That's cool

Anarchy?

Anarchy sucks ass. Be a pragmatist, not a dogmatist. Take everything as it comes and think it through on its own terms. I think that joining a political party can be one of the most intellectually restrictive things that anyone can do. Not necessarily, but partisanship is a bar to the truth.

This is true, unless of course that political party happens to stand for almost everything you believe in. One of the major problems that this two party system exploits is that every one picks a ship and stiks with it, sink or swim, right or wrong. And the argument that "I would vote for a third party if I thought they had a chance at winning" is bullshit because if everyone who said that voted for third parties there would be a lot greater chance that a third party would win.

300 million people in this country, and we're expected to mold our beliefs into the framework of two major parties. Something's a little wrong with that, and there's the big problem.

(NOTE: I edited the thread title to spell "epiphany" correctly. No offense, it just irked me when I read it.)

I missed you TFW! Haven't seen you in ages! Heh

Anyway, on topic.

I have my own belief structure, I can't meld with the christians or the "wiccans" or any other religion.... I have had alot of run ins with hard core christians preaching to me, I always ask if they are better than me. Some say yes, some say no. Its just pretty hard to mould a belief structure when everyone says that theirs is the right one and everyone else is wrong. I find it very cockey. They are so quick to make judgements on others... So I decided that I wanted no part in any sect ages ago... You know what I mean?

Most political systems break down under close scrutiny-for this country we rely on a democratic republic base (not a real democracy people!) where representatives are supposed to relate the wishes of the majority in thier area. two problems with that would be. 1) it still does'nt reflect all people of a community, including the disenfranchised. 2) More often then not they reflect so called 'special intrests' and may or may not have anything to do with the majority at all.

Now as for political epiphanies-I recently came out of the closet as an Anarchist this year. Not as easy as it sounds. Political systems and hierarchies in general degrade the individual by porporting that the individual is esentially an ignorant and destructive individual who needs to be kept on a leash and is completely incapable of any sort of self goverment. they tend, and are proud to be, elitest parties who throw underprivleged classes a bone of philosophy by saying that in thier society all men are created equal. essentially all goverment are dictatorships or oligarchies without having the honesty to admit it.

well, that's the anarchy spiel.

Theocratic Facism is the way forward.

All hail God-Emperor Neon. All hail his benevolent tyranny.

You see,know one understands the world like I do, therefore you should all simply worship the gorund I walk on and let me rule the world my way.

Neon

Lenina, I've always been here, just mostly watching rather than posting. Working on a music ed degree will do that to you...

Anyway...

Mostly, we all seem to agree that two party systems don't quite cut it. So how can the problem be fixed/changed?

I don't think it was intended this way, but the two party system works because of the way our gov't and elections are structured i.e. electoral college, districts drawn by states every ten years, etc.

The only way to make it possible for more than two major parties to thrive is to totally change the federal gov't to a parliamentary system like they use in Europe.

That would also force new parties to be more comprehensive in their platforms. The purpose of "third" parties today is to play spoiler with one or two issues that a majority agree on, in the hope that they can steal enough voters to force one of the major parties to adopt their issues to get the votes back. That's how the Republican Party started.

Thanks, I did notice the incorrect spelling after I posted it but never got around to changing it. Good point by the way.

It is actually alot easier than it seems and an excellent example of this is the California Recall. You see, the hardest thing that third party candidates face is a lack of support and exposure. They lack the proper resources to get ahead. With the recall, it was an independant effort that gained momentum because people were excited about it and they let people know about there cause through other mediums outside the media. Granted, it did become a ratings boost, but that was only after the movement gained momentum. What we need is a charasmatic and intelligent candidate and a dedicated group of people who can get their candidates message to the people. One simple lesson learned in advertising is that the most effective form of advertisement is word of mouth, and ironically, that is the most neglected form of campaigning. If the people know and trust the candidate and they share some core beliefs, they will vote for that candidate, regardless of party.

So if you got a someone that had a network like, say, Howard Dean did early in the primaries? Before he flipped out and started screaming crap?