Political Parties[1][1]Hundreds of years ago the term politics was
unheard of,the word layed scrambled among the alphabet, and the power behind
the undeveloped word lied still. Today,
politics is a wellknown word to us all and the power behind it has governed us
for many centuries. Differences of
opinions in politics havecreated what we know as political parties. The political parties of the United States
are the oldest in the world; amongDemocratic nations, they may also be the
weakest. American voters attitudes and
traditions are big factors in what makesour parties weak.[1]A Political Party is a group that seeks to
elect candidates to public office by giving them a party
identification. Although there are more than two political
parties, the Democratic and Republican Parties, they have dominated
thepolitical system for hundreds of years.
Other parties that exist but, are not very familiar are the Whig Party,
LibertarianParty, Socialist Worker Party, Communist Party of the United States
of America, National Hamiltonian Party, NationalProhibition Party, Peace and
Freedom Party, and the Know-Nothing Party.[1]In
the United States, the labels of the two major political parties have always had a relatively strong
appeal for thevoters. Because of that,
third parties and independent candidates have rarely had much competitive
success at thenational or even the state
level. There has hardly, maybe
never, been a strong national party organization in this country.Though there
have, however, been long periods in which certain state, city, and county
components of the Democratic andRepublican Parties have been organizationally
powerful.[1]Political Parties were developed because of
differences in opinions on subjects; each party was comprised of individuals
with similar views. The question that
seems to come into mind often is, "How do the parties really
differ?" The answer isvery complex,
much depending on what aspect of the party we are looking at: their history, their policies and
platforms,their leadership, their rank, and their level of
government--national, state, or local. A
lot of it also dependson our own view of how we see it from where we sit.[1]During the New Deal, the difference between
the Democrats and Republicans was clear to everyone. At one time there wasa great difference
between all the Political Parties, but things have changed and the lines
between the parties have blurred.[1]Political Parties went through many name
changes beforeany were final. Thomas
Jefferson's party was known as the Democratic-Republican Party. By 1791, Jeffersonian Republicanswere
emerging as an opposition political party.
Although its leaders hesitated to use a name associated with the French
Revolution, the party remained in power until the election ofJohn Quincy Adams
in 1824. It returned to power with the
election of Andrew Jackson, and soon after became known as theDemocratic Party
(Bender 698).[1]The Republican Party is the younger of the
two major parties in the United States.
In 1854, the Republican Party wasorganized to oppose the extension of
slavery into the territories.
Republicans first captured the presidency in 1860under the leadership of
Abraham Lincoln. His election was followed
by the Civil War, during which the Republican Partybecame the majority party
(Reichley 433). The Republican Party was
born in an outburst of protest against the Kansas-NebraskaBill in 1852
(455). After the passage of the
Kansas-Nebraska Act, opponents of the measure held a series of conventions
thatled to the formation of the Republican Party. [1]By 1860, Republicans were in a strong
position. The Whig Party had
disappeared, the Know-Nothing Party had faded, andthe Democratic Party was
divided over the issue of slavery.
(Linden 69-73). In 1860, a
four-way presidential race broughtvictory to the Republican candidate. It was Abraham Lincoln who won a majority of
the electoral votes. However,
theRepublican victory was a narrow sectional one. The Republican Party was the first, and thus
far the only, third party inAmerican history to succeed in becoming one of the
two major parties (Binkley 173).[1]Our major parties have been expected to take
on many heavytasks. At times in our
history, they have performed admirably and at times they have been found
lacking. Since early political parties
lacked the tight organization of present-day parties,candidates were chosen by
a few congressional leaders. They were chosen at a party caucus. The caucus system was successfuluntil the
1820's when many Americans became resentful of "King Caucus." The Americans then called for a change.[1]In the election of 1824, 3 of the 4
presidential candidates were chosen by state conventions or state legislatures
instead of by caucuses (Nichols 217).
Rather quickly, political partiesbegan to hold national conventions to
choose presidential candidates. The
delegates to these conventions did give moreparty members a voice in choosing
candidates.[1]Parties serve as unifying factors at
times: drawing together the president,
senators, representatives, and sometimeseven judges behind common
programs. But political parties, have weakened by having to work through a
system of fragmentedgovernmental power.
This was so we would never develop a strong party. Since 1954, the electorate have chosen to put
Democratsin charge of congress and a
Republican in charge of the White House (Burns 32).[1]Many
Americans have mixed feelings about parties.
