TWO PARTY SYSTEMS

A two-party system is a party system where two major political parties dominate the political
landscape. At any point in time, one of the two parties typically holds a majority in
the legislature and is usually referred to as the majority or governing party while the other is
the minority or opposition party. Around the world, the term has different senses.

The United States has always had a two-party system, first in the opposition between the
Federalists and the Anti-Federalists and then in the competition between the Republicans and the
Democrats. There have been frequent third-party movements in the history of the country, but
they have always failed.

Great Britain has had two successive two-party alignments: Conservative and Liberal prior to
1914 and Conservative and Labour since 1935. The period from 1920 to 1935 constituted an
intermediate phase between the two. Britain’s Conservative Party is actually a Conservative-
Liberal Party, resulting from a fusion of the essential elements of the two great 19th-century
parties. Despite the name Conservative, its ideology corresponds to political and
economic liberalism.

Advantages

Some historians have suggested that two-party systems promote centrism and encourage political
parties to find common positions which appeal to wide swaths of the electorate. It can lead to
political stability which leads, in turn, to economic growth.

Historians stated that the two-party has been identified as simpler since there are fewer voting
choices for the voters to cast vote.

Disadvantages

Two-party systems have been criticized for downplaying alternative views being less
competitive.

It was criticized that the two arty systems can bring down the economic growth of the country if
they failed to work well for the progress
So, if there is a competition in the form of Third-Party, there will be economic and deveoment in
the country.

The two-party system obtains when the political loyalties of the voters are rather evenly divided
between two great political parties. Additional parties are either non-existent or relatively
powerless to affect popular decision on public issues. The two-party system has been traditional
in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand. The United States also has had for more than one
hundred years a stable two-party system.

Merits of the Two Party System

The two-party system has the following advantages :

1. Stable Governments. The two-party system gives stability to the government. Where there is
a multiparty systems and the Government depends for is existence upon the support of many
groups or parties, ihere can be no stability in the government. Such a government can never be
sure of continued support to its policies and programme. Under two-party system, on the other
hand, one party is sure to have an absolute majority. barring Exceptional circumstances.

2. Unity in the Cabinet. In Britain, New England, Australia and other countries political unity is
achieved by the party character of the Cabinet. All 1S members are united together by their
belief in the same political ideas and beliefs, because they belong to the same political party, On
the other hand, the coalition governments luck the unity required for effective formulation of
coherent policies.

3. Effective Role of the Opposition. The two-party system disciplines political opposition.
Criticism advanced by opposition will be "well infomed criticism", since some of the cities will
be persons who have held ministerial posts and now the implications of their land statements. It
will also be a responsible criticism, because the critics have a reasonable chance to change places
with their political rivals. In fact, the opposition in Britain has come to be accepted as a sort of
government in reserve" almost a branch of the government itself.

4. It is easy to fix Responsibility for Failures of the Government.

The two-party system fixes up political responsibility quotes clearly. The party in power is made
squarely responsible for the formulation and implementation of policies, and the party-in
opposition for sustained criticism.

5. Government is the Result of the Direct Choice of the Electorate.

Such a system is a truly democratic system. The electorate can make a clear choice between the
two parties.

That is why it is said government in Britain and the United States is chosen by the people and is
also voted out by them. In a multi party system such a clear choice of parties is seldom available
to the voters, In brief, as Harold Laski puts it, the two party system enables the government to
drive its policy to the statute book, t makes know and intelligible the results of its failure. It
brings alternative government into immediate being"

Crițicism of the Two-Party System

When all this can be said in praise of the Two-party system, it is only fair to add that it has been
criticised on the following grounds:

1. People are left only with two Alternatives. The party organisations have become strong
enough virtually to force their own candidates upon the electorate. Third party candidates or
independents have very little chance of getting elected to the House. Some well-known writers
are of the view that Independents can be a very great asset to the legislature, because they are not
partisan in their beliefs and judge every issue on its merit.

