Re: What's wrong with multi-party system
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
soc.culture.china only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: What's wrong with multi-party system         

Group: soc.culture.china · Group Profile
Author: bmoore
Date: May 7, 2008 14:12

On May 7, 1:13 pm, "ltl...@hotmail.com" hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 7, 1:06 pm, Chen europe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>> On May 7, 5:06 am, "ltl...@hotmail.com" hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> In his NYTimes column article with the title of "Who Will Tell the
>>> People?", Thomas Friedman explained the decline of American power,
>
>>> "[we are] not as powerful as we used to be because over the past three
>>> decades, the Asian values of our parents’ generation — work hard,
>>> study, save, invest, live within your means — have given way to
>>> subprime values: “You can have the American dream — a house — with no
>>> money down and no payments for two years.”"
>
>>> The following also caught my attention.
>
>>> "Much nonsense has been written about how Hillary Clinton is
>>> “toughening up” Barack Obama so he’ll be tough enough to withstand
>>> Republican attacks. Sorry, we don’t need a president who is tough
>>> enough to withstand the lies of his opponents. We need a president who
>>> is tough enough to tell the truth to the American people. Any one of
>>> the candidates can answer the Red Phone at 3 a.m. in the White House
>>> bedroom. I’m voting for the one who can talk straight to the American
>>> people on national TV — at 8 p.m. — from the White House East Room."
>
>>> The above says a lot on what's wrong with American democracy. In the
>>> current two party set up, political leaders often respond to the
>>> opposite party rather than to the needs and wants of the poeple. In
>>> this case, Friedman found Clinton's claim that she was toughening up
>>> Barack Obama against future Republican attacks bogus. Simply put, such
>>> nonsense changes the responsibility of the U.S. presidency from
>>> responding to the people to responding to the opposition.
>
>> When politicle is strong, it will become dictator of totalitarian
>> ruler. When multi-parties are strong, they will become multiple
>> dictors of totalitarian rulers at the same time. To remove one
>> dictator is hard. To remove multiple dictors will be harder.- Hide quoted text -
>
> One assumption of underlying any multiparty system is the popolace are
> somewhat united. With this assumption, a multiparty syatem will not
> lead to mulitple centers of power. However, this assumption does not
> hold, at least not in today's America. Hence, a two party system will
> create two independent centers of power each with its own  group of
> constituents. This situation makes partisan politics inevitable.

Yes to a degree.
> The result is polarization until one side is, more or less, totally discredited.

No. That's silly. There's no basis for that assertion. There is
however, an ebb and flow of popularity.

The greatest thing about a stable democracy like America's is not so
much the people that it produces as leaders. It's the fact that the
party in power can be voted out. A system of government with no formal
mechanism for dumping the current party is far more likely to lack
civil liberties.
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!