A long time ago, I worked in a small independent grocery store. The local Coke and Pepsi jobbers would come to the store weekly and restock and arrange the displays in the soda aisle. Purportedly, this was a service those companies provided so that the store employees didn’t need to police those shelves. In reality, the goal was to marginalize any soda brands not made by Coke or Pepsi. Since the big distributors controlled the display in that part of the store, other soda brands were relegated to the back of the aisle or, preferably, to another aisle all together.
The two major parties in the United States, Republicans and Democrats, are very much like Coke and Pepsi. For me, Coke and Pepsi are practically indistinguishable: both are overly sweet, artificial to a large extent, and full of dubious ingredients. That said, I don’t mean to imply that there are not significant differences between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. There are serious, important differences (though both are certainly largely artificial and full of dubious ingredients).
The resemblance to Coke and Pepsi has to do with our two party system. In a marketing sense, the Republicans and Democrats work together (!) to make sure that third party candidates are marginalized and, for the most part, unable to win an election. This wouldn’t be so bad if the practice didn’t also vastly narrow debate on the issues facing our governments (local and national). In a very real sense, by the time the ballots are finalized, the elites in this country are satisfied that the status quo will be maintained. They may prefer one candidate over another but, overall, they are satisfied that whichever candidate is chosen, their interests are protected.
As I heard someone quip recently: “The system isn’t broken; it’s fixed.”
This situation is a “feature” rather than a flaw in the two party system. Regardless of party affiliation or political viewpoint, and despite the fact that there are lots of things most of us would change if we could, we are all invested in the status quo. Defenders of the two party system explain that change should happen gradually, deliberately, rather than quickly and haphazardly. I don’t entirely disagree with this; as long as change can happen. On my more cynical days, I’m not sure that it can.
Having said this, I’m leaving to walk to my polling place in a little while. For most of us, voting is the only chance we have to shape the political landscape — however constrained that opportunity is. It’s been a long time since I’ve been excited and supportive of a candidate for anything. This year is no different. But I can vote against the candidate that I dislike more. As unsatisfying as this is, it’s the part that I can play in the election and I intend to have an effect no matter how small.