Should the U.S. Get Rid of Political Parties?

Should the U.S. Get Rid of Political Parties?


Democracy is not about policy, it’s about
process. It’s about how you achieve the results in
the policy you want. We have created a political system that rewards people with reelection by being intransigent, unwilling to to compromise because if you do compromise and you talk to people on the other side and you work with them, you’re going to get attacked by your own party in a primary. What we have now is too much power in the
political parties. In nothing else in our lives, do we say we’re going to solve our problems and do things by dividing into rival teams each out to destroy
each other. It’s an absurd proposition. One of the things in the last election that was so amazing to watch is that in both political parties, Republicans and Democrats, there were a lot of people who just didn’t like the system Especially when you talk about young people,
millennials. They’re a la carte. They don’t want to be told, “here is
the line.” “You have to take A,B,C,D, all the way through Z.” And I think all the American people are getting
there too. Who is going to make these changes? It’s not going to be the party leaders. We don’t care if you call yourself Republican
or Democrat. We want you listening to us, and we want you, more importantly, to be thinking about what’s the right thing to do not what your party wants you to do.

Posts created 16656

49 thoughts on “Should the U.S. Get Rid of Political Parties?

  1. We need to change our election system to a proportional representation system. This naturally encourages more political parties (as can be seen in other countries that have 5+ parties) and ends the polarization of a two party system (which naturally occurs in a first past the post). In my opinion, parties are still needed as they provide for unity and ease the creation of legislation. We just need more so that working together is necessary.

  2. Divide (and Conquer) Use the Jewish Mainstream media to create a paradigm of two narratives for every major political issue, to keep the people fighting with each other. Nearly every debate has been turned into two -paradigm debate….. Anyone who thinks outside of the two-narrative paradigm Is dismissed and demonized!

  3. I'm not following this guy. Parties have too much political power? They actually have less power than in the past. FDR began the steps of drawing power out of the party. Much of today's chaos is because individual personality has trumped (intended) party power. Now there is a vacuum and individuals fill it. So Congress ends up being a collection of individuals. Kinda hard to herd them without a party.

  4. Why not have meritocrati?
    Wright a Citizenship agreement where one of the opposites is to be enlightened and thus have legislation that forbids the media to lie. Very hard sanctions.

  5. These two political party "factions" will either not permit reforms that threaten their own power or they will fight with each other to block reforms that one or the other opposes on ideological grounds. James Madison was concerned about this very issue when he wrote Federalist No. 10 way back in 1787. The idea being that political factions, through their constant fighting with one another, would only serve their own interests, not those of the wider community or nation.

    Here's the link to Federalist No. 10 for anyone interested in reading it:
    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed10.asp

  6. So so wrong. The trouble with our political system is that parties are too weak while partisanship is too strong.

  7. This is a very important question because it cuts to the heart of how public policy is made in the United States. I think the problem isn't necessarily political parties per se, but the intransigence that they foster. Political parties currently serve as a kind of shorthand for voters when translating their personal values into public policy via elected representatives. Unfortunately, to borrow a term from economics, there's a principal-agent problem. What's good for the agent (government officials in this case) isn't always what's good for the principal (we, the people). As technology progresses, I think dis-intermediating public policy becomes more feasible. Perhaps, the United States will ultimately be able to shift towards more of a direct democracy, free of political parties. For the time being, however, political parties do serve an important function, albeit often in a very flawed and sclerotic way.

  8. The solution is not important, The most important thing is listing out the problems with details, If most people agree that we have these problems, then the solution will come out naturally.

  9. One party ends up being communism there should be more party's and money constraint on elections. Unfortunately money from large companies and other countries decide our elections.change will never happen because the 2 parties have one thing in common greed and power. They will never change the rules for fear of losing their strangle hold .

  10. That's not quite right. Intelligent principled people want to have some sort of platform, some manifesto containing values, dispositions and proposals, upon which to judge a candidate. I'd like to know how we can jettison the parties while retaining some version of "covenantal" organizations around which to mobilize for change. Politics should be less about personalities or delivering pork but about realizing transcendent goals for the greater good of all.

  11. Why do we have political parties ? I thought we were supposed to be the UNITED States of America not the DIVIDED States of America.

  12. Divisional political factions for the same overall societal objective simply leads to mass divisions between the people, another method of psychological warfare.

  13. I agree dividing because well I'm right is a gang member mentality hense your blood crypt etc. They divide instead of compromise

  14. Hey, guess what, you don't need a party to vote, you don't need a party to tell you how to vote, vote based on your morality, what you believe, not what your idiotic party demands you vote for.

  15. The whole GOP is a fraud. They claim to stand for the individual; but continually cower in their group-think collective of US-rejected
    policies and rhetoric. The US would be BETTER OFF without parties. Let EACH INDIVIDUAL RUN on their own policies. The whole Red/Blue dichotomy is a destructive farce; especially when CA has 70X the population of WY!

  16. Excellent, excellent video. We are starting a new political party for Millennials— www.millennialpoliticalparty.org —and we want to change everything. We want to encourage "Decentralized Democracy" where the people and their communities can have the laws that they believe in without having to fight for power at the national level. Please join us MILLENNIALS!!!!

  17. To replace parties you have to replace their main purpose which is candidate selection with another system. I suggest randomly selecting 100 citizens, representing the whole population, who will then hold a primary to select two of their own number for a short general election. Now you don't need parties.

  18. Yeah. Lots of Americans are fed up with this so-called 2-party crap. If the Libertarian and Green Parties manage to win some states in future Presidential elections, people will still whine and say shit like “I’m tired of this 4-party system”. It’ll be the same people who were initially fed up with the 2-party system. So it’s better to have just only candidates. Another reason is because some Democrats like joe manchin appear to be more conservative than Republicans like John Kasich. There are some partisan crossovers, meaning that sometimes, a Democrat would vote red in some elections like those Reagan Democrats in the 80s who voted for Ronald Reagan, a Republican, despite of being initially a Democrat. Plus, you had a couple Republicans that have voted Obama 2x and Hillary Clinton in 2016. You could be a Republican and still support same-sex marriage. Well, sure, get rid of all political parties while the ideologies can still be around.

  19. It's similar to the King/Noble/Commoner System.

    It's inefficient! Maybe in the past, it was efficient, but it needs to evolve.

  20. You know how many people just vote for the same party their friends or family members did vs actually doing their own research

  21. Political parties are fine with me. But they are not anymore because of the stupid social media and phones. If the social media wasn't so terrible and people weren't so gullible, political parties would be fine

  22. It breaks my heart to say this but we can’t save America anymore. Its going to get worse and worse and we cannot do anything about it. Politicans have ruined this country and everything our founding fathers have sought.

    Can’t believe people still don’t realize that neither Democratic or Republican parties are correct. Instead the people have been manipulated by biased media.

    I am only 17 years old, but if it all comes down to it, and America is a complete warzone. We will have to leave. Everything is set up to have people pick sides against each other, and maybe then, The American people will realize what we have done wrong.

    If this happens, Its the only choice but to leave this country and hopefully live somewhere peaceful. And even then, I will still hold the American flag close to me. I will still be proud to be an American, because no other country has given me the right to be a free individual. I know our founding fathers would be proud of me, and others who agree with me as well. America was built to be independent, but united. And its clear that this country is divided.

  23. I don't think you've thought this through, including the people in the comment section. What's the sense in abolishing political parties if each politician is going to identify themselves or be identified by someone else as having an ideology that is either left leaning or right leaning? You might not see it on the ballot, but voters will recognize the names of left leaning and right leaning candidates and vote based on whether they are left leaning and right leaning instead of voting based on moral character.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.

Back To Top