A concrete pathway to political change
In the United States history, voting for a third party has bought political change. For instance, the Populist Party of the nineteenth century (1890-1896) forced key reforms advocated by the Populist Party that the Progressive Era (1890-1920) later embraced.
In a simplest assessment, the Populists advocated numerous reforms which were incorporated into law during the progressive era. For example, the direct election of U.S. Senators, which became law with the 17th Amendment in 1913. Labor protection laws and the graduated income tax, which is the 16th Amendment, ratified in 1913, established the federal income tax.
In 1992, Ross Perot was in favor of a balanced budget and Americans rallied behind him as a third party option. Democrats later adopted the idea of a balanced budget to stifle the rise of a third party. In the absence of a new threat, both parties are back to incurring debt.
Muslims are expected to vote third party on account of Biden Administration’s blind support for Israel that is committing genocide in Gaza.
Supporting a third party means raising the political cost for the two party system. Muslim Democrat voters are likely to increase that cost for the democrats by voting for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party or Trump. This cost is a pathway to a political change.
Muslims have raised the cost on Democrats in the three swing states, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania. In 2020 Biden won those states with 65 percent of the Muslim vote. In January 2024, Biden was receiving 12 percent of the Muslim vote. Kamala Harris is doing a bit better in these States, but essentially, per Green Party’s assessment, the Democrats have lost this election because of the Muslim vote. –Mehdi interviews Jill Stein— EXCLUSIVE
A few Muslims may choose to rally behind the democratic party. Certainly, they can’t make a case that their vote is a pathway to a political change. One is Mehdi Hasan, an influencer, is seen as a cheerleader for Kamala Harris or the Democratic party. Mehdi as an avid supporter of the Palestinian cause, criticizes Israel for committing genocide, is oddly supporting the Democratic party. Mehdi’s support for democratic party can’t stop genocide.
According to Max Blumenthal, Mehdi is supporting Kamala in hopes to rejoin the Beltway crowd. A win for Kamala would mean Democrats throwing some bread crumbs to the talented Mehdi by hosting Democrats in power on his show. Max Blumenthal also added, “Mehdi is an opportunist.”
Similarly, it is not a concrete plan as far as the remaining Americans go when candidates are dismal in both the parties and they base their vote on the logic of choosing the lesser of the two evil or they vote in favor of a candidate, as a vote against the other candidate.
Then there is still the other utopian scenario in which Americans on either side of the aisle think their party has delivered and no change is necessary.
Let’s face it, we now know that each of our Representatives are assigned an AIPAC “babysitter” to make policies, foremost in the interest of Israel. –KY Rep Thomas Massey. Those Americans that desire change, unless they raise the penalty cost on the two party system by voting for a third party, making America great may remain an illusion.
The problem in floating a third party heightens when Americans assess a potential third party, they often do so through the lens of the dominant values and frameworks of the two-party system. This has historically been a hurdle because third parties often propose values or policies that challenge mainstream norms or established ideas within the Democratic or Republican parties.
I don’t recall Americans taking issue with Ross Perot’s economic and nationalism agenda in 1992. The stage for his win was ripe till the last moment when Perot withdrew from the race due to real risks to his personal life. It disappointed Americans, which made him re-enter the race. Reentry was not good enough, the people had lost faith in Perot and the lost momentum made him bag 18 percent of the vote, which is huge.
A third party win equates to crises in democracy. As was the protest against the Vietnam War a moment of crises in democracy. A lesson learned from the protests, crisis in democracy is to be avoided at all costs in the future. Crushing the students protest on college campuses against the continued genocide of Palestinians was a forgone conclusion.
Indeed, the students protest on college campuses were successfully crushed, but the students’ protest was actually a vote to accept a third party. Social Media has exposed generation Z to the alternate truth. They have developed a different ethos than the mainstream norms and are likely to vote for a third party.
A thought to consume. When the American people land a win for the third party, the United States’ political landscape more than likely will change for the worse because the establishment will not accept it. In an extreme assessment, it could resemble the political situation in Pakistan. That is, political turmoil, and even political assassinations may ensue. Here is why.
Establishments are akin to a dynasty. In Pakistan, the military is the establishment (or a dynasty). Dynasties violate constitution and principles to ensure the survival of the dynasty. Survival at any cost makes them not follow the rule of law.
When Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan in 2018 came into power as a leader of a third party, the army was actively involved in breaking the constitutional law. The army deposed Khan’s elected government by orchestrating a vote of no confidence, political interference, extrajudicial killings, abductions and the torture of Imran Khan’s party member began. All of this followed the February 8, 2024 massive election rigging in which Khan’s party had won more than a two-third majority. In Pakistan constitutional amendments have become a norm. Imran Khan is now a political prisoner.
Should Trump win, and as soon as Trump acts as a third party agenda candidate within the Republican party, it will be an act of crisis in the American Democracy.
In the case of Trump’s presidency with adopting agendas outside of the American mainstream norms in the context of upsetting the establishment, in retaliation the Americans are expected to behave more severely than Pakistanis and will move expeditiously to a civil war to fight for their true freedom.
Conclusion
A third party historically is an agent of change, it’s a pathway to political independence and freedom from lobby and war promoters influence because it gains its strength from the grassroots–the people.
Bio: Mian Hameed is the author of MANIPULATION OF THE MIND: Our Children and Our Policy at Peril. He is a student of the U.S. and South Asia foreign policy. My articles do not present the conventional thoughts of the mainstream media. To read my work, click the Home link below.