Throughout electoral history, the independent political party has always been something of a curiosity. Though major parties tend to dominate the electoral landscape, independents have, from time to time, come together in large enough numbers to sway one election or another. That fact alone makes it worth any student's time to attempt to understand their impact.
Of the two primary groupings of independents, there is only one that is generally considered a potent force. The first group is ideological in nature and seldom even registers on the electoral Richter scale. These groups, such as environmental parties and other extreme movements, are usually single-issue movements and seldom garner any level of noticeable support.
The second type of grouping is less constant. It tends to involve movement-based politics that become more prominent when a sufficient level of dissatisfaction with the main parties begins to arise in the general public. These movements can quickly rise to a level where they seize a sizable portion of the populace's collective consciousness.
When that happens, these parties can garner as much as ten, fifteen, or even twenty percent of the popular vote. Obviously, given the ideological breakdown throughout the nation, this sizable vote can swing an election one way or another. That makes these movements an existential threat to the mainstream parties.
The short duration of these movements is easy to understand, and has to do with the main parties' flexibility where policy is concerned. It seems that as soon as a group like this gains strength, one or both parties move in and take the independents' message as their own. The movement then dies from lack of momentum.
Movements motivated by independents do achieve change in this manner, by forcing the two parties to modify their own stances on major issues. This makes the independent political party a major player in the overall history of electoral politics.
Of the two primary groupings of independents, there is only one that is generally considered a potent force. The first group is ideological in nature and seldom even registers on the electoral Richter scale. These groups, such as environmental parties and other extreme movements, are usually single-issue movements and seldom garner any level of noticeable support.
The second type of grouping is less constant. It tends to involve movement-based politics that become more prominent when a sufficient level of dissatisfaction with the main parties begins to arise in the general public. These movements can quickly rise to a level where they seize a sizable portion of the populace's collective consciousness.
When that happens, these parties can garner as much as ten, fifteen, or even twenty percent of the popular vote. Obviously, given the ideological breakdown throughout the nation, this sizable vote can swing an election one way or another. That makes these movements an existential threat to the mainstream parties.
The short duration of these movements is easy to understand, and has to do with the main parties' flexibility where policy is concerned. It seems that as soon as a group like this gains strength, one or both parties move in and take the independents' message as their own. The movement then dies from lack of momentum.
Movements motivated by independents do achieve change in this manner, by forcing the two parties to modify their own stances on major issues. This makes the independent political party a major player in the overall history of electoral politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment