-7 votes

The Republican Party is Dead. The US Needs Democracy.

I'm an old guy. This isn't the first time I've mentioned that. Being an old guy means that I've seen, tried, and experienced a lot of things; more things that my younger colleagues. When I first heard of the plan to rebuild the Republican Party from the ground up, I sighed a bit. Then I promised myself to write about it after everyone else could review the experience in hindsight.

Congratulations, first of all, for the successes that took place during this election period. Local party officials were ousted and replaced with honest conservatives, worthy opponents of the two-party collusion. The success was powerful enough so that there was even a little bleed through at the Republican National Convention. After being manipulated, Maine's delegation walked out. And then there was this: Minnesota, where we are very proud of our state Republican Party, which runs a fair convention with integrity, casts 33 votes for Ron Paul, 1 vote for Senator Rick Santorum, and 6 votes for Governor Romney.

But those of you who have been paying attention (and I'm guessing that includes many who will read this article) know that most local and state conventions were not held with the same level of integrity as the Minnesota state convention. (related article: Romney Nomination May Be Contested)


Continue reading at original site: The Republican Party is Dead. The US Needs Democracy.


This is the challenge I propose. Give the United States a multi-party system. Free it of the corruption of the two-party system. Consider the success you had during this election and start imagining movement toward constitutional amendments in the states and to the US Constitution.

To help get things rolling, I've created a Google discussion forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/multipartyamerica and am building a project website: https://sites.google.com/site/multipartyamerica/home. Please not that I created the forum and website just now and will continue to develop them. Feel free to join in.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Do you know what a straw man argument is?

It's when you attack a position that I don't hold. Just because I point out flaws with your strategy DOES NOT mean I support the current state of things. I never said Greece is a mess *because* of their multi party system. All I'm saying is that it certainly doesn't appear to have helped. Either way, the number of parties is absolutely meaningless. It is the ideas behind them that matter. The ideal number of parties is not more than two. It is zero.

"I'm surprised you won't defend Ron Paul with the facts"

What are you even talking about? Ive been a supporter since 2007. Where did I say anything false or negative about him?

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

OK ...

... then let's take the position you just stated and hold you to that one. The ideal number of parties is zero parties (not that the number matters).

The Constitution defines a non-partisan system, so you're good to go there at least for a breath or two. How are you going to have it in real life? Outlaw political parties?

Correlation does not prove causality!

Ideally, zero political parties would mean zero politics.

Ie, no government. But that is unlikely for quite some time, so I will explain what my comment means in the near-term.

Political parties are a collectivist notion used to divide people into groups. The vast majority of voters do not research candidates or their positions. They merely vote for the R or the D. If there were no parties to label politicans and create powerful political fiefdoms in washington, people would be forced to actually research what each candidate stood for. I think this would decrease voter turnout, and eliminate some of the inane partisan bickering that is founded solely upon a baseless 'us vs. them' mentality. However, keep in mind that I would never dream of forcing this system upon anyone by law or any other method. I am simply saying that this would be preferable over our current system.

Your multi-party system would probably be an improvement over our current arrangment, but it is also just as capable of being worse, because it does not address the underlying problems.

Until you address the fundamental misconceptions people have concerning economics, war, and liberty, no number of political parties will save us. Just as now, we have 2 parties representing 2 different brands of ignorance, under a multi-party system we will have 17 different varieties of ignorance, all of whom will steal your money and your liberty, but will do it under many different names.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

I'm checking the hit count ...

There are more comments here than people who have read the article. Please read the article before commenting. (Go to the link and read the whole article ... we're not supposed to post complete articles here).

I'm starting to wonder if any of the people commenting here know who Ron Paul is. His political life could have been easier and he might very well have had more influence in a multi-party system. And if we took the situation right now and imposed a multi-party system, Romney's party would have to form a coalition with Ron Paul's party to win the election. There would be no way to shut him out. (Of course it would probably actually mean that Ron Paul's party would win without having to form a coalition with Romney's party, which likely wouldn't exist.)

Correlation does not prove causality!

Democracy the God that failed. Hans Hoppe.

Lincoln killed the Republic and the 17th amendment finished the paperwork.

Now the calls go out to eliminate the Republic completely by obliterating the Electoral College.

Democracy is two wolves and sheep voting on dinner.

The Founders hoped that the two forces, Democracy and the Republic of sovereign States would balance each other.

Worked for 70 years.

Free includes debt-free!

Why not ...

Why don't you pay me the courtesy of reading the article before commenting.

Correlation does not prove causality!

I was arguing that we nearly have a purely democratic system.

Eliminate the two Party Cartel created by Federal Election Commission. The cartel has monopoly control of the voting process.

More parties are needed. Or parties that come and go as the need arises, but as cartel outsiders they will never get an even break. That is why Dr. Paul abandoned the LP.

I agree with many of the points you made. But I think liberty is the ends we seek. We will have to figure out what the proper means are. Here we are over 2030 years later, and we have the same problem as the founders.

But we have a pretty good idea of what won't work,

Free includes debt-free!

That doesn't make sense ...

In a multi-party system, every party is on equal footing. There is no such thing as a "third party" that can't catch a break. (The term "third party" only exists in our de facto two-party system.) It's understandable that Paul couldn't win in the LP in the context of the two-party system. Nobody can. It is not logical to conclude that a multi-party system would yield the same two-party system that we have now. It's in the math, and the math just doesn't work that way.

Correlation does not prove causality!

