Americans should see themselves as one group of people. This is how our nation was built and how a nation stays strong. Even our name represents unity, the “United” States of America. Opinions are going to vary by region. There’s no changing that. Rural populations that support the agriculture and timber industries are going to view things differently than people who work and live in a city, but that doesn't mean we should mark ourselves as two different groups of people. Republicans are typically in the southern states and small communities and Democrats are usually in the northern states and large cities. This is the problem with parties. Regions that already don’t get along because of different lifestyle priorities are now segregated into political groups that are known to disagree. All this creates is malice between people. Look at the government shutdown that happened a few months ago. Our government was in shambles because they couldn't agree on a simple task that nearly every congress before them has been able to deal with. The hate between these two parties has split our country so much that our government is almost not functional. This country was built on compromise by people who had to compromise on almost every law and rule that they created. They had different opinions but no political party. They saw themselves as one group of people even though they thought differently on subjects. This is what our nation needs to be again, one group of people.
The two-party system by itself isn’t perfect, but what really shows its flaws are the people who use and abuse it. If each side cared about our country and put up their best candidate based on experience and not money, it might work, but that’s not the case here in the United States. Politicians are rarely put into office because they are the best candidate. Some politicians are backed by big business. If big corporations want to get past certain laws that are costing them money, many will find a politician to back financially. Corporations will pay for politicians’ campaigns or simply just offer bribes so politicians will vote for or against laws to benefit corporations. Many politicians have a personal stake, usually well hidden, in the corporations they support. Still other politicians don’t even need a financial backer. Some are rich enough from the start to buy their way into office. They spend their money on smearing lies about any candidate that might actually have a chance to run against them. There are also politicians who don't have financial backing so they use one big effective tactic, lying. They say what people want to hear and make things up about themselves and their opponents to get into office.
Today, when forced to chose, more and more Americans are forced not to chose on ideal but instead on Republicans or Democrats, as if their is some form of pressure to vote on a certain side. Politicians now cannot voice their opinions as much or as open for fear it will go against their own party and therefore risk their election chance. Instead, elections ought to be based on individual people representing their own opinions and people ought chose as such.
As George Washington said in his farewell address: "The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty."
It is my full belief that there are no political problems in left in the world. There are only technical problems. The problems of global warming, for example, is an engineering problem. The problem of World Peace is a social engineering problem (human behavior is a technical field). Politicians do not possess any technical background to be able to ARRIVE at decisions that solve problems. Furthermore, they do not have enough of a technical background to select which is relevant and which is not relevant when being advised on technical matters.
And what do they know indeed? If you ask a politician 'how do you proposed to solve the problem of global warming?' The answer would likely be 'We don't know.' Or 'How do you increase crop yield without exhausting soil?' - 'I don't know', or 'How do you arrange conditions so that war is no longer necessary?' - 'I don't know?' Do what DO they know? The fact you have to write to your senators and congressmen to tell them how to do their jobs should be an alarming enough indicator. If you're on an aircraft, you don't have to write to the pilot to tell him to level off, he knows his business. And you trust that he has been given sufficient TECHNICAL TRAINING to fly an aircraft. So why is it that people that possess NO technical training are allowed to run the planet?
All of the problems of the world are the problems of scientists, engineers, botanists and so on and so forth. Not politicians.
Political parties are divisive and can open the door for bad people to seize control of the people's will, and thus have unlimited power. George Washington, the man frequently credited with founding the country as the first President of the United States, put it this way:
"However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
He means by this that political parties can lead to a rush for power, and can dangerously lead to total control for certain people when they are able to sway the public opinion (When Dems or Reps control all 3 governmental branches). This is why political parties should never have been made, as they are set on ideological cores, making them less likely to question power if it is their party in control. This is dangerous and cannot continue in a functional republic.
When a person choose to run for office and chooses a party to affiliate with, then they must adhere to party positions or risk losing the party support. So when you vote for a democrat or a republican your voting for a party and the country will be run by people you didn't even vote for.
They are dividing the country in half when compromise could be reached if everyone wasn't forced to choose one side or the other. If everyone was given a range of candidates that weren't left or right but had a variety of qualifications then a higher standard would be demanded and less corruption would be a result.
Without political parties, it would be very hard for people to know what all the candidates believe in. You would have to somehow pay attention to each and every single candidate out there to judge their views, which just isn't practical. Political parties help make people go: "I won't vote for you, because you are in the X party, and they represent ideologies that are against mine".
However I do wish more independents would run. I can see why everyone is disillusioned with both parties. Both of them are becoming out of touch with the regular American people. If more independents would run, our country would become much better again and be a force for good to be recogned with.