Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Can a range of views co-exist under one party banner?

Both Britain and America what is known as a 'First-Past-the-Post (FPTP)' electoral system and this means that whoever gets the most votes in one particular area (district, state or constituency) gets 100% of the representation from that area. One of the effects of this is that it means that small parties always suffer and might get 5% of the vote nationally but 0% of the representatives. Because of this, countries with FPTP tend to have two-party systems and a range of views in each party.

Right-wing parties are supported by religious Conservatives, fiscal conservatives and nationalists, whereas left parties are coalitions of Liberals, Socialists and Social-Democrats. In other electoral systems (like the Italian Proportional Representation model) these factions would fight elections as separate organisations. Under FPTP, it's pointless electoral suicide so you might as well try to reform one of these parties from within.

The fact that we live in changing political times puts a strain on main parties and their constituent parts. The Republicans have Tea Party and Trump, the Democrats have Bernie and OAC. British politics has had the Corbyn movement and also both parties are heavily divided by Brexit.

My own view is that factions are OK and that internal debate is necessary. For a political party to be effective, it does need balance and responsibility on both sides though. If you join a party, you should support your candidate, even if they are not your best choice candidate.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
Debate should always be a freedom to have for the sake of neutrality. I do think that variety is beneficial, however I may get hate for this but no I don't think a range of views can coexist (more on why I think that later.) I think a CERTAIN range of views can coexist but that is up for debate on what those are.

But first a few facts, from 2005 to 2017 Freedom House (a group that is a democratic watchdog) has recorded a global decline for civil liberties and political rights. In 2017, [b]71 countries[/b] actually declined in rights rather than moved forward:

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R45344.html

You should look on that same link about how populists and nationalistic political parties and candidates have emerged in democracies and also sought to subvert not just through liberal democracies but also core elements of fair political competition (paraphrased from the article of course.)

Democracy is getting too corrupt to keep going, we're getting to the point that it's not fair elections anymore and it's blatantly clear who most of the aggressors are.

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-why-anti-government-militias-are-suddenly-taking-up-their-arms-for-trump-1.5443110

IF this continues on and America ends up being like that, then no there's no chance of co existing because they've already shown they can't co exist in 71 countries.