“Tyranny of Duality”

J. Mastracchio
(10/17/07)

If you have ever taken a class on American History or American Government you
should remember the phrase "Tyranny of the Majority." It is an idea that explains a
weakness of the democratic idea. The phrase is used in John Stuart Mill's "On Liberty"
and in Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America." It is a fear, a fear that
democracy will be overrun by a majority. A majority will essentially become the only
voice of the population, a majority passing laws that may be detrimental to the minority.
In America today we have a problem similar to the tyranny of the majority; I like to call it
a "Tyranny of Duality."
In America we have the wonderful pleasure of operating under a democracy. We
have free elections where leaders are voted in by the populace; let's forget about the
Electoral College just to stay on topic. The House of Representatives is elected every
two years, one third of the Senate every two years, and the President every four years.
Sadly a vast majority of the American people do not vote, one reason being the lack of a
candidate who would best represent them. More often then not, in the federal system, an
elected position will be filled by one of two candidates, a Democrat or a Republican. We
live in a two party system.
On a federal level voters must vote for one party or another, voting for a third
party is often seen as a waste of a vote. States are labeled Red or Blue, one party or the
other. Each election the American people vote in a tyranny, a tyranny of Republicans or
a tyranny of Democrats. We live in a system plagued by partisanism, important issues
are often split between party lines, one fighting for and one fighting against. While more
parties will not solve the problem of fighting, it will allow for compromise. With just
three parties, who ideally won’t agree on everything, there would be a chance for
alliances on specific issues, leading to majority votes instead of stalemates.
We live with extremes. The two parties are polarized, opposites, and the idea of
"bi-partisanism" is a complete joke. Even while in session members of congress label
each other as one side of the isle or the other (there should be no isle, only a governing
body). During elections concern is not on the issues, but on how to stay in office.
Political officials are more concerned with maintaining a seat then representing the
populace.
Our nation's population exceeds 300 million people and in that figure there are
extreme conservatives, moderate conservatives, extreme liberals, moderate liberals, and
people who are split on issues. To say that two parties can represent such a vast
population is insanity. If an individual is conservative on one topic, but liberal on
another, who does he vote for? Not a person who best represents him/her, but a person
chosen by party officials. The choice of the people has been limited, the voice of the
people has been limited; the rule of the people has been limited.
Whether you are conservative, liberal, Republican, or Democrat, you can not say
that everyone fits into two parties. Our founding fathers tried to create a nation of
equality, a nation where individuals voted for people who represented them. We live in a
nation where political parties choose who runs our country and choose who represents us.
I can not blame the political parties only; the blame also lies on an apathetic American
public. We are a nation of citizen who don't vote and don't care. Be glad you live in
America and are afforded the right to choose one of two tyrants; in many countries they
have no such right.