What would happen with a global political party?

[Jessica]

I had this idea and I want to know what people think about why it would or wouldn't work/why it would be bad or good/general thoughts

Imagine if people in different countries formed a new political party, each working as an independent party within that country, but openly considered part one branch of a global party.


???

[6-eyed]

Global and government are two words that don’t belong together.

One political party with that much power could dictate other countries from outside their border.

[WritersPanic]

It seems to me that if we were capable of pulling together a global politick, we wouldn't actually need politics at all. Logic would dictate according to necessity. We would also see an erosion of culture as the planet slipped into a common framework. Languages would need to be standardized as would economies.

Since most humans don't give a flying fuck about anyone but themselves, I don't think altruism will bring this about. I think it will take an existential threat to the planet to drive unity. However, once the asteroid is nuked, the aliens are hurled into the sun or the microbe is finally defeated, people will go back to looking out for number one.

[Din Djarin]

Global and government are two words that don’t belong together.

One political party with that much power could dictate other countries from outside their border.

Global government doesn't equal or mean having one political party.

[Din Djarin]

I had this idea and I want to know what people think about why it would or wouldn't work/why it would be bad or good/general thoughts

Imagine if people in different countries formed a new political party, each working as an independent party within that country, but openly considered part one branch of a global party.


???

I think people are already doing this in some form. What I think about it? I am positive about a political party that looks and is active across borders at first instance. Wether it actually is positive depends on the details as always :P But yes, good idea, that is already acted upon

[Jessica]

Global government doesn't equal or mean having one political party.

yes i know. this thread is about the concept of having one political party though.
not just ..boom overnight.. they rule everywhere
but different branches in various countries, wherever they could form, who could gradually work to get in power one by one.

edit for your second post.. where is it acted upon?

[Din Djarin]

I added 6-eyeds quote to my first post to make sure that was who I was reacting to there.

Ah ok, its about having one politicial party?? That is obviously a disastrous idea. Look at China.

[neonspectraltoast]

I hope we're just in a dark time. It would be cool if someday we were all on the same side, without ruining culture in the process. I have to believe this isn't our brightest moment.

It's safest in my and Jessica's hands, so let's get the ball rolling on this party and see what happens.

[Din Djarin]

yes i know. this thread is about the concept of having one political party though.
not just ..boom overnight.. they rule everywhere
but different branches in various countries, wherever they could form, who could gradually work to get in power one by one.

edit for your second post.. where is it acted upon?

Having a political party that is active/has branches in other countries is a very good idea imo. We see examples of it in Europe with green parties, socialist parties, christian parties and right wing parties all working together with their sister parties in other countries. Of course being in the EU together stimulated this cooperation.

Why do you propose the idea of having one political party? In what way does that limitation seem beneficial to you? It seems like a guaranteed way of giving too much power to one group of people who could keep it and abuse it (have to agree with 6-eyed there).
The idea of creating a new party with branches in various countries sound not bad at all on itself, but it does sound needlessly bad (pointless almost I would say) if it is supposed to be the ONLY political party.

slightly diff idea to get political influence: Another interesting idea that came from a member of a youth branch of one established political party in the Netherlands: join as a bunch of youth/uounger members with similar ideas a lot of diff established political parties, become a constructive member while working towards your common goals with the younger members who joined the other parties :-D

[Jessica]

yeah that last part.. i like that..
i want to write a fictional novel inspiring teenagers in particular to think about changing the political systems, since i think the entrenched ones we have are unfixable without revolutionary change.

[Din Djarin]

Yeah, I found it really inspiring to take notice of that guy spreading that idea. He was really trying to put it into action.

You can not do such a thing without remaining loyal/somewhat in touch with the ideals and goals of the party you joined though. Otherwise you will be (validly) regarded as incompatibel with the party ideals or a radical and expelled.
This happend recently in the youth branch of the dutch socialist party (SP), where certain members were thoroughly dissatisfied with the direction the party is going, and wanted to steer it into a purer socialist (even with communist tendencies according to the established party residents lol) direction.
Jessica

[Jessica]

Din Djarin ...sometimes your lack of comprehension amazes me. it's like you read the first sentence of my post and responded to it.
No, NOT one political party for a single country..

