explain american politics to europeans

[feuergnom 28]

so with all the election- & politics threads going on there is a lot of stuff to read. BUT: for non-u.s.-citizens it is sometimes really hard to get a grasp what the parties are really standing for


so how about enlightening & educating the "not so current in u.s.-politics"-foreigners in here?
it would be nice if you used your own words and thoughts.
please no links and maybe, just maybe, you could play nice without getting to worked up?

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[AggieDave 6]

Imagine a long line. One that is about a 5000ft long. In the exact center is the middle ground of politics. 1/10000000th of an inch to the left is the democratic party. 1/10000000th of an inch to the right are the republicans.

That's just about it.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[feuergnom 28]

so what's the hassle all about? hairsplitting and nitpicking? if it was just that americans would be masters of potiosection (that`s the art of cutting soup)

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[shropshire 0]

Probably correct, but your countries centre is some what to the Right of the Centre of European politics, I'd suggest.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[beowulf 1]

Quote

for non-u.s.-citizens it is sometimes really hard to get a grasp what the parties are really standing for

It's really very simple they each stand for what ever it is that will get them votes. He who has the most money to spend on advertisements wins.

They really don't stand for anything.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

so what's the hassle all about? hairsplitting and nitpicking? if it was just that americans would be masters of potiosection (that`s the art of cutting soup)

The minor difference between the two factions of the "business" party is primarily where our Treasury's largesse flows. It's wealth redistribution but some wish it to flow to towards the few (with a cut for the legislators) and some wish it to flow to the many (with a cut for the legislators). Also, one side wishes to pay for it, the other thinks that borrowing for it is preferred.
Now those are a few of the basic differences but we don't talk openly about those. We (apparently) prefer to deflect the debate towards meaningless and inflammatory diatribe which is perpetuated by the media in order to realize the potential profitability.
It's all about money, there's little honesty involved.

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

so with all the election- & politics threads going on there is a lot of stuff to read. BUT: for non-u.s.-citizens it is sometimes really hard to get a grasp what the parties are really standing for

They both stand for increased profits and decreased wages.

[feuergnom 28]

so basically it's all hot air? gimme a break - after all this is the greatest nation on earth

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

so basically it's all hot air?

Explain to me how any country's politics are any different in that regard.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

so basically it's all hot air?

Basically.

Quote

Explain to me how any country's politics are any different in that regard.

The US is the only western country not to have a major labour based political party and it also has around the third worst labour laws of the hemisphere.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

The US is the only western country not to have a major labour based political party

Having a major labour party doesn't mean a country is any better, just that it leans much harder to the left politically than the US.

Quote

it also has around the third worst labour laws of the hemisphere.

That is simply opinion. Your euro-centric views on things make you believe that is true. Personally I think there are too many protections and that unions have driven much of the American workforce out of a good job.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Personally I think there are too many protections and that unions have driven much of the American workforce out of a good job.

I've got some issues with Unions but I keep hearing them being blamed recently. In the early 80's the average CEO pay was about 40 times that of the average worker. Now it's closer to 400 times. I wonder how much more a company could produce if they could add 400 more workers without changing payroll.
(an over simplification but you get the idea).

[Andrewwhyte 1]

The most distinctive property is that third parties have such a hard time gaining traction. It is not completely impossible (Reform Party Governor Ventura of Minnesota a few years ago) but they really play no part in electoral politics. Canada and UK lean that way with their 'first past the post' elections, but parliamentary systems allow third parties more chance than congressional ones.
Once a two party, and only two party, system is entrenched, the parties must adopt a 'big tent' approach. They want to appeal to a wide cross-section of voters and the multi-party aspect of the system is expressed as factions within the big parties. In power the various factions fight for domination, out of power they tone it down for the common goal of gaining power.
The two parties present themselves to the barely literate public as the same basic flavours as the Christian Democrats (Republicans) and Social Democrats (Democrats) that you see throughout Europe. To the more sophisticated voter they present themselves as more sophisticated and subtle grades of the economic spectrum. Both parties have tipped their hats to the centre that wants a society that allows the 'American dream' to remain; to reward success and allow failure.
Bill Clinton took the Democrat party to the centre the same way Tony Blair took the British Labour party to the centre, with similar results.
Right now the Christian right has firm control of the Republicans and is skillfully using the fear of terrorism/war patriotism to broaden their voter appeal. The Democrats are doing their best to keep their hard left faction from showing their cards before the election. The Democrats have lost elections in the past that they should have won because their candidate presented as too far to the left of the population.

Just one foreigners view.

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

Quote

The US is the only western country not to have a major labour based political party

Having a major labour party doesn't mean a country is any better, just that it leans much harder to the left politically than the US.

Umm... no, it means the state automatically operates on more democratic principles.

Quote

Quote

it also has around the third worst labour laws of the hemisphere.

That is simply opinion.

Labour laws have measurable quantities.

The figure itself is quoted because it comes from knowing I have referenced used it before. So it probably came from someone else's empirical research; you know the ones, preformed by crazy places like Rand and stuff.

Just from memory -The US ranks just above Haiti or Syria and one other place.

