What would a one-party state in the US be like?

The death of the GOP is kind of a hot topic right now:

The Republican Party is already dead – they just don’t know it yet

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS FINISHED. ROMNEY HAS SEALED THEIR FATE. LOSER THAT HE IS!

The Republican Party Is Dead. Long Live the Republican Party

From Lincoln to Trump: Republican Party is dead

The Republican Party Is Dead

First, please don't give me the "The US already is a one-party state" cliche. The two parties block key legislation that one of them wants all the time. Having two parties does create some balance. Sure, they agree on many things but let's do a thought experiment...

If the GOP is really dead (or on the verge of being dead) what would a one-party state in the US be like?

It would mean that the GOP would lose control of both houses of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court forever. That would mean that the Democratic Party would have carte blanche to do basically anything. And, there would be no repercussions, no checks and balances whatsoever.

If anyone doesn't think that matters, let's consider what happened when Obama signed an executive order to close the Guantanamo prison:

EXECUTIVE ORDER -- REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT THE GUANTÁNAMO BAY NAVAL BASE AND CLOSURE OF DETENTION FACILITIES

In a speech at the National Defense University in Washington, Obama said his Jan. 21, 2009, executive order to close the prison was never implemented because House Republicans placed funding and legislative restrictions on moving suspected terrorists from the facility and blocked efforts to shut it down. But he didn’t mention his own administration’s missteps in not shutting down the prison in one year’s time, as he had promised.

“As president, I have tried to close Gitmo,” Obama said. “I transferred 67 detainees to other countries before Congress imposed restrictions to effectively prevent us from either transferring detainees to other countries, or imprisoning them in the United States. These restrictions make no sense.”
How Obama Bungled the Guantánamo Closing

The Republican Party blocked the implementation of the executive order. That proves that there is a difference in the parties and they absolutely have real squabbles, disagreements, and fights with each other.

Here's the question that I find to be really significant:

If the Democratic Party controls both houses of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court without having to be concerned with public perception or opinion (because they'll be completely unchallenged for all intents and purposes)...

How would the United States be any different than China in terms of politics in such a scenario?

The only difference I can see is that the people will theoretically be able to choose which Democrats will be in Washington. I use the word "theoretically" because we all know how rigged national elections usually are.

Eventually the U.S. would become more like Cuba and North Korea and Venezuela.

With some old style USSR thrown in for good measure.

Some people thought this was starting when the 2008 elections ended.

a reply to: Profusion

I suppose your hypothesis would "prove" wrestling is real too lol. Seriously, the bickering is staged, it's political theatre, nothing more. It is to give the fraudulent impression that "something" is happening.

Cheers - Dave

It would have to be an Indie party , as the Dems are faltering as well.All they could field was a dishwater Dem , a pathological liar and known criminal , and a Socialist (who at first kept telling the DNC he was NOT a Dem)

At the moment it really feels like there are four parties in the US; Democrat, Republican, Sanders and Trump.

It's been an exciting year so far for US politics, I think we are on the cusp of a reform.

a reply to: Profusion

Given the total disregard for the Bill of Rights on the part of both Rebublicans and Democrats alike, I feel like we are already in a One Party system: Federalism....George Washington and John Adams would be proud; Central Government, Central Banks, Central Debt. It's a Federalist Wonderland.

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: Profusion

I suppose your hypothesis would "prove" wrestling is real too lol. Seriously, the bickering is staged, it's political theatre, nothing more. It is to give the fraudulent impression that "something" is happening.

Cheers - Dave

That exact thought popped into my head immediately as well...IT LOOKS SO REAL!!!

a reply to: Profusion

In many ways the US already is a 1 party state, not in the way you're referring to but rather with the way territory is divided up. In the vast majority of state and federal elections the real race is the primary the general is only competitive in a handful of total races.

Also, at several periods in the past the US only had one major party. Eventually another starts up but it tends to take around 10-15 years.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Profusion
Also, at several periods in the past the US only had one major party. Eventually another starts up but it tends to take around 10-15 years.

Here's support for that point:

en.wikipedia.org...

The reason I believe this time it's different is because this time, people have reasons to keep the Democrats in power that haven't existed in America's history.

1. In the past essentially anyone who wanted a job in the US could get one (for almost the entire history of the USA). Now, there's so much unemployment and in a new way, people who feel like they have no hope to ever find a job. And with good reason, the manufacturing sector is one of several sectors that are mostly gone and I believe they're never coming back. That's a new pheonemomon in the history of the USA and there's no good reason to think it will change. The people in this group are almost certain to stick with the Democrats for life.

2. The issue of amnesty for illegal immigrants is bigger than ever. Just as with the first group, this group is likely to stick with the Democrats for life.

3. Whereas Americans used to be independent-minded they increasingly have a sense of entitlement, expecting benefits from the government that past generations wouldn't have dreamed of. Just as with the other groups, this group and all those who are proponents of amnesty are likely to stick with the Democrats for life.

4. The LBGT community is growing and they almost completely support the Democratic Party. Just as with the other groups, this group is likely to stick with the Democrats for life.

