On Americans, Europeans, and Political Ideology

[Sionnach Glic]

The following post contains my caffine-fueled ramblings on various political matters. I'm not sure I really expressed what I wanted to say all too well, so I hope you'll be able to understand what I mean. Good luck!

Last night I was talking with a friend of mine, when the subject of American politics came up. After talking about things over there for a while, he eventualy commented about how Americans seem to place a surprising amount of emphasis on the whole Democrat/Republican affiliation, and how they seemed to be more emotionaly and psychologicaly in whichever party they're affiliated to.

I thought about his comments for a while and realised that, with the exception of a few hard-liners, we don't get that sort of thing in Europe. That level of personal investment simply doesn't exist for the most part over here.
I thought about that for a while, and then realised that it doesn't make sense.

In the US, there are two main parties, Both are an amalgamation of various groups with different, and sometimes conflicting, opinions and beliefs on how things should go. When an American decides to back a party, that party will only really have about (say) 10% of its members who follow that American's ideology, while the rest of the party will have various different opinions on different matters. This means that even if, say, the Democrats get a major boost in political power, that voter's desires may very well never come true, even without Republican interference.
From what I can tell from across the pond, the Democrats seem to be composed of everyone whose ideology spans from socialist to centrists, with a sprinkling of right-wing and extreme left-wing people to round it off.
The Republicans seem to be made up of everyone from centrists to theocratic pseudo-fascists.
Both are supported by a heapload of special interests groups.

This means that whichever party a voter decides to back could very possibly not implement a single one of the policies he'd like to have introduced.
So why do people in the US seem so serious about the whole "I'm a Democrat/Republican" thing? I'll admit that my experience with Americans is limited to the couple of times I've went there on holidays, the handful of tourists I've spoken with and speaking to them over the internet. But I think I'm right in saying that they seem to place an interesting level of investment in their party of choice, even though it may not agree with their own beliefs.
So what causes this?

Europe, on the other hand, seems almost dangerous apathetic towards the whole issue of political affiliation. I'll use Ireland as an example, as I can speak for it better than I can for other EU countries.

In Ireland, we have about a half-dozen major political parties, with a handful of minor parties (such as the Socialist Party and the Communist Party) and a boatload of independants. Each of these parties is focused on one specific set of beliefs, with only minor variations among its members. This means that when you vote for a party, you can be pretty damn sure that if they get into power they'll start implementing their (and thus your) policies.

Obviously, this means that each member/follower of a political party in Ireland will have far more in common in terms of beliefs with that party than a member/follower of a political party in the US. Going by that, it would make sense for Irish people to be far more invested in their parties than the Americans....but that's not so. Over here, we're apathetic to the extreme about who follows what party. Quite simply, no one gives a damn about who you're affiliated to. You could parade down a street yelling your affiliation through a megaphone and the only response you'd get would be "Feck off, will ye, I'm trying to sleep!"
Similarly, the who business of what party you follow or what your political beliefs are will never come up in a conversation, and it'd be considered pretty weird for someone to ask you that sort of thing.

Similarly, with the exception of a few Sinn Féin fanatics, there's no real bitterness between the parties themselves, although that may be down more to our political system. Because coalitions are a fairly common tactic to win control of the parliament, the parties kind of need to be on good terms with each other, and more or less try not to talk shit about each other the way Democrat and Republican politicians do (unless it involves Sinn Féin and Fianna Gael, who don't really get along. I suppose the whole civil war business and assassinating Fianna Gael's leaders didn't do much to help relations).

I'm not going to presume to speak for other nations on this, but I think I'd be safe in saying that other European countries have similar outlooks to us on the matter. I know a fair bit about British politics (only natural), and have some inkling about things in France, Spain and Germany, and they all seem to have more or less the same outlook to us from what I can tell.

So why is that? By all logic, Europeans should be the ones most invested in their parties of choice, while Americans should be mostly apathetic. But why is this situation reversed?

Well, I'm done for now. Hopefully that made sense.

[Tsukiyumi]

Good questions, Rochey. I've often wondered why we only have two major political parties, though I've never wondered why people care so much about politics; politicians are the ones controlling our future, after all.

[Captain Picard's Hair]

Yes, I understood more or less what you were trying to say. As to the q: no clue - but is is a fascinating contrast. I can only say that I take after my immediate family in not having any strong loyalty to either the Democrats or Republicans. Now, I am in the "geeky" mode of being rather apathetic to politics (caring more about transistors than filibusters) but one thing that turns me off to [American] politics is the fierce rivalry between the parties, and the fact that it often seems to turn into attacks on the members of the other party rather than just their views. Conservatives seem to view liberalism as if it were a disease, etc. It's a poisonous atmosphere.

