Calm down people. Nader probably isn’t gonna even get on the ballots, much less throw the election. Besides, third-parties are complete shit. The Democratic party always has the best intentions and for anyone who works outside the two-party system clearly hates democracy and loves terrorists.

Okay, the last half of that was just an obligatory April Fool’s joke.

In the middle of her shrill freak-out yesterday with Nader, Randi Rhodes brought up a damn good point. Third-party candidates, while bucking the system during the election, eventually have to pick sides when it comes time to caucus. Granted, this usually isn’t a big deal since the views of third parties don’t usually fall between the GOP and Dems (and the big one that does completely sells out). But if Nader ever did get elected, he’d eventually have to pick somebody to work with, which would point out the big flaw in his argument. There are major differences between the major parties and Nader knows it.

Which brings me to this post by my friend Ross about the wishful thinking of many third-party supporters :

Nader supporters so often seem, willfully I might add, to forget something very crucial to elections in the US: We Simply Don’t Have Proportional Representation or Runoff Voting. Period. I’m sorry to have to tell you all this, but seriously, neither option actually, in any sense of the word, exists here in the States. Nothing will change this. No-Thing. No amount of complaining and wishful thinking will have any tangible effect on the fact that we do not have parliamentary democracy in any form, nor do we have instant runoff voting. When dealing with elections in the good ol US of A, try rememebring that we elect our politicians differently than in Europe and Canada, and most of the world.

Perhaps this isn’t right, and I agree with my friends on the left who want this sort of system that we definitely ought to be discussing this. I certainly agree that instant Runoff voting is a seriously great idea. That said, I’d like to digress for a moment and explain why I fear Proportional representation, at least as it applies to American politics.

Israel, in case you didn’t know, happens to have a proportional elective system, and it’s crippled the ability of Israel to ever find a solution to the problems they’re having. Have you ever wondered why they can’t seem to just come to an agreement regarding the palestinian problem, and deal with it in a way that doesn’t instantly result in hundreds of innocent palestinians and israelis dying? It’s because anytime someone remotely sane comes up with something, the Knesset gets blackmailed by some obscure religious fundamentalist party with just enough votes to keep the major parties from a true majority. (For instance, ultra orthodox fucktards willing to force WWIII so their little fundamentalist schools will be paid for by the government while they STILL won’t be eligible for the israeli draft).

I know this system works very well in most of Europe, but do Greens really think we’d end up with sane, normal political parties from all across the spectrum working together, marginalizing the bastards on the extreme right and left? I don’t. I haven’t forgotten that the US is most decidedly not like Europe in some pretty stark ways, chief among them being our powerful constituency of religious bigoted assholes.

I’m pretty sure that seconds after adopting the Naderite’s beloved proportional representation, we’d be working full time just to stave off electoral anarchy. For instance, the republican party might fall apart, which I would really like, but that’s only because 25 different Jesus-is-coming-soon parties would spring up overnight. All of them would have far greater profiles and mass support than the Naderites ever will, and I guaran-fucking-tee you that they’d blackmail the entire country into submission, while we on the left are trying to be all normal and sophisticated just like in Canada and Europe.

Personally, I don’t necessarily believe in the doomsday scenario outlined above. If anything, I think a split in the GOP would likely marginalize religious extremists. Actually, I think conservatives would probably be smart enough to avoid the pitfalls of splitting into multiple parties. Working together despite their differences seems to have worked out pretty well for them so far.

There is one point that Ross raised that needs to be stressed here : the way we choose our representatives naturally leads us in the direction of a two-party system. This is known as Duverger’s Law. As long as we stick with our current electoral system, we’re pretty much stuck in a two-party state (which, to be fair, has good and bad points).

If we ever want to move towards proportional representation, I think the emphasis on electing third-party candidates could prove to be counter-productive. I can’t help but think grassroots organization would be much more effective trying to raise awareness of alternative voting systems among mainstream voters than trying to elect candidates who are just as likely to get swallowed up and/or ignored by the system they’re trying to single-handedly change.