Democracy is what you

Democracy is what you witnessed at the RNC. It is very easy to corrupt...to lead the masses anyway the ptb want the masses to go...and if not...well...just read a script...

SteveMT's picture

Right, bear. The RNC was tyrannical democracy at work.

The U.S. needs Liberty, not democracy. We live in a Republic, not a democracy.

elections ...

So, you want to eliminate elections in the US entirely? How will we have a Republic then?

Correlation does not prove causality!

Elections on local level and

Elections on local level and no power to Washigton and minimal power to state legislature. And you got your Republic.
Unless you need "leaders". Then Washington is so important to have.
To continue.
We need President to have almost no power, and "Secretary" who serve him coffee and nothing else.
That's what freedom is really about.

So much for theory ...

Now that we understand the theory, why isn't it working the way it should?

Correlation does not prove causality!

SteveMT's picture

It's called tyranny...nearly everywhere you look.

The courts, Congress, internationally, political parties, the media, state and local governments, you name it. Tyranny is all around us. Do you see it also?

How True

The government that works best is the one closest to the people. I get on my town supervisor's case whenever he gets an idea in his head to spend money on some special interest project.

Scary thought, maybe part of

Scary thought, maybe part of the script was not only to defeat Liberty...but to bring up the discussion on democracy...hmmm...look how the US spreads democracy abroad...will that be done to us in our own land to secure this so called democracy?

oh, fer cryin' out loud ...


Correlation does not prove causality!

Yes, and that Cry is LIBERTY!!!!

Yes, and cry out loud LIBERTY!!! as in http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/25070202 at time 37.40 and if you get tired of listing move on up to time 44.00 .

We should have all been there...not looking for a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th party. Focus on what is at hand and Liberty that is ON THE MOVE!!! I see some great leaders that I can follow!!!

The question is ...

The question is how? I've made a concrete proposal and pointed out that it's a tried and true method. You're not really stating an alternative.

Correlation does not prove causality!

Like this:

According to Ron Paul:

1) End the Fed
2) End the IRS
3) Bring our Troops Home

Those 3 objectives are what will enable us to quit paying for our own demise, thus cutting the money monopoly supply to the Legal Criminals. We work over 4 hours out of an 8 our day to pay taxes. The Legal Criminals get stronger as we get weaker as we pay for our own demise.

How...did you watch the video? Join the effort and help these people fight for Liberty instead of dividing forces. This is not the time to scatter.

Romney verses Obama ...

Right now you've got Romney verses Obama for president. How close do you think you are to reaching your goals? BTW: I mention goals in the article. Did you read the article?

Correlation does not prove causality!

No, that is not the truth,

No, that is not the truth, there are other candidates running from other parties. The problem is the MSM is controlled so those candidates do not get to speak to the people they would like to represent.

So maybe we need to vote for another candidate? I don't know what I am going to do come November, but I do not believe Democracy is the answer to what you are pointing out.

Are you switching from talking long term to short term?

I thought it was a

I thought it was a demonstration of the representative system at work... you know, the biggest, meanest jackasses getting more representation over the meek.

You Said: "I thought it was a

You Said: "I thought it was a demonstration of the representative system at work... you know, the biggest, meanest jackasses getting more representation over the meek."

I believe it was a demonstration of Legal Criminals that no longer represent the people.
In the words of Benjamin Franklin (1706–90) http://www.bartleby.com/73/1593.html

QUOTATION: “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

It seems to me we have failed to keep it as evidenced by the RNC. So, the question begs asking: Are we going to let them keep what they have stolen?

And yet ...

... Is this something you think should be fixed, or not?

Correlation does not prove causality!

People being people, I'm not

People being people, I'm not sure the part that includes self-interest involves the reform of anything until it is too late. The cycle repeats, no one learns anything.

elections ...

So, how did you figure that Ron Paul could run for president?

Correlation does not prove causality!

I knew it was a long shot...

I knew it was a long shot...

What I didn't know was how dishonest some people are...but I do now.

It appears there are Enemies of Liberty within this land from Sea to Shining Sea as well as Enemies of the Republic and the Constitution within that Old Party called Grand. That GOP is a disgrace to the Republic and Republicans must reassume the power so that it might exist with integrity instead of being filled with blatant & smug liars, cheaters, and thieves.

I have been a straight ticket Republican for 30+ years...I am now awake to what a disgrace I have allowed to happen thru personal political inaction.

In an evolutionary time-frame ...

... we've come to that conclusion simultaneously. When parties become corrupt, and they do, there needs to be a way to push them off the road with support for another party ... not just the other corrupt one. In a multi-party system, you can even start a new one and get it seriously up and running in a relevant time-frame. The threat of another party moving in and taking power is always there if a powerful party misbehaves.

Correlation does not prove causality!

republiCAN r3VOLution

If Ron Paul had not been a part of the GOP I probably would not have heard of him or decided to hear him.

I should have voted Chuck Baldwin in 2008, but did not know about him or Ron Paul then.

There is resident power in the GOP and Ron Paul told us we should take it for Liberty. Take the Power in the GOP for Liberty. I believe that was the request. I trust Ron Paul's request. He did not give up 30+ years of his life to be an outsider to the Good Old Boy's Club just to fail. I don't believe he gave up his heart's desire to practice medicine for the cause of failure either.

I believe Ron Paul lit the torch of Liberty for all to see and Liberty Lovers are attracted to that torch and will follow Liberty’s Lead.