I ask this consider couple of threads that dealt with political or religious
issue that fairly divided members in terms of their value. Since the last
election, I was wondering with the dissent from both political spectrum so much
more intense than the past, are the people in certain sector of this country
either too Liberal or too Conservative?
In answer to your question, no. There is a historical pattern of shifts in every
country where politics exist, which is also the case in this country. Our
country is too large to not be broken up into Conservative and Liberal regions.
And, as they say, "Birds of a feather..."
In actuality, if by "this country" you are referring to the United
States, people are not too much of anything when viewed upon the spectrum of
political ideology. When compared to, for example, countries in Europe, the two
political parties in the United States are both extremely centrist, with their
fundamental ideologies and platforms really not all that far apart. From an
objective and historical standpoint, in general, whether there is a Republican
or a Democrat in office does not really make that much of a difference upon the
day to day life of the average citizen except in times of crisis, but when
crises occur, the change in daily life typically comes not primarily from the
political ideology of the administration but rather the realities of the
temporal environment.
In Europe, on the other hand, you have a full range of parties, (Edit: these are in no particular order)
fascist, green, Christian democrat, liberal, communist, socialist, separatist,
etc. When the extant political spectrum in the United States is compared to
that in Europe, one gets a better sense of how narrow the spectrum is in the
United States.
Why exactly is this? Many point to the two party system, which, if Duverger's
Law is to be believed, comes from the simple majority system created in the
Constitution. In Europe, the trend is for there to be parliamentary systems
with proportional representation, with slight deviations such as in France. Is
this good or bad? There's no right answer, and there's no wrong answer, as it
all lies in preference and perspective.
Quote by shinsengumiWhy exactly is
this? Many point to the two party system, which, if Duverger's Law is to be
believed, comes from the simple majority system created in the
Constitution.
Unfortunately, our Founding Father's never
intended our system of government to be a two party system. But, thats what it
has evolved into.
Quote by shinsengumiWhy exactly is
this? Many point to the two party system, which, if Duverger's Law is to be
believed, comes from the simple majority system created in the
Constitution.
Unfortunately, our Founding Father's never
intended our system of government to be a two party system. But, thats what it
has evolved into.
How ironic is it that some of the very
founding fathers who warned against political parties were actually the ones who
were instrumental in creating them. . . yet while none truly wanted it, perhaps
it was necessary or inevitable due to the distinctions in opinion between those
from the agrarian south and the industrial/mercantile north. This was
definitely made clear during the Constitutional Convention, as shown in
Madison's notes on the debates.
Many point to Washington as someone who worked hard to keep the new country in
one piece, yet he was a Federalist in all but name who disagreed strongly with
the views of his Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, the leader of the
Antifederalist faction. Others point to Hamilton as one who really worked to
establish the two-party system, and yet he was the one who wrote Washington's
Farewell Address, one of the most important and famous speeches calling for
bipartisanship and unity.
In short, while in theory none wished for a division, in practice all knew that
it could not be prevented.
i´m from germany and at first i would like to say something to
"shinsengumi" please don´t call the
fascist´s as first of all parties. This sounds really bad. And the
most people here hate them. The reason why they become so popular in the last
year is because especially here in germany are many innerpolitical problems.
Many people have no work and because of the new EU some people think that the
foreigners are guilty for their problems and this sick attitude is part of the
fascistic parties. But because of the democracy this parties are still legal...
what ever this means... All the participation is still an philosophical
problem. I think the humans shoul search one common consensus (in thought of
J.J. Rousseau) and don´t trust blind to demagogues or
"Presidents". Policy concerns all human in the world. I
don´t understand the people who say "who cares..."
because the policy is engaged with them. They make rules or lawas for them. So
what i want to say is, that the best policy system is still to search for and
this causes hard work. So the reason for being too Liberal or too Conservative
is a problem of public interests. How hard do we search and want an global
common consensus.
Hope that you understand what i mean this is
hard to explain in my own language so its even harder explaining it in english
Democrates used to be conservative and republicans used to be liberal. In the
civil war the Republicans like Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery. They also gave
many black people rights in the south. However they were always hated by
Southerners and the Ku Klux Klan even killed Republicans. However role between
Democrates and Republican switched when FDR came to power. He made the
Democratic party more liberal with his New Deal and such. Blacks who were
traditionally Republican voted for the Femocratic party because of him. Then
Regan came to power too and his approch was more conservative for the Republican
Party.
ummm
similar system in australia we got coservative coalition %...labour(left centre
%)....greens....
and about 1.5 million other parties. theres even an anrchist
party..lol:D
both major parties believe in the same stuff...and its compolsury to
vote...pfft:(
shud i vote for a old guy and old guy or some1 that doesnt make a
difference?that is the question:D!
I think that the populace is mostly centrist, but in order to energize their
bases, the parties themselves have become more and more radically left or right.
They argue like children, accomplish little, and stymie progress.
A good example is the Social Security debate. President Bush correctly pointed
out that by the time most of us are old enough to collect Social Security, it
won't be here.
