Post AnbXB483FzXToKUvgW by interfluidity@zirk.us
 (DIR) More posts by interfluidity@zirk.us
 (DIR) Post #AnbVRRmOtLpnt53QdE by interfluidity@zirk.us
       2024-11-01T16:12:20Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       James Madison in Federalist No 10 writes a virtue of a large republic is “the greater security afforded by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the rest”.Though they inadvertently produced one quite quickly, the “founding fathers” never favored a two-party system. A two-party system is repellent to logic and aspirations of the Constitutional system.https://billofrightsinstitute.org/primary-sources/federalist-no-10
       
 (DIR) Post #AnbWvIkX87D6WSyqsy by prw@mastodon.sdf.org
       2024-11-01T16:28:48Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @interfluidity A two-party system is also the typical outcome of first-past-the-post electoral systems.  No amount of railing against it will stop it, unless the system that produces it goes away.
       
 (DIR) Post #AnbXB483FzXToKUvgW by interfluidity@zirk.us
       2024-11-01T16:31:47Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @PRW Yes, exactly. Not understanding Duverger’s Law (which, to be fair, would not be propounded until almost two centuries later) is how they inadvertently created a two-party system their own justificatory logic abhors.
       
 (DIR) Post #AndPPWZnHqMZThj4V6 by Foppe@todon.nl
       2024-11-02T14:14:09Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @interfluidity @PRW come on, you know just as well as I do that the authors didn't even want a bill of rights in there, while the "left" side of that group argued that we should throw in some fundamentally toothless language simply because we won't get our Lockean liberal constitution through the conventions otherwise.