Why don’t things get better?

Donald J. Trump, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and Melania Trump

In the United States, the working class exists under a political system that it largely believes to be fair. Simultaneously, a majority of working class voters hold the belief that at least one of the two major political parties is significantly compromised by idiots, racists, or otherwise irredeemable people. Why do we find ourselves having faith in a system that we believe promotes so many failures?

The founding fathers were not in favor of a two-party system, and believed political parties were, according to History.com, “corrupt relics of the monarchical British system” preventing true democracy. The idea isn’t without merit; distilling complex issues into simpler questions broken along party lines encourages otherwise single-issue constituents to develop team mentalities and become polarized.

Plato’s Bipartisan Cave

Even worse than a two-party system is a two program system. The Fox News viewer and the CNN viewer believe that they are radically different from one another, but they have very similar experiences. They decide the framing they prefer, and then they are drenched in a bath of stories that confirm they were right. They get a clear impression of who the heroes are, and they see the villains being evil. “It’s obvious,” the viewer thinks; “Why can’t they understand it when it’s so simple?” The rise of the internet has not solved this problem, but aggravated it; social media trends are artificial, and your newsfeed is “optimized.” You can even argue about Hillary Clinton with an unidentified PR agent on various online forums (if they’re on Correct The Record’s payroll).

The clear-as-day struggle between Democrats and Republicans we observe is greatly exaggerated, and it influences what we consider important. When the 24/7 media cycle guides our focus to divisive issues, politicians have less trouble quietly unifying behind common agendas. There will always be wedge issues with existential implications such as abortion, the climate, and gun control, but our two parties at large will reliably come together in favor of things like war, fracking, and personal enrichment.

The overton window is largely determined by the mainstream public discourse

When compared on the world stage, the Overton window our political and media systems produce is very narrow, and very right-wing. For example: Universal healthcare is a given in most developed countries and considered a center-left concept, if not simply centrist. Universal healthcare in the United States is a radical idea that conjures the spectre of socialism among Republicans and Democrats alike. This tendency towards the authoritarian right can further be observed with regard to other modern topics, like police militarization and the prison industrial complex, where proposals to address systemic failures don’t often come from the politicians we’re led to celebrate.

Trump didn’t win the 2016 presidential election because he’s a natural politician, but rather, the opposite. One of Trump’s most heavily repeated (broken) promises was that he would “drain the swamp” of corrupt insiders, and people believed him because he wasn’t from DC. Hillary cinched the Democratic party’s nomination only after defeating Bernie Sanders, a relatively successful populist grassroots candidate that railed against the political establishment and refused corporate money. America is demanding candidates that won’t needlessly perpetuate its suffering for the benefit of exploitative corporations and bought politicians.

Anyone dedicating time to defeating the Republican or Democratic party, but not both, must recognize their complicity in a system that encourages two parties of the elite class to perform polarization, obfuscating what they have in common. Two wrongs don’t make a right. They make two wrongs.

Follow me on Twitter @WillEverman