Lots of nations are now preoccupied with developing democracies. The central aim is to make the will of the majority exercised. There are many approaches to reach this goal. Some countries have numerous political parties that are seen as certain representation of some groups of people. The USA is the only democracy with two parties. Some may consider this to be an obstacle to a democracy as, seemingly, only two major groups can achieve their aims. However, I believe this political system is a very good approach to achieve true democracy.
In the first place, it is necessary to note that Americans have been living with this pattern for more than two hundred years. This system has worked for them so far. Of course, it is impossible to say that all groups of people enjoy the same rights and have similar opportunities in this country. Nonetheless, the will of the majority is exercised.
Those who believe two parties cannot address all the issues existing in the society focus on the number of parties rather than on their activities. Thus, the existence of two parties does not mean that rights of two groups are secured whereas all the rest of groups are not represented in legislative bodies. The two parties have representatives of the majority of groups who reveal their needs and inclinations. The two parties simply have two quite different approaches to reach goals and meet expectations of a variety of groups of people.
Therefore, the two-party system does not mean that there are benefits for a small group of people at the expense of the rest. More so, this system is more effective as the two parties have consistent approaches to achieving aims. Many political parties in the legislative body can often lead to ineffectiveness of this body as the parties have totally different views on core issues. When it comes to the USA, all democrats (as well as all conservatives) have a specific program where major issues are perfectly outlined (Burnell & Ware, 2007). Therefore, the party’s decisions are consistent. At the same time, the country does not run the risk of becoming an autocracy as decisions of democrats are weighed by conservatives who do not let their rivals to pass laws which can be harmful for the country (and vice versa). The rivalry between the two parties brings balance.
Finally, existence of many parties may also lead to financial losses. That is no news that political parties are funded. Eventually, tax payers have to lose their money (Burnell & Ware, 2007). Funding two parties may be quite costly. However, funding many parties that fail to produce effective laws is very costly and ineffective.
To sum up, it is possible to note that the US approach to democracy, i. e. two political parties, is effective as all groups of citizens of the USA (and even immigrants) can articulate their needs and inclinations. These needs will be addressed by the two parties. Of course, there can be no democracy with one party, as this would lead to autocracy. The existence of two parties ensures balance as each party has quite different approach and weighs each incentive suggested by the rival. It is also associated with increased effectiveness and less funding, which is very important.
Burnell, P. J., & Ware, A. (2007). Funding Democratization. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.