Evolving from a two party system

A political system that allows only two rational choices works in a regime that provides only binary choices. Even in such a case, it substantially constraints the voters with overlapping considerations. In the US, for example, this inflexibility has created an apathetic middle – nearly half the country – who do not vote. In the past, most dealt with this rigid constraint by projecting their desired outcome on the characteristics of the individual who ran for office. It appears that the country is entering a period in which the individual choices are unlikely to map across the policy landscape.

It is time to think differently. The other extreme – such as the French and Indian systems – where anybody with more than one supporter can create a party and run for office – is highly inefficient. Confusion leads to fragmented representation, followed by horse trading and unstable coalitions with no policy teeth. A happy middle in the offing in the US, where the populace seems to map into four distinct categories – Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and Socialists. Such a categorization, with equal powers to raise money and get on the ballot in every state will substantially increase the voting participation. More importantly, this will lead to representation that a high percentage of the country believes in.

Industrial revolution is over and we are in an information economy. The younger generation has substantially improved abilities to gather information, analyze it and make choices. Systems based on assumptions from the past are unlikely to be optimal. It is time for the US to move into a four party system with a higher level of choices that also avoids the problems from fragmentation.