The Republicratic Party.... What if??????

[Universal Mind]

Imagine this... A political party draws in pretty much every adult in a country by pretending to be two different parties that hate each other. The two different wings of the same party lure in the masses by staging a mock conflict that gets two very big sides against each other, and the conflict gets people so emotional when they see it happening that they join it. Mobs of people get into the very heated conflict by taking one side or the other. In taking one side or the other side and getting very passionate about the conflict, all of these people are really just moving by the millions into two different entrances to the same political party. It would be the greatest and most effective deception of all time, assuring power for the slippery politicians who are behind it. Could this be happening? I know that Democrats and Republicans talk very different games, but when it comes down to real action, aren't they very strangely close to being the same thing? Just a thought. Discuss.

[paragon]

Yes, absolutely, and it is happening in every country, not just America. The major parties are either in collusion, or tools of some shadow power, depending on how you view it. All third parties, or anyone who wants to break the script and make any genuine difference to society, is gunned down by the media, usually using simplistic labels like racist, sexist, homophobe, nut-case, extremist and so on. It's silly that people become so passionate over the differences between parties that are working towards exactly the same goal, just through different scenery. But then, all of politics has become so polarised, compartmentalised and emotional that there is really no room for reasoned debate anymore, from either side. So it’s not entirely surprising that this continues to happen. All these campaigners argue as though solving the world’s problems is a mere change of government away, yet whilst some things may temporarily improve when a government changes - and whilst there are cosmetic differences in policy - looking at the wider picture the same problems in society keep getting worse and worse regardless of who is in office. Those who campaign for the established political forces are really campaigning for the slow destruction of their own country.

[Invader]

This happens in Ender's Game... Except that it was executed by two children who posed as older intellectuals of largely differing political viewpoints.

[Alric]

Pretty much, just look at the issues. Both parties agree on 90% of the stuff, and then they argue over the last 10%. And thats assuming they tell the truth and do what they say, which they don't. One guy says they want to get out of iraq when the job is done, and the other guy says they want to get out of iraq as fast as they safely can. Two different answers, but the exact same result. Both republicans and democrats are for larger governments, and both are for expanding government in new ways. Compare that to like Ron Paul who is for smaller government. Small government vs big government is a fundamental difference in position. What we have today are just slight difference of opinion between people who believe the same thing.

[Xaqaria]

This is why I see not voting as an honest and valid choice in a two party system.

[Amethyst Star]

Well, it's easier to accomplish something if you have people onboard to assist and agree with you. Political parties almost seem like a sort of contract agreement where one sides with the "established" views of the party or risk appearing defiant or rebellious. It's comraderie in a politcal sense. Saying you're Republican or Democrat (or Independent/Liberterian/etc) doesn't mean a whole lot to me, especially if that person is unaware what their party stands for. It's their actions that tell me the kind of person they are, their voting record which indicates what their future actions will be. There were no parties in the days of Washington (nor were there African-Americans or women, but that's beside the point). I'm not politically minded, though. That's just my personal (unexperienced) opinion.

[Universal Mind]

[drewmandan]

Imagine this... A political party draws in pretty much every adult in a country by pretending to be two different parties that hate each other. The two different wings of the same party lure in the masses by staging a mock conflict that gets two very big sides against each other, and the conflict gets people so emotional when they see it happening that they join it. Mobs of people get into the very heated conflict by taking one side or the other. In taking one side or the other side and getting very passionate about the conflict, all of these people are really just moving by the millions into two different entrances to the same political party. It would be the greatest and most effective deception of all time, assuring power for the slippery politicians who are behind it. Could this be happening? I know that Democrats and Republicans talk very different games, but when it comes down to real action, aren't they very strangely close to being the same thing? Just a thought. Discuss. Yet you think Israel and the Iraq war are legitimate. I believe that's the definition of irony.

[Universal Mind]

Yet you think Israel and the Iraq war are legitimate. I believe that's the definition of irony. Irony? Israel was not legitimate in 1948, but it is in 2009, unless Palestinians are somehow a single person and Israelis are somehow a single person. The Iraq war is the best shot we have at turning the most threatening area of the world into something more civilized than a baboon cage, and I am for the ending of genocide everywhere it exists and the granting of fundamental rights everywhere they do not exist, even if we have screwballs running our own government. It is beside the point. Don't forget that this is a "what if" thread.