The American Political Parties Are Breaking Down

[Valin]

Via Meadia:

Walter Russell Mead

October 31, 2011

 

(Snip)

American political parties are increasingly being reduced to flags of convenience; party organizations and party institutions have little influence over events. That didnt use to be true. Party leaders and officials once exercised significant power over the choice of nominees, over the careers of aspiring pols, and over patronage. These days, outside Chicago and a handful of other places, we no longer think of party bosses.

 

(Snip)

 

The appearance of unconventional figures in politics is one reflection of this trend. Strong party machines tend to produce dull and forgettable candidates. A candidate selected by a party machine might have to tell voters that I am not a crook; such a candidate would probably not need to make a television commercial to explain to voters that I am not a witch. Populist politicians tend to be more flamboyant; they have to be able to mobilize their followers. From Jesse Ventura to Al Franken and Sarah Palin, we are seeing more politicians whose ability to command attention and mobilize the base counts for more than their ability to rise patiently through the ranks of a party machine.

 

(Snip)

 

Also, the diversity of the country means that no single brand of populism is likely to sweep the whole country at the same time. The anti-Iraq war movement, the Tea Party, and the OWS movement are all examples of popular mobilizations that the Founders would have considered populist, but none of them was or is likely to be strong enough to sweep the whole country. A populist demagogue in America would face soon learn that the stirring words that bring crowds to their feet in Alabama dont have much impact in Vermont. The populism of the Bay Area is not the populism of Cedar Rapids.

 

(Snip)