An interesting conversation

[GT40FIED]

So this week I was back up in KC so I could work a few hours. I was happy to bump into one of our regulars, Otto. Otto's an older guy who came here in 1960 after Castro took control of Cuba. It should also be noted that he served in the 26th Of July Movement during the revolution (which by no means makes him a communist). We got to talking about his days in Cuba (under Batista, before Castro) and how it compares to Amerika today and he pointed out something interesting. Although Amerika prides itself as being the cradle of democracy, it really isn't. At least not in a classical political structural way. Everyone here thinks that they can belong to one of two parties if they want to be behind the "winning" candidate. But those parties (dems. and repubs.) are, again...in the greater scheme of things, basically the same. A few fundamental differences aside, they're pretty much the same bunch of assholes. As he pointed out, a true democratic society would include something like 20 viable parties. That is...20 parties that actually had a chance. With two such similar parties and no real third party system, people become so rabid about one party or the other...and I think this election year proved that. I personally know a few people who voted straight down party lines for everything...even though they had little or no knowledge of anyone they were voting for besides Bush or Kerry. Ridiculous. So why is it that we don't have a reliable third party (or more) system here? It can't be because the two big ones are doing so well. One party serves 4 or 8 years in office, then we switch parties like it's a retarded political square dance. So what gives?