Defining Political Parties

When I think of political parties I tend to think of them as groups of voters and/or representatives, depending on whether we're talking about an election or a congressional vote, that usually come back together to vote for the same candidate, legislation, or policy that most closely fits with their own position. Perhaps it's far more complex than that (I kind of hope so, anyway), but at least in a two-party system such as in the US I think that it's a labelling process that is useful at the same time as it is frustrating. Party members have shared policy positions, goals, and platforms that they will tend to support and that can be an important part of simplifying election and voting processes that are already complex. While there is of course variation and people who consider themselves independent of party affiliation, generally in America most people identify with either the Democrats or Republicans and see it in opposition to the other, and vote (or not) accordingly. That isn't to say that smaller parties aren't also parties...certainly when I hear about the Green Party or Libertarian Party I think of them as parties in some sense of the word, even if they lack the ability of the two major parties to exert direct influence on legislation they still share ideas and positions and band together to try to win political offices. There are even battles within parties for control over what exactly the party's positions and platforms will be, but I think that exists outside of the context of party since in any large group of people, smaller groups (what Washington or Madison would probably call a faction) of more or lesser extreme positions will always form and try to steer the dicsussion in their respective direction. That would be true whether or not there was something formally called a "party" for everyone to see.

From the readings, the difference between the Washington and DeLay farewell addresses really is striking. I can see where both are coming from though, despite the literally hundreds of years of history that are also relevant when comparing the two statements. Some of what Washington was saying still resonates - even now, do people want to be in a party and win elections because they want to do what is in the best interest of the nation, or because they just want to win? Although the party system has institutionalized itself in many positive ways in the US, that isn't true everywhere in the world so it's understandable that Washington feared it when the nation was still so young. And certainly there are opportunities for personal gain in politics that - while they may not amount to "tyranny" - are attractive to those who might abuse their office. Speaking of which...Tom DeLay's statement highlights some of the positive developments of parties, pointing out that the debate is healthy, that it is in fact necessary to prevent tyranny. People see things differently, it's just how it is, and having the debates and battles over how to do things are preferable to not being able to have them.