Quote

Your euro-centric views on things make you believe that is true. Personally I think there are too many protections and that unions have driven much of the American workforce out of a good job.

Euro-centric? What is that code for? Having some semblance of an understanding about the relationship between capital and labour? Oh shit now isn't that borderline Marixst.

What things like terrible labour protection and no labour party mean is that you have a one party state with two different factions.

[jakee 1,498]

Quote

Imagine a long line. One that is about a 5000ft long. In the exact center is the middle ground of politics. 1/10000000th of an inch to the left is the democratic party. 1/10000000th of an inch to the right are the republicans.

That's just about it.

No no no, remember, this is for the European point of view.

Mark the line about ten feet to the right of centre, then put your dems and reps a fraction of an inch each side of it

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[feuergnom 28]

Quote

Quote

so basically it's all hot air?

Explain to me how any country's politics are any different in that regard.

ok, i'll try

in my little part of the world we have parties with a socialist background - they've become social democrats, then there's the conservative parties (christian democrats and the likes) being more "bourgeoise", liberals (definitly understood in another context than in the states - at least it is not derogattory, if you call someone liberal), greens aka environmental parties and freedom parties occupying the right end spectrum.

of course each of these organisations strives for getting into power, and in trying to be sexy for the voters they produce loads of hot air. nothing new here. BUT - and that is indeed a big one - they still reprsent and wide spectrum. at least according to our euro-centristic views and beliefs

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

so with all the election- & politics threads going on there is a lot of stuff to read. BUT: for non-u.s.-citizens it is sometimes really hard to get a grasp what the parties are really standing for

You really start by looking at England's two party system. Though they use a parlimentary system that gives total power to the winner, you still have a 'labor' and a 'conservative' party, but when there are only two parties, they naturally gravitate towards the center to obtain as many votes as possible. The only two party political systems where this is not true is where one party has always been in power, and the other is window dressing. (Japan is an example)

The Democrats still have a tendency towards the working class, but can't ignore higher income concerns. The Republicans still have their business tendencies, but their small government mantra is long gone. Spending money = votes, a principle Reagan found very successful, at least for him.

The key difference between the US and UK is the checks and balances. The President can be in an opposite party to the majority in Congress. Each chamber of Congress can be difference, and in the Senate, unless you have a supermajority (60 of 100), the minority can block efforts. This has positives and negatives. Just as multiparty parliamentary systems throughout Europe have both.

[JackC 0]

I don't know for sure since I'm not American, but in terms of European politics, American politics seems to be a bit like this:

They have left wing (meaning right wing) politicians and right wing (meaning right wing) politicians. Anyone who is left leaning (meaning right leaning) is wrong leaning. Anyone right leaning (meaning right leaning) is right. Any argument between right and left must immediately mean the blow job card is played against the left who are wrong but actually right (and may even be right). At least I think I'm right (and right) which is actually left and not wrong.

Is that any clearer?

[shropshire 0]

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[mnealtx 0]

American politics?

A media-driven popularity contest between two politicians with no real differences between them, giving the voters a choice between two different flavors of shit sandwich.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[feuergnom 28]

the first one to take the bait - so where's the rest of the hot bunch of political wrestlers in here?

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Imagine a long line. One that is about a 5000ft long. In the exact center is the middle ground of politics. 1/10000000th of an inch to the left is the democratic party. 1/10000000th of an inch to the right are the republicans.

That's just about it.

No no no, remember, this is for the European point of view.

Mark the line about ten feet to the right of centre, then put your dems and reps a fraction of an inch each side of it

Shouldn't that be Meters, CM's DM's, Liters? Damn. Sounds like a good Euro rap song.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

the first one to take the bait - so where's the rest of the hot bunch of political wrestlers in here?

I dunno...I think I hit it pretty well on the head...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[feuergnom 28]

hey i won't cut you some slack. you have to argue for the arguements sake. and i want the guy where only bilvon knows what he's talking about argue to, not to forget amazon

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[TheBachelor 5]

I think this explains it best:


Global Politics - The Two Cows Explanation

A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT:
You have two cows. You keep one and give one to your neighbor.

A SOCIALIST:
You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.


A REPUBLICAN:
You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. Maybe he should work harder....

A DEMOCRAT:
You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. You vote people into office who tax your cows, forcing you to sell one to raise money to pay the tax. The people you voted for then take the tax money and buy a cow and give to your neighbor. You feel righteous.

A COMMUNIST:
You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk.

DEMOCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE:
You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point you have to sell both to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow, which was a gift from your government.

CAPITALISM, AMERICAN STYLE:
You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.

BUREAUCRACY, AMERICAN STYLE:
You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, then pours the milk down the drain.

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION:
You have two cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when the cow drops dead.

A FRENCH CORPORATION:
You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION:
You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one tenth the size of An ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.

A GERMAN CORPORATION:
You have two cows. You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION:
You have two cows. You worship them.

A RUSSIAN CORPORATION:
You have two cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 15 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION:
You have two cows but you don't know where they are. You break for lunch.

A MEXICAN CORPORATION:
You think you have two cows. Who cares. You take a nap.

There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years...