The case for a strengthened Libertarian and Green Parties?

[Cassius]

Eric, I take issue with your last post in this thread, and here's why:

1. The political systems of the United States and the United Kingdom are entirely different, partly due to the Presidential aspect that you acknowledged, which is a very important aspect which makes these two political systems different. But its much more than that; in the United States, the two major parties are entrenched, legally, psychologically, in terms of representation. Whilst the United Kingdom may be dominated by three major parties, in our system, its much easier to set up and develop new political movements (though the success of those is usually limited). I would also remind you that the UK was never quite a two party system; the Liberals may have been very heavily squeezed in the 1950's, but they still retained a small base in loca government, the House of Lords and in the Commons. From that base they were able to gradually build themselves back up (and even then, much of that success can be attributed to their alliance and merger with the SDP in the 1980's). No minor political party possesses that kind of base upon which to build. UKIP is perhaps a more apt comparison, but still a flawed one, as UKIP first obtained representation in the EU parliament, which is a much easier nut to crack even than local council elections (which aren't strictly comparable to local and state elections in America, as councils here have far less power, and elections are often seen as a 'popularity poll' for the incumbent government).

2. Your argument that voters are turning to third parties because they want 'diversity': I can see where you're coming from here, and there is an element of this behind the reasons why, in certain countries, previously dominant parties are falling into ruins. However, to be honest, these collapses are much more to do with the individual political context of each country in question. The Euro crisis is a massive cause of this; the countries which have been worst affected (Ireland and Greece for example) have seen their major parties severely weakened largely due to what the electorate sees as their spectacularly bad mishandling of the economy whilst in office. Even then, many of these major parties are still limping on (like Fianna Fail in Ireland), wounded but not dead. Moreover, the collapse of these parties has been helped by the fact that a lot of the countries in question have varying degrees of proportional representation, making it easier for smaller political movements to break through. But, as I was saying, these massive changes in respective party systems have only been brought about due to extremely testing political and economic conditions, which are simply not present on the same scale in the U.S.

3. The idea that the U.S is 'behind' Europe: I really disagree with this. Depending on how you define 'progress' the United States could be argued as being 'ahead' of many European countries on issues such as gay rights and drug use (there are still a number of countries where gay marriage is illegal). Furthermore, the US has, historically, been more 'progressive' on a number of issues than many Western European countries. For example, Ireland didn't legalise homosexuality and divorce until the 1990's, although that is partly due to the unique conditions regarding Church and state that were present in Ireland up to that point. In Spain, I believe you can still donate a portion of your tax to the Roman Catholic Church. I think this idea that the United States is more backward and less 'educated' than Europe is a bit of a silly myth to be honest with you.

Basically, the problem with you're analysis is that comparing the United States with Europe generally is like comparing apples and oranges, to use that particular cliche. Different histories, different political issues, different political systems.