What will be the next American party system?

[pecksniff]

Here's how historians periodize it by general consensus:

First Party System: 1792-1824. Federalists (Adams, Hamilton) vs. Democratic-Republicans (Jefferson, Madison).

Era of Good Feelings: 1824-1828. Federalists gone, no new challengers yet emerged.

Second Party System: 1828-1852. Democrats (Jackson) vs. Whigs (Clay).

Third Party System: 1850s-1890s. Democrats vs. Republicans.

Fourth Party System: 1896-1932. Democrats vs. Republicans, Republicans dominant.

Fifth Party System: 1932-disputed. Democrats (New Deal Coalition) dominant.

Sixth Party System: Disputed-disputed -- at any rate, beginning no later than 1980 and lasting until quite recently. Republicans (Reagan Revolution) dominant.

Seventh Party System

Mark D. Brewer and L. Sandy Maisel speculate that "in the wake of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential victory, there is now strengthening debate as to whether we are entering a new party system as Trump fundamentally reshapes the Republican party and the Democratic party responds and evolves as well."[13] Some also argue that it started in 2008, 2012, or 2020.

Proponents of the Sixth Party system starting in the late 1960s argued that if the Seventh Party System has not started yet, the Sixth Party System would be the longest party system in United States history, breaking the 40-year-long Third Party System's previous record.

Possible dealignment period

One possible explanation for the lack of an agreed-upon beginning of the Sixth Party System is that there was a brief period of dealignment immediately preceding it. Dealignment is a trend or process whereby a large portion of the electorate abandons its previous partisan affiliation without developing a new one to replace it. Ronald Inglehart and Avram Hochstein identify the time period of the American dealignment as 1958 to 1968.[14] Although the dealignment interpretation remains the consensus view among scholars, a few political scientists argue that partisanship remained so powerful that dealignment was much exaggerated.[15]

What next?

 

[LittleDixie]

Here's to hoping that people realize that government fucks up almost everything it touches.

Maybe we should have the "burn it all down" party.

 

[pecksniff]

Here's to hoping that people realize that government fucks up almost everything it touches.

Maybe we should have the "burn it all down" party.

We do have a Libertarian Party. But I very much doubt it has any better future than past. And Old-World Anarchism never really took root here.

 

[LittleDixie]

We do have a Libertarian Party. But I very much doubt it has any better future than past. And Old-World Anarchism never really took root here.

Except for when the country was founded.

 

[pecksniff]

Except for when the country was founded.

That was before Anarchism was even a named idea, and none of our FFs had any serious tendencies in that direction, not even Jefferson.

Anarchism, remember, is a leftist tradition closely associated with Marxism. In a nutshell, Libertarians oppose the state as a threat to private property, and Anarchists oppose the state as a guardian of private property.

 

[LittleDixie]

That was before Anarchism was even a named idea, and none of our FFs had any serious tendencies in that direction, not even Jefferson.

Anarchism, remember, is a leftist tradition closely associated with Marxism. In a nutshell, Libertarians oppose the state as a threat to private property, and Anarchists oppose the state as a guardian of private property.

Mooching off of your friends and family and providing nothing of value to the world you think you are entitled to is a tradition of Marx.

But, I oppose the state because it has no legitimate claim to authority over any of us. We are not slaves. We are not peasants. We are not subjects. We are not children. The government has convinced us that it is the wellspring of our liberties and successes in life and that we owe it a significant chunk of the fruits of our labor, a debt that it will collect through violence if necessary. The government will take you or your children and send them to war against their will to fight and kill strangers in foreign lands. The government is always there to control your behavior and monitor you to make sure you are obeying it's rules. Fuck the government.

I should be able to own things and to trade freely and to live my life without intrusion or surveillance or state violence.

Our FF's realized this. They wrote about it quite eloquently in the Declaration if Independence. They had reasons why a people would want a divorce from their government. They lived it. When they founded this country, they hoped to keep the same kind of cancer from developing here - to keep us a free people. They failed to appreciate the insidious nature of giving people power over others. They hoped that the government would be so labyrinthine and fused with checks and balances that no one could distort it into an authoritarian nightmare. They were wrong.

 

[pecksniff]

I should be able to own things and to trade freely and to live my life without intrusion or surveillance or state violence..

You can't do any of those things in the state's absence.

 

[Cubantripod]

We do have a Libertarian Party. But I very much doubt it has any better future than past. And Old-World Anarchism never really took root here.

Libertarianism and anarchism are not the same thing. We've done a good job of convincing people that you need government because you can't trust other people.

