2 party system failing

I remember when I was in High School history, the teacher gave us a quote from George Washington. While I don't remember the quote word for word this is the jist of it. George Washington said"If the U.S. becomes a nation of 2 political parties it will cause it to decline and be a failure."

I have problems with members of both parties at all levels.

The latest thing I witnessed was Senator Harry Reid on this past Sunday morning. He was on This week on ABC. When asked questions, he didn't answer the question that was asked, but simply spoke the agenda he had probably been practicing for the last week. It was so aggravating to think that it's people like this running the country. They see what they want to see, hear what they want to hear, and speak about what they want to speak about.

George Washington was right.

[edit on 2-11-2005 by dbrandt]

[edit on 2-11-2005 by dbrandt]

I agree with you one hundred percent! I am glad I found a topic regarding this issue because it has been kinda bothering me.

It seems like people aren't even looking at the candidates and their issues anymore, they just vote for whichever candidate is in the party they belong to. Not to mention I feel like both parties have become a haven for extremists. I am a moderate and I feel like there isn't a major party representing me.

Unfortunatly there is a slim chance that there ever will be more than two major parties in the U.S. because people are too afraid to go outside of the box and vote for an independant or a minor party. We get told constantly that voting independant is 'throwing away your vote." Ralph Nader said that the only vote wasted is the vote you make voting for someone you really don'y believe in, and I agree with Mr. Nader 100%.

In one sense, the two party system isn't a failure, but is a rousing success. There are, and have been throughout history, people who, not content to simply live their lives, have sought to gain power and prestige and to wield that power over others.

In the earliest days of human history, it was challenging to live such a life. Those who wished to do so had to raise armies and actually fight with others who wished to do so, and the territories and benefits that they could gain from victory, impressive though they might've been on a limited scale, would seem paltry by modern standards.

As time went on and the territories conquered by this or that power-monger expanded and became relatively stable and well-defined, those who sought power could gain it simply by establishing the right connections in court. It was still a dangerous game that they played, but it was dangerous in an entirely different sense than riding to battle was. Of course, riding to battle was still a viable way to gain power, but even then the power was often a reward that was granted rather than just a commodity to be seized.

Through all of this, the mass of humans were never anything more than property that, along with the land and the resources, defined the value of that which the power-mongers held and changed hands as new power-mongers fought or finessed their way into authority. But then came enlightenment-- average people in two important places-- France and the nascent United States-- essentially said that they had had enough of being somebody else's property and that they were going to manage their own affairs from now on, thank you very much.

This was a noble experiment, and, for a short time at least, it kept those who sought power simply for its own sake within reasonable limits, but ti could never last. There are simply too many people who have a truly insane lust for power, and they were not going to let some damned piece of paper stand in their way.

It honestly didn't take that long before power-hungry people figured out that, if they must allow us to elect our own leaders, they were best served by making certain that we had as few choices as possible, and that all of the available choices could ultimately be depended upon to do the bidding of the powers-that-be. There were a few false starts and a few diversions when individuals who were not a part of the established structure managed to gain office even without the active support of the power-mongers, but since the turn of the 20th century, and particularly in recent decades, there has been a steady consolidation of political power and of media control and this has led to the state that we find ourselves in today. At this point, choice between the two parties is virtually meaningless, and that is by design.

The fact is that those who seek power will do virtually anything they can to gain it. The problem with a two party system is that it makes it too easy for those who seek power to gain control of essentially all of the politicians by only having to gain control of two hierarchies. The power is too concentrated and too easy to control. Spreading political power out among more parties would make it harder for scheming individuals to guarantee control of the system, and that's exactly why our current system discourages third parties.

While, from our viewpoint, the two party system is a complete failure, from that of those who seek power, it's a rousing success. In a way, it's even superior to the days of monarchy, when those who sought power had to overtly work for it. Now we have the illusion of choice, which illusion obviously continues to fool many among the people, judging by the regularity with which people still fight for one party and against the other. But it's really nothing more than an illusion. The fact is that both parties are owned outright by the same group of people, and regardless of who wins any election, they continue to win the battle for power. And we the people continue to lose.

Defy them. Vote third party. Do NOT allow them to dissuade you or discredit your choice. The only chance that we have to win back the power that's rightfully ours is to vote for somone-- ANYONE-- who is not owned by the power elite.

Originally posted by dbrandt
I remember when I was in High School history, the teacher gave us a quote from George Washington. While I don't remember the quote word for word this is the jist of it. George Washington said"If the U.S. becomes a nation of 2 political parties it will cause it to decline and be a failure."

I about two years ago or so had a long discussion with my teachers about how America was created in the way that it has to be a 3 party system in order to function correctly.

All though some people say my teachers and I were wrong, including my own father.

But what do you guys think? I know at one point in history America had North D, North R, South D, South R. And they all had very close votes, so It's possible that soon we'll have a third party dominating.