I'm sure there are many other such factors that I'm missing but I can't spend all day on this post. The point is, this time it's really different than before. None of the factors above were very important just 20 years ago. Now, they're reasons to believe that the Democratic Party will take control and keep control forever IMHO.

It would not last long. When the GOP swung super far right and the DNC moved to the center. With GOP self destructing after being taken over by nutters leaving Reagan style Republicans without a party and the DNC becoming more than ever under Obama the party of the center, the far left does not really have a party either. So even with the death of the GOP as it a major party the DNC will not last much longer as is. In the end we will likely see a far right GOP, a Centerest DNC and new Left leaning party. Now your asking what about Trump if he forms a party? Frankly any party based a person will not last long.

a reply to: Profusion

What would a one-party state in the US be like? - just project from the day before 911 to now, then and add 2, 5 or 10 years and you will know.

You only have one party in the United States as it is. Its called the the Bird-of-Prey, with the left wing called the Democrat wing and the right wing called Republican wing.

I concur with others here in that there is no 2 parties and hasn't been for some time - at least 5 elections or so.
How is it people don't see this?

It would be exactly like it is now. Except that everyone would actually be aware of what the reality of the situation is. For at least the last 16 years, they have managed to placate the half of the voting public that leans conservative with the illusion of a party that faithfully represents them.

The reality is that when the Republican party DOES manage to get some power, they basically do exactly the same kinds of things the Democrats do. They just change the storyline a bit to make it more palatable for conservatives. And they throw in some noisy rivalry on TV to make everyone believe there's real opposition happening. It's exactly like pro wrestling. Remember when everyone believed that was real? But unfortunately, everyone knows it's fake now.

But when it comes to stuff that really matters, that same old trick works every time. You got your textbook faces and heels in politics doing exactly the same thing they used to do in wrestling. And also, it's worth noting that it's exactly the same thing you find in most fiction. Typically, black and white characters. Heroes and villains. Occasionally some grey characters, just for those people who can't be completely drawn in without a little more complexity.

IMO, that's exactly why we're getting these cartoon characters like Trump and Sanders. Because the writers are struggling with the subject matter and an audience that's always on the verge of losing interest. They have drawn such outlandish stories and characters that the only way they can keep people believing it it is to keep the action going so fast people simply don't have time to think.

originally posted by: gottaknow
I concur with others here in that there is no 2 parties and hasn't been for some time - at least 5 elections or so.
How is it people don't see this?

This thread is kind of an interesting poll in that regard:

Posters so far who believe that the US is not a one-party state now: 4

Posters so far who believe that the US is a one-party state now: 6

One poster wrote that it's a mix of the above.

Please note that of the six posters claiming that the US is a one-party state now, only two gave their rationale for that belief. BELIEVERpriest gave one valid reason (Federalism) while BrianFlanders just made a circular argument IMHO. My position is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Please provide evidence for your positions. None of the six posters have proven anything including BELIEVERpriest who at least went to the trouble of giving an actual reason for their belief.

I believe that when it comes to the military (and alphabet agencies), it is a one-party state. Neither party ever blocks military spending (in any substantial way), the wars continue no matter what, etc.

Here's a more balanced discussion of the topic:

Democrat vs. Republican

I would ask the opposite question you posed:

Outside of military (and alphabet agencies) issues, how can people not see the parties are different?

I dont believe there is a nickles worth of difference between the two we have now...

But libertarians seem to be growing... VPOA is considered one of the fastest growing parties in America, so even if the gop falls apart completely (I doubt it will happen and I doubt the Dems want it to happen cause then who can they shift blame onto) You have at least 2 parties looking to step up in the vacuum.

We had one party rule back from 2008 to 2010

When the Democrats held the trifecta. The House,Senate, and the executive.

Turns out people didn't like it very much.

Voted the GOP to be the party of no.

a reply to: Profusion

It would mean that the GOP would lose control of both houses of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court forever. That would mean that the Democratic Party would have carte blanche to do basically anything. And, there would be no repercussions, no checks and balances whatsoever.

Forever? You do know that there was a brief time in American history where we DID have a one party state right? It wasn't forever and just looking back will tell you that even if the GOP splintered, it wouldn't be very many elections before we'd be back to a two party system again.

originally posted by: Profusion




If the GOP is really dead (or on the verge of being dead) what would a one-party state in the US be like?

It would mean that the GOP would lose control of both houses of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court forever. That would mean that the Democratic Party would have carte blanche to do basically anything. And, there would be no repercussions, no checks and balances whatsoever.

look at democrat-dominated states and cities; Detroit, Chicago, Massachusets. gated-community elites surrounded by drugs and thugs.
the democrats will outlaw or put control mechanisms on opposition media (Fox News, talk radio, National Review, etc). the dems will burden businesses with impossible environmental restrictions which will lead to more jobs going to the third world, leading to increased US unemployment and more government dependence.
the courts will consistently rule in favor of sexual and racial minority rights until rule of law is irrelevant.

which, as xuenchen observed, leads to the US becoming a new North Korea. the ruling elite will continue to live the good life while the rest of us will live in fear and poverty and watch the pretty people on tv assure us that things are great.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Profusion

It would mean that the GOP would lose control of both houses of Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court forever. That would mean that the Democratic Party would have carte blanche to do basically anything. And, there would be no repercussions, no checks and balances whatsoever.