 

[pecksniff]

Libertarianism and anarchism are not the same thing. We've done a good job of convincing people that you need government because you can't trust other people.

That's not the only reason, but it is a reason that will always apply.

 

[coati]

We are not children.

Then why do you have an underage looking avatar? What is your strategy there?

 

[LittleDixie]

You can't do any of those things in the state's absence.

You absolutely can.

 

[pecksniff]

You absolutely can.

Move to Somalia -- you'll find that you can't.

 

[LittleDixie]

Move to Somalia -- you'll find that you can't.

Somalia is not an anarchy.

 

[pecksniff]

Somalia is not an anarchy.

Then, it is proof that anarchy is impossible. Eliminate the state and you get a power vacuum -- and warlords, tribal leaders and mullahs will move in and fill it.

 

[LittleDixie]

Then why do you have an underage looking avatar? What is your strategy there?

I guess you're just seeing what you want to see.

 

[LittleDixie]

Then, it is proof that anarchy is impossible. Eliminate the state and you get a power vacuum -- and warlords, tribal leaders and mullahs will move in and fill it.

No, that's not completely true. The problem with Somalia is that they removed the people, but left the government intact. It would be like removing the President and most of the senators and house members and a bunch of judges. The government is still there. The levers of power are still in place.

They didn't dismantle the state, they deposed some statists and left their chairs empty.

Ever since, people have been fighting and killing one another to sit in those chairs.

 

[pecksniff]

No, that's not completely true. The problem with Somalia is that they removed the people, but left the government intact. It would be like removing the President and most of the senators and house members and a bunch of judges. The government is still there. The levers of power are still in place.

They didn't dismantle the state, they deposed some statists and left their chairs empty.

Ever since, people have been fighting and killing one another to sit in those chairs.

A distinction without a difference.

 

[pecksniff]

This thread is about the next formation the American party system will shake itself into.

There will be a next formation -- and neither Libertarianism nor Anarchism will play any significant part in it, no more than in the previous six. There is no on-the-ground demand to speak of and there never was.

 

[coati]

I guess you're just seeing what you want to see.

No, your avatar image is what it is, a cutesy "little Dixie".

Seems ironic to have you use that image and then say "We are not children".

 

[pecksniff]

I guess you're just seeing what you want to see.

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a man.

 

[coati]

This thread is about the next formation the American party system will shake itself into.

There will be a next formation -- and neither Libertarianism nor Anarchism will play any significant part in it, no more than in the previous six. There is no on-the-ground demand to speak of and there never was.

I'd like to see at least three or four active political parties, the elimination of the filibuster in the Senate, a limit on campaign spending, disclosure of all campaign donations, and the recognition that multiple political parties means that coalitions need to be formed to pass legislation.

This two-party crap is obsolete.

 

[pecksniff]

I'd like to see at least three or four active political parties, the elimination of the filibuster in the Senate, a limit on campaign spending, disclosure of all campaign donations, and the recognition that multiple political parties means that coalitions need to be formed to pass legislation.

This two-party crap is obsolete.

We'll never get rid of it until we adopt some form of proportional representation. The mechanics of the single-member-district system naturally produce a two-party system, even if it has to be two internally heterogenous, turbulent "big tent" parties.

Problem is, there isn't even a significant movement for PR in America at present. FairVote was originally founded as "CPR" -- "Citizens for Proportional Representation" -- but even they appear to have dropped that for goals more reachable.

In fact, few Americans have even heard of PR. I once asked a candidate for office about her opinion on it, and she thought I was talking about the form of gerrymandering meant to empower racial minorities.

It is at least conceivable that all the disparate third parties in America, from Libertarians to Communists, would join forces to campaign for PR, the one issue that would benefit all of them, but I see no sign of that on the horizon.

Realistically, for the foreseeable future, we will have to assume that the Seventh Party System will be a two-party system, with other parties playing only a marginal role as now.

 

[BluesDriver66]

Kind of hard to tell before the rent and food riots burn down a couple of major cities and citizens are pushing guillotines up and down Wall street.

 

[pecksniff]

Kind of hard to tell before the rent and food riots burn down a couple of major cities and citizens are pushing guillotines up and down Wall street.

Yeah, how come OWS never brought any of those?!

 

[BluesDriver66]

Yeah, how come OWS never brought any of those?!

It was a spur of moment thing. All they had time for was some hand made signs.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ByVio5FFzCE/SZ3fZdQA1_I/AAAAAAAAAQA/Kxn3Gk13kbA/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Jump!+You+Fuckers.jpg