Party Government - Part 2 of 2

Party Government - Part 2 of 2
by Ted Lang, Associate Editor

December 20, 2002

Columnist Ted Lang Political parties totally control government officials, legislatures, and elected chief executives, focusing the power of government on their party's objectives. Such party objectives are usually foreign to those constitutionally intended for government, and party government rarely serves the interests of the electorate.

Behind-the-scenes power brokers manipulating political parties are virtually never on a political level that equates or is answerable to the average American voter. Yet the rich and powerful controllers manipulate the party, and the party manipulates government operations, and almost always, the manipulation of both is detrimental to the hardworking, over-taxed, voiceless American citizen and voter.

And party government doesn't really wish to be associated with the voter-taxpayer because the latter is of the lower and middle class tier of wage and salary earners. Individuals in this, the largest class of the citizenry, do not have adequate individual financial or political power to affect or control political change. But because of their large numbers, the huge majority of lowly voter-taxpayers are desirable only because their collective wealth is far in excess of anything the politicians and their parties have.

The Founders desired the average citizen to be involved in holding government office and kept access and qualifications relatively simple. But with the advent of political parties, political manipulation before, during and after elections, the latter most notably in terms of the spoils system, it has become increasingly difficult, if not totally impossible, for the average voter-taxpayer to be elected and to represent his peers in public office. In order for anyone to access public office, it must be through either of the two mainstream political parties in America.

Campaigning for public office is prohibitively expensive, and that's just fine with the American privileged power class that controls political parties and government. No one can access public office but through the two parties. This demands party patronage, loyalty and sponsorship, and considerations regarding constitutional law and what's best for the voter-taxpayer never enter into that equation. Defenders and apologists for the two party system offer that it works; undoubtedly, but for whom? Certainly not for the voter-taxpayer.

And if party politics is necessary for an individual to get elected to public office, what happens after he or she succeeds and acquires elected office? Who is the official beholding to? The obvious answer is that elected officials owe everything to the party, and as such, their obligation is to the behind-the-scenes power brokers and party big shots. This precludes representation of the voter-taxpayer, who serves only to provide vast sums of money for collection through the legitimacy and force of government.

The rich and powerful that control political parties also have the "in" with the press. Many of the powerful are so because of huge business interests, which provide the lifeblood for the American press: advertising revenue. In this manner, a partnering of a handful of powerful individuals controls the press, the party, and ultimately the voter-taxpayer. The latter is the lamb for fleecing and slaughter. It is for this reason that voters are always presented with the lesser of two evils instead of the people's choice. Even party caucuses and conventions are a thing of the past. Key political decisions are conducted behind closed doors, leaving only an insignificant sliver of bone to the voter-taxpayer in the voting booth at election time.

Other than the two glaring mistakes made by the Founders, first in relying on a "free and independent press," and second, in not being more specific as regards citizens' ownership rights regarding firearms, their failure to take into account political parties and their intrigue has fostered the loss of our constitutional freedoms that we now are subject to. The operative words are of course "subject to;" Bush and his federal police agencies have as yet not enacted the oppressive arrests and suppression of opposition that they now are legally capable of exercising as well as entitled to. ***

In addition to his work at The American Partisan, Ted Lang is a government analyst and a political freelance writer. He has written for numerous websites such as USA Daily, where he is a columnist, The Patriotist, Sierra Times, as well as New Jersey newspapers. Lang holds a BA in political science and an MBA.

Photo of Columnist Ted Lang courtesy of the author