Say that you, Neon and I all formed a single party manifesto and ideals, what we believe in, gave it a name.. and made it into a real thing in our respective countries.. so say for eg. it's "The Treefort Party" ..Ignoring the fact that in current times we basically have two parties and go back and forth between them.. imagine that Treefort party has become significant in all three countries.. the country still has a range of parties.. but Treefort would openly say.. if you vote us in, we'll work with our counterparts in the other countries where Treefort exists to create unity and good relations. If TF was in power in the states.. as the UK branch I would appeal to public to vote me in so that the US and the UK would effectively be being run by the same party.

I'm not saying this is a good idea. And clearly it could be good or bad, depending on many factors.. but I wanted to get other people's perspectives on where those problems are.

EDIT.. since you do seem to understand a LITTLE more based on following post.. yeah, different branches.. NOWHERE did I say it was meant to be the ONLY party. You just filled that detail in yourself.

[Amerijuanican]

You make a good case here .. but lets say five countries .. NZ and Canada too.
With that, I think we have a good goal.

[Jessica]

Amerijuanican oh yes.. definitely. Any country that had people who wanted to form one. I didn't want to confuse Asmo with too many places in the example ; )

[Din Djarin]

Ah yes, so I understood correctly the first time. It strives to be the biggest party, with having branches in several countries, and if it gets succesful there too they could have a bigger impact on global issues by working together (to put it in a summarized way :P).
Sounds good.
I can't go into possible problems at this point because it is a general concept. I don't see problems with this general concept yet, although I'm sure they could occur :P But they depend on non established details. If the goal is to get into power/become the biggest in several countries then I would simply conclude the biggest problem, or hey, lets just call it a challenge, is to get those votes :P

[Dax]

Political parties are in general selfish and inward looking entities. They seldom if ever consider the well being of their own supporters, leave alone the opposition. They are easily influenced by those who fund them and end up trying to please their sponsors instead of the electorate.

Personally I would prefer it if the party winning the election gave those who actually voted them into power the right to choose their President, Prime Minister, leader or whatever. In that way we will at least get the leader we want and not have someone foisted upon us by those who have bankrolled the winning party.

[Din Djarin]

Din Djarin ...sometimes your lack of comprehension amazes me. it's like you read the first sentence of my post and responded to it.
No, NOT one political party for a single country..

Say that you, Neon and I all formed a single party manifesto and ideals, what we believe in, gave it a name.. and made it into a real thing in our respective countries.. so say for eg. it's "The Treefort Party" ..Ignoring the fact that in current times we basically have two parties and go back and forth between them..

I wanted to say about the bolded sentence, that does not has to be a given either. Although it is really hard to change if the established parties do not want to change this and a majority of the voters keeps supporting this system. In my country we have a different situation. Of course having a shitload of meaningful parties and a coalition government that can consist of parties with opposite ideals brings forth their own issues :P But I dig it in regards of adequate representation and how it forces cooperation

[Jessica]

I wanted to say about the bolded sentence, that does not has to be a given either. Although it is really hard to change if the established parties do not want to change this and a majority of the voters keeps supporting this system. In my country we have a different situation. Of course having a shitload of meaningful parties and a coalition government that can consist of parties with opposite ideals brings forth their own issues :P But I dig it in regards of adequate representation and how it forces cooperation

oh yeah, it definitely doesn't have to be that way.. hence why i said IGNORING that fact.. i just was predicting someone was going to tell me that was one of the reasons it wouldn't work.

[Din Djarin]

oh yeah, it definitely doesn't have to be that way.. hence why i said IGNORING that fact.. i just was predicting someone was going to tell me that was one of the reasons it wouldn't work.

If even only a big minority of voters would make it a real big issue it could change in like 2 elections. It seems that in the US voters are ripe for this change. They 'only' have to unite and organize on this issue and break it to the establishment. Yes, easier said than done, but that's partly because the majority don't involve themselves beyond casting their vote or even worse don't vote at all.

[Undies]

It seems that in the US voters are ripe for this change.

it's needed now more than ever, but it seems to me that voters are more invested in the current two party system than they ever have been in my lifetime at least. when i was a kid people actually talked about third parties, even if they didn't generally vote for them. now almost every person is on the "us versus them" warpath.