Two-Party Totalitarianism

[kerrin]

Liberty for the American voter will be achieved at the ballot box when the two-party system is no more. Voting third-party may not decide the winner in the current election but it promotes change on a macro level within the voting system. End the totalitarianism that is the two-party system.

Warring against [the principles] of the people,... there is no length to which [the delusion of the people] may not be pushed by a party in possession of the revenues and the legal authorities of the United States, for a short time indeed, but yet long enough to admit much particular mischief. There is no event, therefore, however atrocious which may not be expected.
--Thomas Jefferson 1798

[Couloir]

I agree completely, I've been telling people lately that I'm voting for Bob Barr and every one of them responds that I'm throwing my vote away. Worse is when I'm told that by voting for Barr, I'm basically voting for one of the other two candidates. Since federal campaign financing is a joke, you think they would give that 84 million to the smaller parties. At least then we might get a discussion on issues that actually matter.

[kerrin]

I agree completely, I've been telling people lately that I'm voting for Bob Barr and every one of them responds that I'm throwing my vote away.
Good for you! You are absolutely not throwing your vote away (that's staying home) or voting for one of the other two candidates. It's this conventional 'wisdom' that is throwing away our country!

...you think they would give that 84 million to the smaller parties. At least then we might get a discussion on issues that actually matter.
Such an excellent idea! Of course 'they' have their hands very tight on that taxpayer money. 'They' have no intention of giving up any power.

For your enjoyment:
Barr is expected to be on the ballot in at least 47 states. In July, a Zogby poll had Barr receiving 6% of the vote nationwide, as well as double digits in several states. (http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1523)

A Zogby poll released on August 15, 2008 indicated that most Republican and Democratic voters want Barr to be included in the presidential debates. The poll also indicated that almost 70% of independent voters would like to see him included. (http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1538)

People are getting pissed at the current system.

[Anenome]

I disagree.

The best way to topple the two-party system is to convert one of the parties to your way of thinking from the inside. At least, this is the realistic way.

Starting a 3rd party has enormous hurdles, not the least of which means effectively and greatly empowering the opposition party from whom you will not be drawing votes. Thus, you advance the cause of those you most want to oppose.

Therefore, those whom are like-minded as individualists should seek election on the republican ticket, pick-up a track-record of success, and reform the party through the accumulation of political power. That is the only realistic way that it is going to happen.

Look at the Republican party right now, truth is it has never been weaker. They have very little strong leadership at the top, else McCain would never have obtained the nomination. Meanwhile, Gov. Palin is the strongest up-and-comer they have. And if they lose this election it will cause a political realignment within the party. This will not be the last time such a shift can happen. And it has happened before...

The socialists successfully took-over the Democratic party starting in the 60's. Obama, their headliner, is now a socialist in fact.

Unfortunately, greater influence for individualists and libertarians can only take place by the cultivation of personal power. Imagine if Gov. Palin were a committed individualist and libertarian. She is in a position to control the party going forward. Obtaining that position, that power, is what needs to be done.

Achieving that sort of end-run is a goal of mine, but I plan to be a facilitator. I don't have the biography to run for office at the national level.

[kerrin]

I disagree.

The best way to topple the two-party system is to convert one of the parties to your way of thinking from the inside. At least, this is the realistic way.
You make a good distinction here:

change within a particular part of the system
change to the system as a whole


I was primarily referring to the system as a whole needing change, but we could also discuss the strategy to change one part of the system. I don't think changing one part always results in a change to the whole. While perhaps I am not being realistic I still stand behind the idea that true freedom for American voters at the ballot box would only happen if there were more then two or no parties (the way it was when the country was founded).

The system as a whole
My opinion is the two-party system is fundamentally not good. As a system it limits the number of voices and differing political opinions. Currently we see very little difference in the two major parties because both are in control of, as Jefferson said in the quote I provided above, "the revenues and the legal authorities," which has resulted in "the delusion of the people." People on the whole are unaware of other opinions on the topic of economics alone, which both major parties say basically the same thing and for the most part act in cahoots regarding economic and monitory policies...there are minor differences of course.

Strategy to change part of the system
Even if the republican party changes back to represent the more Goldwater/Regan philosophies, which most political gurus say will happen if they loose big this week, the voter is still left without hearing the voice of individualists or libertarians....or other voices.

I agree with the strategy to change a party from within. However, as a voter and someone not currently holding any public office. My strategy is to not reward a party that screwed up with my vote, but let them implode as a result of loosing. This is what can be accomplished by not voting for them (Republicans). At the same time I am supporting a 3rd party, who may not win, but represent my political beliefs. Yes, perhaps the party who I appose will gain power for a short time period, but that is something I am willing to accept for the long term strategy.

Therefore, those whom are like-minded as individualists should seek election on the republican ticket, pick-up a track-record of success, and reform the party through the accumulation of political power. That is the only realistic way that it is going to happen.
I agree. Maybe someday I will run on the republican ticket as an individualists. As a voter, now, there is little I can do, but vote for ideas I am for, again, I don't think the republicans will change with out a loss.

Look at the Republican party right now, truth is it has never been weaker. They have very little strong leadership at the top, else McCain would never have obtained the nomination. Meanwhile, Gov. Palin is the strongest up-and-comer they have. And if they lose this election it will cause a political realignment within the party. Agreed. This is why I want them to loose. The supporters of the neoconservative philosophies will be forced out.
Although, I would disagree that Palin is "the strongest up-and-comer," I think we will see with a Republican loss a rise of someone like Newt and other like minded conservatives who have been waiting for the opportunity to regain prominence.

Unfortunately, greater influence for individualists and libertarians can only take place by the cultivation of personal power. Imagine if Gov. Palin were a committed individualist and libertarian. She is in a position to control the party going forward. Obtaining that position, that power, is what needs to be done.Sure but if she had much substance she probably would not be where she is now. I image since she is of little substance with a republican loss she will be discarded, since her soul purpose was strategical, nothing more.

Achieving that sort of end-run is a goal of mine, but I plan to be a facilitator. I don't have the biography to run for office at the national level.Nor do I but I may get more involved on a local level...we'll see.