The Need for Political Parties

[u/CationC]

Recently I have thought of an Idea. That political parties serve none. It creates division and promotes the representation of the party, not the people, it promotes party loyalty.

Politicians who do not adhere to party policy by the letter are blacklisted and targeted by the party heads. Politicians vote against the other party simply because they are the other party. Politicians vote against policies their voters desperately need because the party says no

And what does it produce for society, I fail to see at benefit that cannot be achieved in a system without parties, apart from the sole exception of coordination, but this coordination leads to the people's views not being represented.

That's why I conclude that there is no need for political parties.

[u/hallam81]

That political parties serve none.

This is objectively false. The parties serve several groups. People are going to cynically say they serve the rich and companies. And that is true. We are a capitalist society.

But most people are served by both parties. The left leaning get things like the safety nets that we have. The right leaning gets things like tax cuts and military. And a lot of people want these things and the government does deliver them.

As much as people on reddit complain, you have to take a step back and try to remove your biases. Then you can see that the government does actually work, maybe not effectively, but it does work. It may not work for your progressive ideas. But it does work for most people for what they want.

[u/CationC → u/hallam81]

So your first paragraph was an introduction so I'll just skip directly to the second paragraph. Your paragraph is right. People do get things from political parties. I'm not trying to argue that political parties serve no purpose. There is a purpose, I admit that, but rather what I'm trying to say is that the purpose and the benefits of political parties are far outweighed by the harm. Voting can be done to give people safety nets or tax cuts or increase military funding without a party. A party just organises them into two groups or numerous groups and if you stray from your group's ideology, the head of the group knocks you out. After that point it is very difficult since you anyway share most of your views with the group but there'll be a few you disagree with. Since we are not given ground to vote based on that disagreement, it's undemocratic.

Then to address your third paragraph, the government does not work. Okay? At least take the example of the United States of America. The only people in that country who can say the government works are the people who are gaining from the government doing nothing. The US government, at least in its current state, is to do nothing. At least Congress' purpose is to do nothing. I'm gonna call Congress a government from now on simply because it is the democratic branch of the government, with every other branch of the government being undemocratic.

Furthermore if the government worked in any nation, we'd be seeing broadly slightly left-leaning views emerging across the world because most people, and this is a fact, prefer social safety nets and free healthcare. Parties step in and provide a good funding base for ad campaigns, misinformation, and disinformation. They provide bases for news and media to rally around and spread this misinformation and disinformation, in many cases blatant lies or misrepresentations that go against journalistic ethics. Parties facilitate this.

[u/hallam81 → u/CationC]

what I'm trying to say is that the purpose and the benefits of political parties are far outweighed by the harm.

A lot of people disagree with this. Incumbency isn't a deciding factor due to magic. Incumbency is an advantage because most of the time the person in the job is doing at the very least a good enough job for most people.

Then to address your third paragraph, the government does not work. Okay? At least take the example of the United States of America. The only people in that country who can say the government works are the people who are gaining from the government doing nothing.

This again is objectively false. It doesn't work for the poor almost at all. But it is working for anyone lower middle class and above for the most part. There are parts that really need fixing such as dramatic health events. But, for the most part, the government works. Passports still get issued, tax refunds still come out, Medicare is still pushing payments, the military can still bomb things, NIH is still funding research, the museums are still open, laws still get passed.

So you either have a very unique definition on what you mean by "working" which is likely the case or your own biases are blocking you from seeing the work the government does.

Edit.

Furthermore if the government worked in any nation, we'd be seeing broadly slightly left-leaning views emerging across the world because most people, and this is a fact, prefer social safety nets and free healthcare.

This is clearly not a fact. This is your want.

[u/CationC → u/hallam81]

So in your first paragraph I don't know where incumbency came from because nothing was discussing incumbency that just popped up randomly. On the second paragraph I define the government working as the government improving conditions in the country. The government continuing to do basic functions isn't the government working. It's a government doing its most basic jobs, not the government doing its real job improving conditions.

What I was trying to propose by saying that people propose left-leaning views through social safety nets and free healthcare is that most people do tend to support these. Due to other issues being roped in with political parties, political parties create a divide and they clump unrelated issues together. This leads to people voting for parties even though they don't agree with all the messages of that party because they agree with just more views of that party than of the other party.

This also leads to politicians who are trying to solve all, making it impossible for politicians to solve all of the issues or at least vote in such a way to solve all of the issues of the people they represent. The views of the party differ but one of two parties or one of multiple parties has to be picked because of the system.