“One-party Rule” by Anil Shrivastava ‘Musafir’

Democracy can only survive while it has strong opposition. Many of us seem to have forgotten this concept since the last U.S election was held in November 2020.

“No government can be long secure without a formidable opposition” (Benjamin Disraeli).

We know enough about a one-party rule in countries like China, North Korea, and Vietnam to understand the perils of living in such a society. The leaders of the party in those countries abuse the power of office without a check. There is a saying,

“Absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Lord Acton).

People with opposing voices in those countries are punished or treated as pariahs. In my view, that’s not the way democracies ought to operate. We have seen examples of this in Nazi Germany when Hitler, without effective opposition, displayed signs of fascism.

Countries with healthy democracies such as the U.S., the United Kingdom, India, South Korea, Australia, and Canada have strong opposition parties or a two-party system, at least. Since its inception, democracy in the United States has thrived on this principle. The two-party system has permitted wider and more diverse viewpoints in government and has encouraged dominant parties to make deals with weaker parties to form winning coalitions. The first two-party system consisting of the Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party took effect in 1789. Since the 1850s, there have been two major parties in the U.S., the Democratic Party, and the Republican Party.

I have voted for both the Democrats and the Republicans in the past, but now I am afraid to do so lest I should be deemed as a reactionary or undesirable by my own folks and friends. That’s the way things are today. There are dangerous signs to indicate that the United States is moving towards a one-party nation run by the Democrats alone. The Democrats are branding all Republicans as racists, insurgents, and dividers. They have a serious plan to eradicate Republicans from the Red states by opening the border and settling the migrants (who traditionally vote for the Democrats) there. The coastal states with the exception of Florida and the Carolinas are already one-party states. In order to achieve the goal, the Democrats are planning to get rid of the electoral college; legislative filibuster — eliminating the Senate minority’s ability to delay or block legislation and they want to pack the court to make the conservative judges voiceless. They also want to make the District of Columbia a state, creating two more safe Democratic Senate seats. They could also admit Puerto Rico, adding two more seats. This would make it nearly impossible for the Republicans to regain the majority.

There was a time when both the Democrats and the Republicans worked towards the betterment of the country despite differences of principles and opinions. No one tried to eliminate the other. Harry S Truman was faced with an open Supreme Court seat in 1945. While naming a Democrat to the seat likely would have been approved, Truman broke with his party and instead chose Republican Ohio Sen. Harold Burton for the Court .

The vision of President Lyndon B. Johnson, the Great Society program was one of the most ambitious agendas in American history. Congress answered the president’s call to action and enacted, with some adjustments, many of Johnson’s recommendations.

When the Soviet Union launched the first man-made satellite, Sputnik 1, into space on October 4, 1957, the U.S. found itself with only a fledgling space program. President Dwight D. Eisenhower took immediate action with bipartisanship support. As a result, NASA was conceived.

Republican President George W. Bush, following up on campaign promise, introduced a blueprint of “No Child Left Behind” to Congress. This was supported by Republican Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Judd Gregg and Democrat Rep. George Miller. Sen. Edward Kennedy, one of the most outspoken critics of the president, lent his name to the bill.

President Obama extended the Bush-era tax cuts to promote bipartisanship. While Obama did not agree to all aspects of the deal, he described it as “a package that will protect the middle class, grow our economy, and create jobs for the American people”(Bipartisan Policy Center).

Now things are different. The Democratic party, in unison with business oligarchs and the Hollywood crowd, is marching to a different beat. If you wrote a book stating that homosexuality was more a result of nurture than nature or questioned the working of Planned Parenthood, you’d not be published. On top of that, social media would ban you for life and the employers would blacklist you. If you planned to give a conservative talk in a university or a public library, you would be shouted down and banned for life. Disagree? Try once.

Should Facebook be reading this article, I may be banned for life. If that happened, “hey nice to know ya!”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s