No Party System?

Post Reply New Topic

What you think of this idea? It is also called non-partisan democracy. "Non-partisan" has a broader meaning which may or may not apply to a no party system.

No party system could mean that no parties are allowed, but not necessarily. What if parties, alliances, coalitions are are all allowed, but there are no official (registered) parties? Therefore the electoral system would not be built around parties but only individual candidates, rather than party based elections.

What ideas would you have for the process of forming a government, how would relate constituency and local government with a national government, and generally integrate with the voting process?

This is more of a concept rather than a specific system, becuase many different variants could be used. Discus.

What do you think the pros and cons are of such systems?

It would be interesting to see whether, if official names weren't available, if names would simply be given out by everyone's opponents and eventually congeal into some blunt categories of similar meaning.

It would be great if, in America at least, it were possible that yanking the (R) and (D) off people's names could get more people to pay attention to what's happening. To me that's really doubtful, especially with the pandora's box that Steve Jobs opened on the world a decade ago.

I think I'd prefer a no party system.

I think we need much more diversity, and by that I mean ideologically.

I'd rather have politicians who don't call themselves "republican", "democrat", "libertarian", etc., who have their own differing opinions on different issues, and aren't afraid to express them.

There is no political party I agree with enough to consider myself a member of, and I'd like it if the majority of politicians were similar.

Originally the British and French had no political parties.
But people started organizing political parties when the government failed to act in their interests.
Both systems favored the rich aristocracies until political parties came about.

The problem is without political parties, the rich tend to control the system, which has always happened throughout history.

Political parties make it easier for the common man to be represented... in most cases.

The U.S. is different since the last rewrite of the election laws in the 1990s, which made it very hard for 3rd parties and independents to run. The rewrite of the laws were done to protect the current two party establishment and the incumbents from getting ousted from power.
Thank Ross Perot's campaigns for causing this.

I have no problem with the existence of political parties, but I would love it if the ballots did not list the candidate's party affiliations.

I don't know about ballots in the UK, but in the US there is generally an option to vote a straight party ticket. I'd love to see that disappear, too.

Exactly what was changed in the 1990s to make it very hard for third parties and independents?

The funding and donor laws changed.

It is really hard to get the necessary permissions to hold fund raising events for the third parties and independents standing for federal elections.

Also anyone who wishes to make big donations to them are required to go through more hoops to do it than the would if it was for a Republican and Democrat.

There is also a lower cap on how much a person can donate when it comes to third party candidate and independent.
You are allowed to make bigger donations to Democrats and Republicans.

You have to disclose how much money you are giving to a third party or independent, if you a group giving money or a person giving a huge amount of money.

There is also stricter limits on when third parties and independents can start their campaigns and fund raising for their campaigns.

Lastly incumbents are allowed to start campaigning and fund raising at any time for their reelections.
They also exempt from most of the disclosures and funding raising rules.

Also the requirements to get on the federal ballot were tightened in most states, including the required filings, number of signatures required, and residential requirements.

The states control the ballots and the process of getting on the ballot.

This means if you have the backing of either of the major parties, you have a huge legal advantage.
If you are a third party or independent, you have to go through a lot of legal hoops just to get on the ballot.
Even more if you want to raise money and run a full scale campaign.

Here in Michigan by law our ballots are done this way:

You have a choice to vote a party ticket for Democrat or Republican, but no third party ticket instead of filling out the whole candidate section.

The incumbent is listed first, followed by the other party candidate.
If the office/board/whatever has numerous seats up then it goes Incumbent, his party (in alphabetical order by name after the incumbent), the other party in alphabetical order by name, then third parties followed by independents.

The third parties and independents names are in smaller font sizes in many cases compared to the two main party candidates, especially when it comes to congress, president, courts, etc...


Ross Perot received 18.9% of the popular vote in 1992, which is said to be the main reason why Clinton beat out Bush.
Most of Perot's votes came from people who would normally vote Republican.
It's believed if Perot didn't run in 1992, that the election would have been a very tight outcome between Clinton and Bush.

The same is believed about 1996 as well.

Anyways it's no big secret that the major parties write the election laws to benefit themselves in the U.S., which have done time and again through out American history.

I think the two-party system is why government is so screwed up. It would be good to have no parties. People will still be labeled probably as liberals, conservatives, or moderates, but at least there would be nothing official.

No-party system?

Think "Student Council" elections based solely on popularity and attractiveness, with the office-holders doing nothing and having no real power at all.

Yes, I know ... That's how it is now.

So why bother changing, if nothing improves?

General election the ballot has a symbol which is the party emblem and the name with a a large box, each candidate is on a separate line.