[Sionnach Glic]

Aye, that's what I was getting at. There just seems to be this bitterness between both parties in the US that just doesn't exist elsewhere. Even Sinn Féin's attacks on other parties look downright pleasant compared to the US, and they're a bunch of terrorist-sponsoring extremists!

One possible explaination I can think of is that it's the fact that there are only two real parties in the US that have any realistic hope of doing anything. With just two, it lends itself much better to the "us versus them" mentality. In the US, you support one party and thus you oppose the other party. In Ireland, and many EU countries, the government is often formed by coalitions between two or more parties. This means that you pretty much have to get on other parties, even if you completely oppose their ideology.

[Mikey]

There is no single, national, American cultural indentity. Everyone (more or less) in Ireland is of Irish descent, and shares an Irish cultural and ethnic heritage. Because of the fragmented nature of the American consciousness, we tend to be a nation of "joiners;" and furthermore, we want to join a group that has a shot of winning. That's why the fringe parties' small support bases are a self-fulfilling prophecy - it's hard to get us on board and increase that base when the party in question doesn't have much chance of impacting the landscape like the big two.

[Sionnach Glic]

So it's more a sort of "well, these guys are the only chance we haev"?

[Captain Picard's Hair]

http://www.videosift.com/video/Citizen-Kang

[Monroe]

Well the more parties there are the more extremist parties have power. In a political system with dozens of parties all of a sudden those crazies have a big say because of coalitions. Now in the US where we have had 2-3 parties our entire history there's no way for small parties to have power through coalitions. Often small parties will merge into one in hopes of achieving a goal. The Republicans are fairly uniformed but the modern Democrats are a hodgepodge of different ideologies. Take the Anti-Masonic Party. Despite their name they weren't just for destroying the masonic order. They wanted to be an alternative to King Caucus and the Democratic-Republicans monopoly on politics.

[Reliant121]

I disagree. We have numerous parties over here, and some would certainly be considered crazy's (The legalized Cannabis alliance and the Monster Raving Looney Party for instance), but they virtually never get any say in anything. Only the Conservatives and Labour get anything notable, although over recent years the Liberal Democrats (which is probably where i stand, although I lean slightly more toward the Conservative) have been getting their say. Crazies just...don't come up. Coalitions dont happen, or havent happened while I can remember.

[Monroe]

I disagree. We have numerous parties over here, and some would certainly be considered crazy's (The legalized Cannabis alliance and the Monster Raving Looney Party for instance), but they virtually never get any say in anything. Only the Conservatives and Labour get anything notable, although over recent years the Liberal Democrats (which is probably where i stand, although I lean slightly more toward the Conservative) have been getting their say. Crazies just...don't come up. Coalitions dont happen, or havent happened while I can remember.

Think more political parties. Say.. Weimer Republic for example.

[Reliant121]

Ah, I can see you're point.

[Sionnach Glic]

Well the more parties there are the more extremist parties have power. In a political system with dozens of parties all of a sudden those crazies have a big say because of coalitions.

I have to disagree with that. While there are certainly plenty of extremist parties (Sinn Féin and the Christian Solidarity Party in Ireland, the British Nationalist Party in Britain, etc) they have pretty much no power. This is because the extremists, which are by definition a serious minority in the country, are confined to one party, thus ensuring they have damn all votes going towards them. Because of this, these parties pretty much never have enough power to make getting into a coalition with them of any real benefit. The handful of extra seats (if any) they get by allying with them will be offset by voters abandoning the party due to their teaming up with the fringe lunatics. And anyway, usualy those extremist parties are so idealogicaly seperate from the mainstream parties that they'd be completely opposing each other.

Think more political parties. Say.. Weimer Republic for example.

The Weimer Republic is a bad comparison for modern politics.

[Mikey]

If the fringe parties, as Rochey and Reliant say, have little to no effective vigor; then the difference between our systems is minimal. Our Green Party, Socialist Party, Libertarians, etc., crop up all the time but end up with no base to effect their will. What's the difference?

[Sionnach Glic]

Probably not much.

[Monroe]

Think more political parties. Say.. Weimer Republic for example.

The Weimer Republic is a bad comparison for modern politics.

How about Italy then? England's main parties and from what it sounds like Ireland's too are powerful enough to sideline the extremists but take a look at countries with dozens.