Forever? You do know that there was a brief time in American history where we DID have a one party state right? It wasn't forever and just looking back will tell you that even if the GOP splintered, it wouldn't be very many elections before we'd be back to a two party system again.

Someone brought up the point you just made earlier in the thread and the following was my reply. I'm posting the reply again in the hope that someone will offer a response to it. I wrote the original post assuming that none of the following trends will ever reverse and they'll just keep getting worse (I use the word "worse" because I see all of them as being negative personally).

The reason I believe this time it's different is because this time, people have reasons to keep the Democrats in power that haven't existed in America's history.

1. In the past essentially anyone who wanted a job in the US could get one (for almost the entire history of the USA). Now, there's so much unemployment and in a new way, people who feel like they have no hope to ever find a job. And with good reason, the manufacturing sector is one of several sectors that are mostly gone and I believe they're never coming back. That's a new pheonemomon in the history of the USA and there's no good reason to think it will change. The people in this group are almost certain to stick with the Democrats for life.

2. The issue of amnesty for illegal immigrants is bigger than ever. Just as with the first group, this group and all those who are proponents of amnesty are likely to stick with the Democrats for life.

3. Whereas Americans used to be independent-minded they increasingly have a sense of entitlement, expecting benefits from the government that past generations wouldn't have dreamed of. Just as with the other groups, this group is likely to stick with the Democrats for life.

4. The LBGT community is growing and they almost completely support the Democratic Party. Just as with the other groups, this group is likely to stick with the Democrats for life.

I'm sure there are many other such factors that I'm missing but I can't spend all day on this post. The point is, this time it's really different than before. None of the factors above were very important just 20 years ago. Now, they're reasons to believe that the Democratic Party will take control and keep control forever IMHO.

originally posted by: ElGoobero
look at democrat-dominated states and cities; Detroit, Chicago, Massachusets. gated-community elites surrounded by drugs and thugs.
the democrats will outlaw or put control mechanisms on opposition media (Fox News, talk radio, National Review, etc). the dems will burden businesses with impossible environmental restrictions which will lead to more jobs going to the third world, leading to increased US unemployment and more government dependence.
the courts will consistently rule in favor of sexual and racial minority rights until rule of law is irrelevant.

which, as xuenchen observed, leads to the US becoming a new North Korea. the ruling elite will continue to live the good life while the rest of us will live in fear and poverty and watch the pretty people on tv assure us that things are great.

And then people want to say that there's no difference between the parties.

Please note that no one claiming there's no difference between the parties will debate anything in this thread. They just make their claim and take off.

a reply to: Profusion

None of the six posters have proven anything including BELIEVERpriest who at least went to the trouble of giving an actual reason for their belief.

Consider this. Rather than looking at the parties as Democrat vs Republican, look at it as Federalism vs Anti-Federalism.

Federalists favor:
1) strong central government,
2) a central bank backed by debt
3) a nationalized military controlled by a centralized authority (Pentagon)
4) interdependence between superpower nations to prop up the monetization of debt.

Anti-Federalists favor:
1) a weak central government that answers to the representatives of each state
2) a debt free monetary system backed by a commodity which has real value
3) a state-by-state independent and compartmentalized military/militia force
4) national sovereignty from other nations to avoid interdependence

That is the premise. Now look at what certain Presidents have done to this Nation over the course of American History.

George Washington:
1) the Militia Act of 1792 to consolidate the state militias into one national military.
2) the Jay Treaty fused economic ties between the U.S. and England, promising that all Colonial debts would be paid in full, despite the fact that America had won its freedom.
3) First Bank of the United States (Vice President George Clinton let the bank charter expire)

Now look at things like Social Security and Medicare.

Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt started Social Security which founded Medicare and Medicaide
Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson started medicare.
Democrat Bill Clinton associated medicare with HMOs.
Republican George W. Bush expanded medicare to include prescription coverage (Part D).
Democrat Barack Obama passed that Affordable Care Act.

Look at the Proxy Wars.

Vietnam: from Kennedy to Johnson, to Nixon. Both Democrats and Republicans involved.
Desert Storm: George H.W. Bush, Sr. Republican
War on Terror-Iraq George W. Bush Republican
War on Terror-Afghanistan George W. Bush Republican
Libya-Barrack Obama Democrat
Syrian Conflict-Barrack Obama Democrat

Look at the central banking system:
Federal Reserve
IMF

Look at the international ties:

Council on Foreign Relations
Trilateral Commission
World Trade Agreement
United Nations

Notice how our taxes go higher and higher with less and less representation.

Its not about Democrat vs Republican. Its Federalist vs Anti-Federalist, and the Federalists have taken total control of both Democrat and Republican parties.

I wish I had more time to go through American History, but America became pure Federalism long before WWII.