Get our most popular stories once a week!
Boarding schools are schools where the..."
Posted by bevanstraut in Where is Dr. King's Dream Today?
blessy posted in Tools for Activists: Turning Privilege Disparities into Just and Sustainable Action
Gayathri posted in Tools for Activists: Turning Privilege Disparities into Just and Sustainable Action
morganwardztas posted in Tools for Activists: Turning Privilege Disparities into Just and Sustainable Action
|
May 15, 2008
Can We Have Real Democracy in a Two-Party System?
Like generations before them, Millennials lament the two-party system. They want more choices, more accurate representations of their ideals and values. As one student in CIRCLE's study measuring political attitudes among college students, said, "I think everyone is just too afraid to agree with one another because there's this mindset where you have to either be completely Democratic or completely Republican."
The two-party system controlled by the Democrats and Republicans shuts out voices of other, legitimate political parties and interests. Other forces, such as the media, have colluded with the two major parties in order to define America's political choices. A fellow WireTap writer, Kameelah Rasheed, has criticized already some of the positions of the Democratic candidates, as not her cup of tea.
So here's my -- unabashedly -- very unoriginal plan that can move us close to a multi-party system in the next few elections. Let's move to small towns and big cities in states across the country, to affect very local elections, such as city and school boards. Conservatives have already done just that - created small pockets of conservatism by controlling local school boards.
Let's say there is an existing party, Party M, that has a small presence in towns and cities all over the country. We then identify where elected seats could be won. One vote really matters in local elections and our experience in peer-to-peer outreach and online fundraising can make us a serious voting bloc for any local election. Assuming we win, we next build upon that base, getting more Party M candidates elected to municipal- and city-level seats. After securing those seats, we can now make a run at state districts, and so on. The goal isn't to get one person elected to the highest office, but to elect many people in many different localities and in many different states. This way is very grassroots, which is to our advantage, and it is more pluralistic than segregating oneself in a political oasis. We join the system, but with fresh ideas and attitudes, and more importantly, we bring a progressive ideology that won't bent to the politics of those before us. And we offer others another choice.
Now is the time because of today's political engagement and the evolving work culture. Millennials are energized and participating in politics at level not seen since 1992, perhaps earlier. The presence is real and it's already helping to decide this election's outcome. Not only has voting been up in all the primaries, save New York, but young people have been the face of politics in the media and on the campaign trail. So, we must use this energy to make seismic changes in the political system, just as in other areas of civic engagement. Isn't that why we're getting involved in the first place?
We are not limited to a few geographic locations, and picking the right community is not as difficult as before. Millennials are demanding a change in work culture that allows us to work from where we want to live (and where we want to bring democracy). For example, one of my colleagues works full-time from her home in Chicago; our office, where I work, is in Washington, DC. I've encouraged her to run for school board and I hope that she does, but as a third party candidate.
Some Millennials don't want to choose between the two parties, but still we give into the system. But this moment is our chance to carry forth on our lofty goals and ambitions. Let's leap at the opportunity, because we've arrived.


Karlo Barrios Marcelo is a research associate at
IT's all a big sham....
Posted by: checkoutmytrip on May 15, 2008 12:59 PM
I have a major problem with a "democracy" that is owned and controlled by special interest groups... who control the direction of our country through a 2 party system. It's very frustrating, because the choices are so limited when it comes to voting for our officials... they're all "on the take" and receive huge sums of "contributions" to make sure their buddies see major profits during thier term in office. We must turn this around and allow more voices to be heard!- » RE: IT's all a big sham.... Posted by: Karlo Barrios Marcelo
Report this commentBut is it viable?
Posted by: RossRapoport on May 16, 2008 8:37 AM
Changing the two-party dynamic will require much more than a grassroots effort. Creating a system in which a third (or fourth, or fifth) party has any teeth whatsoever would require a move to a true parliamentary system, requiring a litany of wholesale constitutional changes. Is the America that elected (and re-elected!) George W. Bush ready to move away from the politics of Deciders and Prophets, and really start thinking about the issues? The venomous, immature derision directed at nuanced consensus-building politicians like Senator Clinton is enough to suggest an answer.AP PoliSci taught us that third-party Presidential candidates usually pop up when there is a looming issue that the major parties have failed to address. In the cases of H. Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, the fringes of either party rebelled enough to swing the election in the other party's favor, but the greater issue of broken government never got addressed. A new issue that is incapable of being pushed to the back-burner offers us the greatest opportunity to challenge the dominance of our two parties. But what will it be? Will it be the environment, provided the Green Party can shake off the stigma of Ralph Nader's colossal ego? Or will it be a sort of Christian Nationalist party (Jorg Haider in the US), responding to the inevitable fracturing of the GOP's dream coalition of Wall Street and the Bible Belt? Both of those fractures could be bad news for people who like progress.