No, this should not be allowed. I believe that when a political party holds up the government simply to prevent another party's success, it is ultimately the people who suffer. A party is voted into power because its policies appeal to the voting public, and all political parties should respect that by allowing the government the opportunity to introduce those policies. By not doing so, very little progress will be made, and many people may consequently feel that it is not worth taking any interest in the politics of their country, which would be a disaster for democracy.
If only one political party is allowed to hold up the government, will promote bad leadership. This will actually prevent the other party's from succeeding. Different political party's have different view's and ideas. Therefore other political party's should be given a chance to hold up the government if a country wants to have a change.
A one-party state, single-party state, one-party system, single-party system, or 1-party system is a type of state in which one political party has the right to form the government, usually based on the existing constitution. All other parties are either outlawed or allowed to take only a limited and controlled participation in elections. Sometimes the term de facto one-party state is used to describe a dominant-party system that, unlike the one-party state, allows (at least nominally) democratic multiparty elections, but the existing practices or balance of political power effectively prevent the opposition from winning the elections.
Playing us-against-them politics and refusing to make progress together just out of spite and wanting the other political party to fail is not a successful strategy. All that it does when one political party refuses to work with the other is harms the lives of average, middle-class people. Halting the process of the government for petty disputes is unacceptable.