Can a sophisticated democratic state function without large political parties?

Are the differences between them clearly defined?("major" = a party that has a reasonable chance of winning enough seats to have an effective voice in parliament. )* Do you have any strong opinion for or against the existence (and dominance) of large political parties? * Do you think that there's a viable alternative to a party-based system, that still maintains direct election of the legislature and would be capable of efficiently running a sophisticated modern state?Cheers.

Asked by dj-unk 17 months ago Similar questions: sophisticated democratic state function large political parties Politics & Law > Politics.

Similar questions: sophisticated democratic state function large political parties.

Well I can only Attempt an answer as one I saw on Vectors! :o In my opinion there are two major parties in the united states. While I have seen some other parties put up candidates for president I don't see any of them as actually viable.In my opinion when 3rd parties start getting more grassroots level election victories - then they may be able to stand up for president, but not until then.

I think the parties are NOT clearly defined at the moment. The fact that elections are often close and sometimes very close indicates a general level of acceptance of the status quo - thus I would say both parties are for the status quo with minor differences. For a long time I have advocated that we advance form 2 party to 3 or more.

I saw both parties as stuck in mind and will. Was it the youthful radical in me who need change faster?Probly. Now when I consider the issue I am not so sure.

Maybe 2 parties allows us to work both sides of any issue that comes up. That does seem to work for us....people get up in arms about something.... someone says I back you ... someone says thats wrong... and our elections can let off a lot of steam while moving our society slowly forward. Would a three party system allow the steamrolling of issues into law?

I don't know. This is the key I think. How fast should a modern government react to the concerns of its populace?

If it moves too fast does it run the risk of being knee-jerk reactionary and chaotic? Some people of the world already think our society is moving too fast and dangerously. Is it?

Would it help if our government/party sytem was reacting faster or would it make us more dangerous? As for alternatives.... I think they are coming. Change is already in the air.Do you wonder when you will vote from your cell phone like I wonder?

Look how fast ( and without complaint) we went electronic voting. Witness the rise of the internet factor in elections. Consider the effect of social networking and high tech phones.

Perhaps a new alternative will be the complete and utter destruction of the 2 party system. It will be replaced with a multitude of special interest parties branding and marketing with each other - I think. If it is functional or not....as usual we better make it so if we go there.

1 I think so. I wish that the US had more than two functioning parties. We are so polarized, compromise is almost impossible.

I wish that we had at least three parties.

I think so. I wish that the US had more than two functioning parties. We are so polarized, compromise is almost impossible.

I wish that we had at least three parties.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.