2. Party Organizations stifle Free Criticism. The party organisations exert strong pressure on
their members, so that in the name of discipline all free criticism is suppressed The present day
politicians have for all practical purpose, become professional politicians The members of the
legislature are too dependent on their salary and position to resist their party bosses. It is said
they have almost become "voting robots" and do always vote as per dictates of the party-bosses.
In the British House of Commons, for instance, there is no cross voting and no voice raised
against the leaders.
3. Party Programmes are Evasive, Experience has shown that under a two-party system, no
party can afford to be .extremist. Each of the parties aims at making its appeal as broad-based as
it possibly can, so that it may win the support of the majority of the voters. As a result, party
leaders tend to be pragmatic, and nor idealists. They promise all types of things to all sections of
the society. In fact, the two parties "are both like and unlike each other." How could the
Republicans or the Democrats in America, for instance, win any of the Presidential elections
unless they could gain support of both North and South, and without Support for wage-earners as
well as propertied interests? The parties are, in fact, wide coalitions" and contain contradictory
clements.

The two-party system is generally regarded as essential to a stable popular government, or at

least an effective means of organising public opinion in a coumy.

USA & UK

Political parties are indispensable part of the governments and the democracies. Parties help
taking control of the governments and shaping of the democracies. Every state has different type
of party system. Even though these systems are the same, they can approve differently from each
other in some countries. The purpose of this essay to compare the USA and the United Kingdom
in terms of two party system and also discuss their differences and similarities. Defining a party
is hard and up until today many people have tried to define in a certain framework. If necessary
to summarize meaning of the political party, the political parties are institutions that gather
people under same ideological roots, people who have certain beliefs and believe same particular
principles what government should be or should not be or how government behave. The political
parties want to have control of the government, to capture and use political office. They use
legitimate means such as elections. By the help of the elections they can come to power or can
stay in opposition side. Sometimes they may not want to join to the elections , this situation is
also legitimate. The political parties have interests and they can represent one or more interest in
the society. There are various party systems that bring together the political parties or promote
one party and shape the regime of the government. One of them is the two party system. A two-
party system is a system that is dominated by the two major parties and in the elections the voters
make a choice among these political parties. The two parties have equal power for winning
government. Actually there are a number of party but only two have sufficient electoral strength.
The power alternates between them and these parties are electable. There are both advantages
and disadvantages about two-party system. The advantage of this system is that two-party system

provides stability. It is also very easy for voters since they only have to choose between two
runners; whereas, in a multi-party system voters must choose between many runners. For
example, if a voter doesn’t like one runner they just have to choose the other.1 The
disadvantages of the two-party system is that the system restricts choices and there are not
enough alternatives for voters. Critics say that a two-party system limits representation and the
range of policies considered for enactment.2 It was an advantage that if a voter did not want to
choose the one party, he or she could choose the other party. So, if he or she does not like the
other option? There will be a problem. This situation can be disadvantageous. This system may
promote conflicts and argumentations. The two-party system is created in democracies such as
the United Kingdom and the United States of America. In the United Kingdom there are two
parties; the Labour Party and the Conservative Party. These parties are the largest parties of the
UK.

On the other hand the USA’s two biggest parties are the Democrat Party and the Republican
Party. These countries are approving the same party system but British two-party system is
different from American two-party system. This difference results from the British parliamentary
system and American presidential system. The important feature of the two-party system is to be
majoritarian. In British parliamentarian system there is a concert or union between legislative
and executive powers. but on the contrary Britain there is separation of powers in an presidential
system, like the USA. According to Florin Fesnic: ‘’ British two-partyism is very different from
the American two-partyism. The institutional context is crucial for how a two-party system
actually works and for its effects on policymaking. The key distinction here is between
America's presidential system and Britain's parliamentary system. Although the logic of a two-
party system is inherently majoritarian, the existence of separation of powers opens the door for
divided government. This can mitigate the winner-takes-all effect of the two-party system when,
as it is often the case in the United States, one party is in control of Congress and the other party
controls the White House. The British parliamentary system, with its fusion of legislative and
executive powers, prevents such an occurrence. In a parliamentary regime, a two-party system
means that the party that has a majority in the legislature is also forming the government. Such
single-party governments have a higher life expectancy than multiparty governments. ‘’

