the two major parties are often described as though they were highly organized, close knit, well disciplined groups. neither party is anything of the kind, both are highly decentralized, fragmented, disjointed, and often beset by factions and internal squabbling. (Federalism, the nominating process)
well one day he basically went into to his bathroom and went to take a pis* as he open the toilet and took don his pats he looked down and saw that his di*k was so small which made him so concerned about this issue
Banter that is political in nature.
Frankly, because it is human nature for us to band together into like-minded groups. We seem to seek out similar individuals (however one wishes to define "similar") to bond and group with. Politics is no different than any other area in this respect. In retrospect, any period of ANY government form without some type of political parties should be considered an anomaly. Even in governments with only one political party (or systems which claim not to have any parties), a closer inspection will reveal groups which operate in a manner similar (or even indistinguishable) from a formal political party.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Well, let's look at it: "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." if you break this down it basically means that respect requires that they should state the causes which urge them to the separation
Federalism
Yes, in retrospect. He was right, but it is human nature to take sides on issues and I don't know how we could have avoided having political parties. If there is any doubt about his observations all we have to do is look at the current situation we are in concerning political parties.
Political nature refers to the characteristics, behaviors, and structures that are related to politics and governance. It includes the ways in which power is distributed, decisions are made, and policies are implemented within a society or system. Political nature can encompass a wide range of topics, such as government systems, political parties, and the interaction between individuals and institutions in the political sphere.
They are the government, by their nature they control policy of the government in power.
George Washington warned against the divisive nature of political parties in his Farewell Address, suggesting they could lead to factionalism and undermine national unity. Today, many argue that political parties contribute to polarization and gridlock in government, often prioritizing party loyalty over the common good. However, others believe that parties are essential for organizing political ideas and facilitating democratic participation. Ultimately, Washington's concerns about the impact of political parties remain relevant in contemporary discussions about American politics.
Israel has several major political parties, with the most prominent being Likud, the Israeli Labor Party, and Yesh Atid. The political landscape is characterized by a multiparty system, often leading to coalition governments. Other notable parties include Blue and White, Shas, and United Torah Judaism. The number of significant parties can vary with elections, reflecting the dynamic nature of Israeli politics.
They does because it is them who form the part of polices and it is them who discuss all the issues based on the policies to the government departments.
there are more independent voters and people are now more educated to the corrupt nature of parties
In Great Britain, political parties were historically referred to as "factions" or "clubs," particularly during the 17th and 18th centuries. These terms highlighted the informal and often localized nature of political organization before the modern party system emerged. The term "orders" was used in some contexts, but it was less common. Over time, these factions evolved into more structured political parties, such as the Whigs and Tories, laying the groundwork for the contemporary political landscape.
Jean Blondel has written: 'Cabinets in Western Europe' 'The political factors accounting for the relationship between governements and the parties which support them' 'Ministerial careers and the nature of parliamentary government' 'Voters, Parties and Leaders'
The framers of the Constitution intentionally omitted any mention of political parties because they believed that such factions could lead to division and conflict, undermining the unity and stability of the new nation. They were concerned that political parties might prioritize their interests over the common good and create polarization. Additionally, at the time of drafting, the concept of political parties was not yet fully developed, and the framers hoped that a well-structured government could function without them. Ultimately, they aimed to create a system that encouraged debate and compromise without the adversarial nature that parties often foster.
The American political parties of Democrats and Republicans don't fit well into other countries' political systems. That is, the unique nature of American culture and politics makes it very difficult to map American political parties to their equivalents in other countries. In addition, the stated goals of both American political parties is often at radical odds with actual practices and pronouncements from those parties, making the comparison even more difficult - in most other countries, parties tend to stick rather closely to their stated philosophies, as that is their primary means of attracting support in a very pluralistic political party environment.