Theythink parties: evade the
issues, fail to deliver on their promises, have no new ideas, and they are
sources of corruptionand misgovernment.
Parties follow public opinion rather than lead it. Other Americans favor political parties and
take partin it. Most Americans believe
in voting for individual candidates, regardless of party label. There are many
political parties that enter candidatesin national elections. The Democrats and Republicans seem tobe the
most common. Democrats and Republicans
also hold sharply contrasting images of one another. As we entered the 1990'sDemocrats consider
the Republican party to be a John Wayne/Rambo/tough-guy party that talks a hard
line againstcommunists and terrorists in foreign affairs. They are also against criminals and welfare
cheats. Republicans considerthe
Democratic Party to be the party of "the losers, the lame and the
lazy." The party that will not meet
the nation'sresponsibilities in the world arena. The party that is too soft toward the
communists abroad. They are too tolerant
offringe groups at home: the feminists, the gays, and "troublemakers"
in general. Reagan's shift, late in
hispresidency, toward a friendlier stance toward Moscow, and Bush's mixed
approach hardly altered these contrasting images (Burns236).[1]Our nation began without political parties;
today political parties, though far from extinct, are about as weak as at
anytime in our history. Some party
experts fear the parties are so weak they are mortally ill--or at least in a
long decline. They point first to the long-run impact of the progressive
reforms early in this century. It was
the reforms that robbedparty organizations of their control. Their control of
nomination process by allowing masses of independents and "uniformed"
votersto enter the primaries and vote for candidates who might not be accepted
the to party leaders. They also point to
a long series of "reforms."
The nonpartisan elections in cities andtowns, the staggering of
national, state, and local elections. This made it harder for parties to
influence the electionprocess. [1]Some parties suffer from further ills
today. The rise of television and video
cassette campaigns, media, anddirect-mail consultants, have denied parties
their historic role. The role of
educating, mobilizing, and channeling theelectorate. In addition, partly as a result of media
influence, the most powerful electoral forces today are officeseeker oroffice
holder organizations. Not the party
organizations. Officeseekers are supported by money and media. They organize their personal followings to
win nominations while the partyleaders are supposed to stand by nuetrally. If they win office, they are far more
responsive to their personal followings thanto the party leadership. [1] The
truth of the matter is, the two-party system in the United States does not
offer voters a meaningful choice.
Somepoliticians and scholars, both Republican and Democrat, are more
intrested in party renewal than party reform.
In theirview or at least in the view, of the "party
pessimistes", the party system needs to be strengthened, not
reformed. Thosethat fortify the party as
an organization would nurse both the elephant and the donkey back to health and
vitality before theywould teach either animal how to improve its ways. Everyone has their own opinions about
political parties and how they should be run. There have been many changes over
the years since political parties started to develope. Although some may agree with them and some
may not, but this is howpolitical
parties operateWorks Cited[1][1]Bender, David. ۊAmecican Elections. San Diego, CA: GreenhavenPress, Inc., 1988. (pg. 698) [1][1]Binkley, Wilfred. ۊAmerican Political Parties. New York:
AlfredA. Knopf, 1945. (pg. 173)[1][1]Burns, James.
ۊGovernment by the People. New
Jersey: Prentice[1]Hall,
Inc., 1952. (pg. 32)[1][1]Linden, Glenn. Legacy of Freedom. Sacramento, [1]California: Laidlaw Brothers, 1986. (pg. 69-73)[1][1]Nichols, Roy.
The Invention of the American Political Parties. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967. (pg. 217)[1][1]Reichley, James. ۊThe Life of the Parties. New York:
The FreePress, 1992. (pg. 433-445)[1][1][1][1][1] [1][1][1]Parties[1][1]
I. Introduction. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 1[1][1]
II. Different Types of Political
Parties. . . . . . . 1[1][1] III.
Two-Party Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[1]
A. Democrats. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . [1] B.
Republics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[1][1]
IV. Choosing Leaders. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . [1]
A. Caucuses. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .[1]
B. Conventions. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .[1][1]
V. Opinions of Political Parties.
. . . . . . . . . .[1][1]
VI. Political Parties Today. . .
. . . . . . . . . . .[1]
A. Entering Elections. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .[1]
B. Nation without Political
Parties. . . . . . .[1]
C. Campaigns. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .[1][1] VII.
Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-7[1] 
No comments:
Post a Comment