Skip to main content

REFLECTIONS ON TWO PARTY POLITICS IN THE USA


WAYNE JOHNSTON

January 7th, 2020

Folks I’m writing as a Canadian and poking my nose into American politics. Hope you’ll bear with me. I do believe passionately in democracy and that true authority comes from the hands of the people, not two parties. I have been an avid observer of Americans and American politics for some time, certainly since Nixon. Though like most of us I’m a flawed person I think that by and large I’m reasonable. I don’t believe that everyone who voted Republican embraces the Trump cult. Nor do I think everyone in the Democratic primaries who embraced Bernie Sanders are socialistsi My sense is that there are a whole bunch of people who make up the majority. These are traditional Republicans and Democrats who are willing to embrace progressive policies yet remain also focused on the economy. I call this being socially generous yet fiscally prudent. Most folks in successful western democracies seek this balance, a sound economy and decent social programs that treat citizens with honesty and compassion. But, simply put, the two-party system that exists in the U.S. cannot, will not, allow that. Both the Dems and GOP have to appease and appeal to those on the further end of each political spectrum. Unfortunately for the GOP Trump really galvanized a lot of individuals who are mean spirited, racist, incredibly stupid, and downright horrible human beings. The GOP will likely pay long term for their chicanery and misplaced loyalty to Trump over the USA and its citizens. Let’s be clear, the “loud and proud” minority of white supremist, racist, self serving, science denying knuckle draggers, and those lacking in human decency and compassion (i.e., “The Cult) isn’t going anywhere. In 2024 they will expect a candidate that embraces Trump’s Shitbaggery and lack of ethics, inhumanity and dishonesty. Indeed, they want nothing less than Trump himself as the candidate in 2024. Meanwhile the decent yet misguided Republicans (and there are some) who voted party over country will likely not vote for Trump again. Not everyone in the GOP embraces his bully like, divisive, self-serving, hateful, contemptuous style of “leadership”. These folks know that by 2024 America’s political landscape and demographics will have changed. It will be younger, more diverse, more socially liberal, less rural, etc., a constituency that is not keen on the kind of toxicity that Trump preached. The reality is that’s what is beginning to happen in Georgia.

I see the possibility here of a reality-based strategy to victory: engage, motivate, and register the members of the changing demographics. It almost happened in a few states that remained Red. It also happened that states Trump won by a slim majority in 2016 went Blue in 2020. By 2024, with changing demographics, and the same formula of engage, empower and register, the states which verged on Blue, will go Blue, along with a couple of others including PA. The GOP traditionalists, a number of them part of the Never Trump group, and some members of the Lincoln project, know that sticking with Trump is the mark of a perennial loser. The many Republicans who abandoned the GOP in 2020, and voted country over Trump, are hardly likely to return to a party under Trump’s helm or influence.

The next few years should be very interesting times in the U.S... The hard right and cult will demand Trump, or a Trump-like figure, who embraces his dirtbaggery. While concurrently those on the committed left will be seeking a move towards more just, fair social programs. Perhaps by
2024 America may no longer be a two-party political system. 2024 may be a tad premature, however I think in the fullness of time we will see this. To my mind this may not be a bad thing, short-term, mid-term or long-term, for America and Americans to have a party that embraces far right political ideology, one that is slightly right of the (GOP), one that is slightly left of the (Dems) and one that embraces Bernie Sanders’ style of democratic socialism. So, to be clear, that would be 4 different parties?) I believe while there will be growing pains, it would be very healthy for American Democracy and all Americans generally. Clearly this sort of diversity and choice would more truly reflect the range of real values of all Americans. It would force politicians at all levels to work together to improve the quality of life of all Americans. This could break the deadlock in the Senate and House that causes such political stagnation that nothing gets done.

________________________________________________________
Resources:

Akerman, S. (2019). “What Bernie Sees in the New Deal”. Jacobin. https://jacobinmag.com/2019/09/bernie-sanders-new-deal-speech-socialism-roosevelt-race-housing-fdr.
Purdy, J. (2015). “Bernie Sanders’s New Deal Socialism”. The New Yorker. November 20.
i To be fair, it is not clear what the term socialism means for a lot of people in the USA, and probably in Canada. Indeed, many genuine socialists (Akerman, 2019) and even a writer for the New Yorker (Purdy, 2015) would note that what Mr. Sanders represents is less socialism and more a return to FDR’s New Deal. (The Editor)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ANY LEFT LEFT? OR WHY I AM DISAPPOINTED IN THE NDP

 By Bil Lee Prior to announcing that they would not support the Liberal budget (thus triggering an election over what was really a pretty left friendly Liberal program) the NDP in Ontario has been wasting a great deal of breath on hammering the Liberals over the "gas plant" scandal. Of course the Libs have been their old tricky and disingenuous selves in many ways and did waste a pile of money (and try to cover up how much) attempting to score some bi-election wins by cancelling the damn things. But the fact is the PC's and the NDP had both made a promise to cancel them if they got into power, so the money ws going to be wasted in any event. So it was all game playing, and pretty boring game playing actually. I am not against a solid critique of the Libs (except I continue to disagree on the utility of playing at the gas thing). My concern with role back of corporate tax breaks that Horvath has muted about as an election promise is that though I clearly support the ide...

RITUALS KEEP CHANGING by Tony Boonstra

It is interesting that since time immemorial people have developed rituals. Sometimes we forget the initial meaning of the ritual. Take Christmas. It was originally “the Mass being celebrated at the time of Christ's birth”. That is literally what the word means. What I found helpful is an idea I came across in my studies at McGill University years ago. One professor shared with us the difference between a sign and a symbol. A sign is literally what it says. So, when one comes to a stop sign there is only one meaning. Stop. No rolling stops allowed. The meaning of a symbol on the other hand, is the meaning that a community embraces. This can change over time as the community's values and belief systems undergo changes. In the Netherlands they celebrate Sinter Klaas-Santa Claus, on December 5. The celebration takes on much of the meaning of what Christmas is in Canada. There is goodwill, exchanges of gifts, celebrations, etc. Then Christmas is a quiet day for reflection and for C...

Lifeboats for the rich will sink us all – Income Inequality and Climate Change

 By: Mike Balkwill Climate change are words that form a constant hum in the background of my thoughts. It is an anxious hum and is the result of a lot of gathering a lot of information about climate change, its causes, its current and anticipated impacts on the ecosystem and therefore on human society. The hum goes like this – “Everything is going to change, everything has to change. Will the people I love survive?” In order for humanity, (and many other species) to survive the effects of the changing climate people who live in societies with capitalist economies are going to have to change everything about how we live.  One source I have read says that in the industrialized economies that means reducing everything we do that uses fossil fuels by 90%. This means anything that we do ten times in a day, or ten times in a week, or ten times in a month that requires fossil fuels we would now be able to do only once a day, one time in a week, or just once in a month. If I...