But the Republicans were too scared of being seen as meddling with the system
that supported their elderly voters, and the Democrats created the system of
Social Security and are loathe to touch it. So nothing was done. And the problem
remains.
I ask this consider couple of threads that dealt with political or religious issue that fairly divided members in terms of their value. Since the last election, I was wondering with the dissent from both political spectrum so much more intense than the past, are the people in certain sector of this country either too Liberal or too Conservative?
In answer to your question, no. There is a historical pattern of shifts in every country where politics exist, which is also the case in this country. Our country is too large to not be broken up into Conservative and Liberal regions. And, as they say, "Birds of a feather..."
In actuality, if by "this country" you are referring to the United States, people are not too much of anything when viewed upon the spectrum of political ideology. When compared to, for example, countries in Europe, the two political parties in the United States are both extremely centrist, with their fundamental ideologies and platforms really not all that far apart. From an objective and historical standpoint, in general, whether there is a Republican or a Democrat in office does not really make that much of a difference upon the day to day life of the average citizen except in times of crisis, but when crises occur, the change in daily life typically comes not primarily from the political ideology of the administration but rather the realities of the temporal environment.
In Europe, on the other hand, you have a full range of parties, (Edit: these are in no particular order) fascist, green, Christian democrat, liberal, communist, socialist, separatist, etc. When the extant political spectrum in the United States is compared to that in Europe, one gets a better sense of how narrow the spectrum is in the United States.
Why exactly is this? Many point to the two party system, which, if Duverger's Law is to be believed, comes from the simple majority system created in the Constitution. In Europe, the trend is for there to be parliamentary systems with proportional representation, with slight deviations such as in France. Is this good or bad? There's no right answer, and there's no wrong answer, as it all lies in preference and perspective.
Hope I answered the question
Unfortunately, our Founding Father's never intended our system of government to be a two party system. But, thats what it has evolved into.
How ironic is it that some of the very founding fathers who warned against political parties were actually the ones who were instrumental in creating them. . . yet while none truly wanted it, perhaps it was necessary or inevitable due to the distinctions in opinion between those from the agrarian south and the industrial/mercantile north. This was definitely made clear during the Constitutional Convention, as shown in Madison's notes on the debates.
Many point to Washington as someone who worked hard to keep the new country in one piece, yet he was a Federalist in all but name who disagreed strongly with the views of his Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, the leader of the Antifederalist faction. Others point to Hamilton as one who really worked to establish the two-party system, and yet he was the one who wrote Washington's Farewell Address, one of the most important and famous speeches calling for bipartisanship and unity.
In short, while in theory none wished for a division, in practice all knew that it could not be prevented.
Hi,
i´m from germany and at first i would like to say something to "shinsengumi" please don´t call the fascist´s as first of all parties. This sounds really bad. And the most people here hate them. The reason why they become so popular in the last year is because especially here in germany are many innerpolitical problems. Many people have no work and because of the new EU some people think that the foreigners are guilty for their problems and this sick attitude is part of the fascistic parties. But because of the democracy this parties are still legal... what ever this means... All the participation is still an philosophical problem. I think the humans shoul search one common consensus (in thought of J.J. Rousseau) and don´t trust blind to demagogues or "Presidents". Policy concerns all human in the world. I don´t understand the people who say "who cares..." because the policy is engaged with them. They make rules or lawas for them. So what i want to say is, that the best policy system is still to search for and this causes hard work. So the reason for being too Liberal or too Conservative is a problem of public interests. How hard do we search and want an global common consensus.
Hope that you understand what i mean
this is
hard to explain in my own language so its even harder explaining it in english
Democrates used to be conservative and republicans used to be liberal. In the civil war the Republicans like Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery. They also gave many black people rights in the south. However they were always hated by Southerners and the Ku Klux Klan even killed Republicans. However role between Democrates and Republican switched when FDR came to power. He made the Democratic party more liberal with his New Deal and such. Blacks who were traditionally Republican voted for the Femocratic party because of him. Then Regan came to power too and his approch was more conservative for the Republican Party.
Most ppl only believe in a certain issues their party represents not everything in the party. This is a Canadian perspective...
Jaszi5
neither, both evil and wrong!
ummm
similar system in australia we got coservative coalition %...labour(left centre %)....greens....
and about 1.5 million other parties. theres even an anrchist party..lol:D
both major parties believe in the same stuff...and its compolsury to vote...pfft:(
shud i vote for a old guy and old guy or some1 that doesnt make a difference?that is the question:D!
I think that the populace is mostly centrist, but in order to energize their bases, the parties themselves have become more and more radically left or right. They argue like children, accomplish little, and stymie progress.
A good example is the Social Security debate. President Bush correctly pointed out that by the time most of us are old enough to collect Social Security, it won't be here.
But the Republicans were too scared of being seen as meddling with the system that supported their elderly voters, and the Democrats created the system of Social Security and are loathe to touch it. So nothing was done. And the problem remains.