What if there were no more Republicans?

[rucky]

Paradise, I agree. But is it a solution? I say it is, but only at the expense of the Democratic party as well. And that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

Bare with me...

The Republicans seem to think that if they destroy the Democratic party, they'll eliminate everything and everybody that's not them and the world would be a better place for it. We call it facism, but that's their version of paradise and they're going for it.

Now turn it around. Do we want to destroy the Republican party? If we were to gain control of all three branches of Government, what would do with the minority party? Revenge is tempting. Beat 'em into submission like they've done to our party.

But is that going to end the cycle, or will it turn partisan warfare into our own little version of Israel/Palestine?

Yes. We didn't start the war, they did. They've chosen the battlefield, and in it we are out-nastied, out-moneyed & out-media-ed. We don't even have the numbers behind us: they fluctuate & always by narrow margins no matter what. So how are we going to end the struggle? Through compromise or through a tooth & nail fight? Is compromising "pandering"? Is it more important to work a win-win situation, or simply to win?

The strategic flaw of the left: Fighting the partisan battle head on is not a fair fight, nor will it unite the country.

The strategic flaw of the "center": Achieving common ground does not mean adopting more Republican ideologies. Centrism is not the "third way" - it's just a mish-mosh of the two other ways.

We could debate that for days, but we don't necessarily have to.
The solution is out of the box. It defies labels, and eliminates the root cause of our country's division. It is driven by an independent spirit that is not bi-partisan. It is non-partisan. Anti-partisan. The independent voice is not just another label, try as we might to pin it down. The undefinable, elusive independent voter. The swing vote is the brass ring for the winning party. The independent voter holds the real power. They represent a unified force without any effort at all - without fundraising, organization or leadership. In debate among friends, both "sides" listen to the self-proclaimed independent with hopes of winning them over. In campaigning, both sides 'pander' to who they think the independent voters are.

"They" can't even be referred to as "they" - a major paradigm shift happens when we talk about independent voters. No parties. No paramaters. Just individuals and issues. So instead of trying to lure independents to "our side", try to predict what "they" want, or try to mold our own party closer to our beliefs, why don't we join them? Perhaps the best way to preserve our Democratic ideology is for each individual to carry it on as their own. If you redefine yourself as one, there nothing to compromise, and no battles to fight other than the battle of ideas. Your opinion is yours and it is golden - without the prejudices that come with party affiliation. Republicans and Democrats would do better to release their attachments to party labels that have been stigmatized, politicized, corrupted, split and downright misunderstood.

So why cling to any label? How does it help us or our country? Labels are for mayonaise. They don't truly define us, they don't unite us, so it seems their only purpose is to divide us. On an individual level, it's only natural to eschew them, so why is it so difficult to do it collectively?

Would this be giving up the fight? Hell no. As it stands now, if the Republicans succeed in their assault on the Democratic party, it does not mean the end of Democratic ideology by any means. None of us would ever say, "I guess I'm a Republican now." It would transform the battle into something that the one-party dictators are completely unprepared to fight. What it would mean is the end of the label that's attached to the ideology. The end of a war that's fought on the only terms that extremists can understand: us & them. It would not be a victory for them outside of their own minds, because what they don't understand is that the battle they're fighting can never be won.

And when they fail to win our hearts our minds and our souls, it's over. Deep inside they know this. Their fight is so fierce and desperate because they, too are teetering on the edge of destruction. Shedding the party labels would turn the American ideological struggle purely into what it is: ideology & issues instead of name-calling, rhetoric & spin. That's a battle a true Democrat would win every time - with or without a party to define us.
The end of the partisan battles would mark the beginning of real & constructive debate over the direction of a country, with an infinite number of options open to us, and the best ideas prevailing irregardless of who thought them up.

The two-party system is broken, it's demise has been predicted for years - and looked upon by many with anticipation. But the alternative solution is not within a one-party system OR a three, four, or thirty-party system. It's with a no-party system.

[onebigbadwulf]

1. If repugs were destroyed

Dems would take the moderate/conservative stance with libertarians and Greens/Labor would rise as liberals.

Yes it would be utopia, but not because there would be one party. It would be utopia because we would be free of the religious repressive burden that our government carries.

[neuvocat]

2. It wouldn't last very long.

Just like the above post mentioned. Similarly, if there were no dems then the dems or liberals then they would start to materialize (for lack of a better word).

[rucky]

4. It would last long enough

to keep our country from spiraling into the toilet at record speeds.

Before I got carried away, I simply meant to say that a nonpartisan approach (over partisan loyalty) would be most effective against the republican affront

[ProudDad]

3. Just like god

We'd have to invent them....

[htuttle]

5. "Imagine all the people, living in harmony..."

What if the Republican party was gone?

(let me dwell on that thought for awhile...)

:)

:)

:)

... still dwelling...

:)

:)

But seriously, both current mainstream parties were formed long after the Constitution was written. All the parties that were around in the 1790's have Whigged out long ago. New parties would spring up in the old one's place.

[rucky]

7. But it's still come down to two parties

pretty much. The names have been changed to restore their reputations. They peak when they're created & it's all downhill from there. Same shit, different smell.

Until we break from our dualistic thought patterns that are hard-wired into our Western brains, we will never be free from it.

Then again...Bull Moose. I could be a Bull Moose. that's got a nice ring to it.

[Silverhair]

6. Yes. We have to be the party of new ideas that...

are not necessarily left or right. The left - right thing (Collectivist vs Individualist) is leftover from the days of heavy industry being the dominate part of the economy. It isn't any more, and many modern managers know that you get better work and more productivity out of happy employees. It is called enlightened self interest.

Win-win solutions almost always work. Win-lose solutions often end up becoming lose-lose.

It is this type of thinking that we at DU need to concentrating on. We should be brainstorming about coming up with new workable ideas, instead of thinking that we are going to get many voters to change their votes because of what Bush's greatgrandfather did in WWI, or what his grandfather did before he was born. (Doonesbury has already started bringing up the Nazi stuff.) Joe & Jane Average will see that and most of them will think, "That was his grandfather years before he was born. The Democrats must really be desperate to try slinging that mud."

We need to be talking about new ideas, new ways of doing things. Once upon a time we were the Party of New Ideas and great dreams. We are the party that put a man on the moon. (OK, Nixon was in office then, but everything was done under JFK & LBJ all by a Democratic congress.) We need to look for new ideas on crime control, gun control, health care access, and everything else. If we start doing that - WE WIN BIG.

A large part of our problem is that we are tied to old programs that have out lived their usefullness, or never worked in the first place.

[quaker bill]

8. In their very dominance they begin to factionalize.

Remember when Democrats ran everything? I know some of you are not old enough. At any rate, factions arose in the democratic party. One faction was split off by the Nixon southern strategy.

Note now the beginning of a neo-con vs paleo-con/libertarian rift in the repubs. If they get large enough, eventually they will eat their own.

That is the point, we are too large and diverse as a people to fit one tent. Try to cram us in and it will fail.