. They are hardcore Social Conservatives (read "Christian Fundamentalists") and pretty far right economically. They also consider themselves Nationalists. They are not very well organized right now and have no presidential candidate for 2004.

The Green Party--Nader's Baby in 1996 and 2000, they are still trying to recover from that defeat and Nader's procrastination in deciding to run in 2004. All Ican really tell about their platform is that they don't like big corporations. Has the largest following of any of the third parties.

Libertarian Party--Holds the most local political posts of any third party. The are very socially liberal (legalizing "victimless crimes" and such) and very governmentally and economically conservative. These guys are pretty much my favorites, although the laissez faire attitude towards economics irks me. Other than favoring corporations over labor, though, they have some good ideas.

Reform Party--Since being abandoned by Perot, Jesse Ventura, and Pat Buchanon, this party has had a hard time rebuilding itself

Socialist Party USA--True Democratic socialist. These guys are less radical than most socialist movements, and are not authoritarian socialists either. They have some good theories, but as long as greed and laziness exist capitalism will triumph over socialism. Still, if your less cynical than me you could check them out

Of course, there are the independents. They don't really have a political affiliation, and sometimes it's best that way. The bottom line is, choos the candidate who has the best ideas for change and appears to have the ability to implement them. It is pretty rare that the best candidate is a Republican or a Democrat, and if more people vote third party or independent, maybe fewer candidates would feel tied to bipartisan plaforms. For more information on the scads of parties out there visit http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm