The Problems of a Two Party System in the US - Research Paper Example

Section/# The Problems of a Two Party System Although there are a great many dynamics and key issues that come to play within the American political system, one of the most defining elements that can be seen to impact upon each and every level of decision-making, voter choice, and further exhibition of democracy is with regards to the two-party system that exists within the United States. Although there are a litany of other issues that could be discussed within this essay that would also warrant analysis, it is the belief of this author that the two-party system strikes at the very core of many of the issues that continue to plague democracy and representation of the will of the people within the United States system of governance. In such a way, such a broad and systemic political problem is likely to elucidate many other issues that exists alongside and tangentially to the problems caused and affected by a mere two-party representative democracy. Accordingly, this research paper will focus upon these six specific reasons for why democracy and the two-party system is ultimately a flawed constraint by which represented democracy within the United States is confined. Although it will not be the express intent of this research to point to a specific type of multiparty democratic system, such as those exhibited in parliaments around the world, it will seek to engage the reader with the means by which a general improvement within each of these aforementioned six conditions could be realized if but a multiparty system might be engaged as a means of representing the ultimate will of the people. Accordingly, the ultimate importance of such a topic is naturally closely tied to the overall level of democratic ideals and democracy that are reflected back to the individual citizen stakeholders. Likewise, the first of these determinants which will be analyzed is with regards to the fact that the level of exasperation and frustration with the given paradigm seems to be ever-increasing. Although there are a number of factors which must be considered with regards to the overall level of support/belief/trust that the government engenders within the population, it must not be understated that the ineffectual nature in which the two-party system is exhibited over the past several decades is likely one of the causal components. Evidence of this can anecdotally be evidenced with regards to many of the polling results that a number of diverse entities has engaged in. The results of these nonpartisan polls have indicated that an increasing share of the American populace deals both disconnected and frustrated with politics as usual that is oftentimes exhibited at the regional/state/federal levels. Such an eventuality is not surprising due to the fact that the two-party system necessarily divides people in an unnatural manner. When one stops to consider the fact that the United States is a multi religious, multi racial, multiethnic society, it comes as something of a curiosity that the two-party system has effectively been able to govern and represent an infinitely diverse level of needs and wants that such a vast and unheard modulus nation must necessarily engender. Although one may very well point to the fact that disagreement over economic policy, disagreement over involvement in foreign wars, or disagreement with regards to a litany of other social issues has helped to create an increasing level of frustration, the logical and to all of this is with regards to the fact that the frustration and dissatisfaction can ultimately be linked back to a general lack of creativity and problem solving that defines a ready-made two-party system. Another negative externality that the United States two-party system engenders within the current dynamic is with regards to the fact that the nation is currently in the midst of a wrenching and extraordinarily difficult economic shift. Whereas many decades the past history within the United States had been defined by an industrial era, the shift that is recently been realized is necessarily contingent upon the transition to an info-tech economy. One does not need to look very deeply in order to understand the radical changes that this has affected upon the overall landscape of employment, labor, specialization, and competition within the United States. However, although the economy itself, and by extension the labor force, has been relatively fluid in adapting to this changing dynamic, the reality of the two-party system lags decades behind. One does not need to look into the distant past to realize the way in which recent political campaigns between the two parties have almost wholly been concentric upon the revival of industry and infrastructure as a means of providing economic growth and wealth that the nation once realized. However, although this is merely rhetoric and demagoguery, the fact of the matter is that these talking heads within the power bases of both parties are all too often lately an entirely unaware of the realities of economic change that are impacting upon the American system. Whereas a multiparty system might seek to specialize in a specific area of interest for a group of professions, the two-party system is shackled to the corpse of a historical approach to the means by which economic self-sufficiency growth and profits might be exhibited within the United States. Tying in with this inability and change with the shifting dynamics within the United States, the reader should come to the understanding that due to the fact that the American two-party system has previously and historically been in sufficient to integrate with the needs and demands of the voting base, this has given rise to fundamental shifts, transformations, and the brief rise and subsequent collapse of third party/alternative politics. Although this eventuality might be seen by a critic as proof that the United States two-party system, and brief derivatives of other parties, is sufficient to represent the will of the people, the fact of the matter is that this example merely helps to illustrate and underscore the fact that the two-party system is fundamentally unable to successfully represent the changing dynamic and needs that the American citizen represents within the voting booth. As with any political institution, the establishment that the Democratic and Republican parties represent is one that is almost impervious to change and takes years to represent the shifting dynamics that the voters necessarily seek to express. Anecdotal evidence of this can of course be seen with regards the way in which the Republican Party has recently sought to do an about-face with regards to the issue of immigration reform. Realizing that the previous position was untenable within a globalized world in which a larger and larger share of Hispanic Americans make up voting base, key aspects of the party have finally come around to softening their prior intractable stance upon immigration reform. Yet another reason why many critics have criticized the two-party system of the United States is with regards to the fact that it somehow is unrepresentative of the very essence of the American culture. What is meant by this is with regards to the overall level of choice that pervades nearly every single aspect of American society. For instance, in years past, if an individual lights a particular single of an artist it was required that they by the entire album. However, with the provision in differentiation of choice that exists within the United States, the recent reality is that the individual can merely purchase a single song from the artist directly through the Internet. Although this is of course tangentially related at best to the issue surrounding the two-party system and its exhibition within the United States, it is indicative of the overall level of choice that pervades the United States yet is somehow not exhibited within the political arena. This of course engenders a system that has been defined by many critics, both within and without the United States, as “a choice in name only” (Dwoskin 20). What this is created is something of a public consciousness that there is ultimately little if any choice to be exhibited within the realm of politics. An ancillary drawback to such an approach is the fact that voters have more or less been unresponsive to key issues that they might otherwise engage with. As a result of the belief, either correctly or incorrectly, that the current system will maintain itself with without voter engagement – duo the similarity between the parties, voter turn out and purchase a patient within the elections and citizen engagement within the process of representation and democracy has arguably been greatly diminished. Not the least of the problems that the two-party system the that the United States faces is with regards to the fact that it is necessarily a self-perpetuating system. What is meant by this is with regards to the fact that both the Democratic and Republican structures have been able to maintain a complete monopoly upon media, messages, organizational activities, and the raising of money. In such a way, it is virtually guaranteed and assured that no further interaction between third-party interests will likely generate any particular interest or effect within system (Kuula 719). Although it might be convenient to assume that this can all be defined from a monopolistic level of control that these parties have within the political structure, it must not be discounted the role that dissatisfaction and frustration, mentioned in point number one, play with regards to discouraging any level of interaction by the voter with such alternatives. Of all of the issues that it been discussed up until this point, this particular drawback is perhaps the most salient and the most important (Murphy 1246). This is of course due to the fact that this particular drawback represents something of a self-fulfilling an actuating system. Whereas the political parties in discussion have effectively constrained the way in which other ideas or groups can exhibit themselves and interact with and engage the constituents, is nearly assured that the given paradigm continue up until its complete collapse from either internal or external pressures. As an aside, it must be noted that it is the belief of this particular author that the causal mechanisms which will bring about the collapse of the two-party system will necessarily be external factors. This is of course due to the fact that it is been obviously exhibited that although contentious at times, the symbiotic relationship that this two-party system exhibits is unlikely to abate within the near future. Lastly, similar to the pressures which were discussed previously within this analysis, it is the understanding of this author that one of the causal mechanisms for the inability of the two-party system to speak to the needs of the electorate is due to the fact that existential problems are currently exhibited within the system. Whereas much of this analysis is focused upon the means by which it level of cooperative dynamism exists between the two parties, this final element is with regards to the contentions that they necessarily represent. By its very nature, a two-party system is one differentiates all political subject matter into two distinct camps. As a function of this, it is only natural to assume that as a means of further differentiating themselves from their opponents, a political party operating within the two-party system will necessarily strive to differentiate itself is much as possible from the stands in viewpoint that the other party necessarily engages with. What this affects is a situation in which contention for contentions sake is invariably represented within subject matter, topics, sociological issues, and the gamut of political debate. Evidence of this can of course be seen with regards to the high-minded calls that are always presented on Capitol Hill with regards to bipartisanship. By very nature, the political parties have staked out key rhetorical stances that are represented within the voting base. As a function of this, they are oftentimes either unwilling or and able to move with regards to such stances. Accordingly, deadlock results on a range of issues that would otherwise not create such an impasse. Although this is important in and of itself, the reality of the situation is that certain ex-essential threats face the United States. To name a few, the reader should consider the issue of debt, climate change, inequality, decreasing standards and proficiency of workforce, as well as a range of other issues (Pavia 439). As a means of providing a stronger and more resilient future for its stakeholders, the political system should be interested in ameliorating each and every one of these to the greatest effect. However, the results that is seen is a system by which the two-parties are contents to bicker amongst themselves and delay any action in attempt to demonize and stymie whatever attempts the other might make. As can be seen, a monumental loss of efficiency and utility is reflected back into the system as a result of this perpetual infighting. Rather than seeking to achieve the betterment of the nation were seeking to engage in small extent problems that threaten to multiply into monumental once, the stakeholders within these undifferentiated and monolithic parties continue to play politics rather than seeking to genuinely engage with the destructive forces that threaten the very survivability of the system. It should not be understood from this analysis that a multiparty system is not engendered many of the same flaws. Naturally, infighting, political bickering, and ignorance of extent threats is indicated in each and every multiparty system around the globe. However, due to the fact that the political powers are not contingent and concentric around to all encompassing belief systems, it is the belief of this author that a much greater level of political and social utility can be exhibited within such systems. Finally, rather than demonizing the American political system and stating that it is completely and entirely incapable of dealing with the challenges that face it, it must be understood that like any other system, the United States political system can necessarily benefit from key changes and shifts in focus and/or dynamics. Ultimately, a secondary understanding that should be gained is with regards the fact that regardless of how broken or ineffectual the current system may be, it is nonetheless endured for nearly 250 years and provided a solid basis by which the development, growth, and supremacy of the United States is without question (Aragones 157). Similarly, a tertiary understanding that must be engaged is with regards the fact that the United States political system is ultimately within the stakeholders hands. Due to the fact that it is a democracy, it is the will of the people that defines the direction in which the country moves. Although it is true that the power structures within the Democratic and Republican parties have made it nearly impossible for third-parties to gain entry into the system, this would nonetheless be averted if a larger group of individuals were to demand that such a change be affected. Fourthly, from the foregoing analysis, it is the understanding of this author that although flawed, the United States two-party system is unlikely to change and will most certainly continue in its present form until external factors demand that a fundamental shift be realized. Works Cited Aragones, Enriqueta. "Government Formation In A Two Dimensional Policy Space." International Journal Of Game Theory 35.2 (2007): 151-184. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 May 2013. Dwoskin, Elizabeth, and Heidi Przybyla. "The Illusion Of Bipartisanship." Bloomberg Businessweek 4293 (2012): 20-21. Business Source Premier. Web. 14 May 2013. Murphy, Erin. "The Case Against The Case For Third-Party Doctrine: A Response To Epstein And Kerr." Berkeley Technology Law Journal 24.3 (2009): 1239-1253. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 May 2013. Pavia, Jose M. "On Introducing Proportionality In American Presidential Elections: An Historical Analysis, 1828-2008." Political Quarterly 82.3 (2011): 435-447. Academic Search Complete. Web. 14 May 2013. Kuula, Markku, and Antonie Stam. "A Win–Win Method For Multi-Party Negotiation Support." International Transactions In Operational Research 15.6 (2008): 717-737. Business Source Premier. Web. 14 May 2013. Read More