Both American and British party systems give possibility in order to choose easily for the voters
by the help of two-party system. The power always changes hands among two parties. Two-party
system has different features in the USA and the UK. Another difference proceeds from the party
discipline. In the USA the parties is not very different from each other in terms of sociological
background and ideologies. Party discipline and ideology is weaker than the UK. Therefore
functioning of the two-party system is softer than the UK. This softness is beneficial in election
of the president and functioning of the separation of powers principle. In relationship between
the legislative and the executive the tie among the parties does not have any importance. Also the
president can appoint people who are members of the opposition party as a minister in his own
cabinet. This situation prevents conflicts in terms of constituting a concert and color between two
parties. In the United States, the Democratic and Republican Parties absolutely dominate federal
and state elections with independents securing only small proportions of the vote.
American parties are undisciplined and party dissent within itself is more common. According to
Foster & Muste (1992): ‘’The United States has always had weak parties with “a less
programmatic basis and fewer formal membership processes than the parties of other western
countries.‘’ British parties are disciplined and centralized party and the system is more strict
than the USA. British parties on the other hand do have a long ideological tradition. However,
there has been a steady decline in party affiliation, too. Two party in the UK have a
homogeneous structure and by this means they provide unanimity. Because there are hard
sanctions for people who vote for ideas that are against the party view, there is a union within
party. Therefore the government provide authority and efficiency. Again according to Florin
Fesnic: ‘’British parties are centralized and disciplined, and representatives from the same party
tend to vote as a bloc. Those who follow the party line enhance their chances for being rewarded
in the future with a better position in the government, and party dissidence is rare.’’
On the contrary in the UK this situation is different in the USA. The senators who come to the
congress in order to represent their parties can vote in direction of their personal views without
any consulting with the his own party’s ideas. In other words republican-democrat differentiation
does not reflect opposition in the congresses. For this reason American soft two-party system is
more close to the multiple party systems according to British strict two-party system. Strict two-
party system parliamentarian mechanism functions well with the executive. Britain two-party
system has characteristic of this kind of two-party structure, parliamentarian regime functions
well. But, in the USA there are problems in the functioning and the government is undecided and
less efficient. The party systems brings such difficulties to the regime. British system has more
effective executive organ because there are no disputes between the powers. The reason of the
differences in two-party system of the USA and the UK can be considered as their societies and
geographies.
For example the USA is bigger than the UK in terms of both geography and population and the
USA has more diverse society. As a result of this situation the USA’s representatives represent
more diverse people than the UK. Therefore the USA’s parties more divided.
There is a similarity with regard to the legislative branch of government, i.e. Congress in
America and Parliament in Britain. They are both bi-cameral (meaning that they have two
chambers), consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the USA and the House
of Commons and the House of Lords in Britain. Two-party system has a moderating effect.
Because people have only two options for making a choice. If there is a problem or conflict in
one side, people focuses on the other. Britain is more successful in policy positions because of its
moderate actions. Currently, British politics is less polarized. At the same time, there is a
widening policy gap between the positions endorsed by the Republicans and the Democrats in
the United States. Because the USA has more diversity. As a result the United States of America
and the United Kingdom’s are two example countries that approve the two-party system. Even
though they use the same party system, there are differences between in their functioning. There
can be a few reasonsfor this difference. The most important of them is that Britain has a strict
two-party structure, the USA, on the contrary, has a soft two-party structure. This differentiation
proceeds from Britain’s parliamentarian system and America’s presidential system. America
varies from Britain in terms of relations between the powers. There is a fusion between
legislative and executive in Britain, but there is a separation of powers in America’s presidential
system. Another reason results from the difference between Britain’s and America’s party
structures. For example political parties in Britain are based on a powerful ideology therefore
they are more disciplined and centralized. The members of the parties have to act in direction of
parties’ general view. There are some sanctions for people who act against the general view.
Therefore British parties are more disciplined and British two-party system is more strict. On the
other hand American political parties are decentralized and less disciplined. Party discipline and
ideology is more weaker than the Britain. For example the members of the parties can act in
direction of their personal views. If they want, they can act without consultation of their own
parties. This situation shows that there is an undisciplined part structure in America. On the other
hand America is a larger country than Britain in terms of both population and geography.
Therefore America’s population is more diverse and American representatives have to address to
a wider mass. Much as the same party system is approved in the USA and the UK. They differ
from each other in some points.