Accepting Answers...
   « »

state disadvantages of multi party system .


Posted- 2030 days ago
7 Answers

Answer This
Best Answer

 Multi party system becomes merely a race , political competition.

no party do anything for their peopleas they think that they have  2 quit after 5 years

 
Best Answer
it delays the decision making of parliament and it is very near to dictatorship
 
Best Answer

Multi party system becomes merely a race , political competition.

no party do anything for their peopleas they think that they have  2 quit after 5 years

 
 
Best Answer
  • Narrowly based ideological factions can force the major parties to help them in exchange for their support. This can create a chaotic and fluctuating system of alliances that intensifies confusion among voters. Additionally, this "tie-breaker" influence minor parties achieve can serve to undermine the true positions of the major parties.
  • The ruling party's majority may still be based on a smaller segment of the population than coalition governments due to lower turnout, and votes cast that do not lead to the desired representative [1]. The majority of this body (20% plus one) rules the nation. [2]
  • Legislative representation can skew wildly from the actual percentage of the vote a party wins.
  • Elections based on geographical district representation can become subject to gerrymandering.
  • If one of the two parties becomes weak, a dominant-party system may develop. In fact, a dominant party system has developed in almost every single country that has used first past the post (FPTP), at least at a regional level. In the US, the Democrats often landslided in the southern portion up until the late 20th century, winning almost every seat available in most states in a phenomenon known as the Solid South. Mexico had a dominant party system until constitutional reforms added fairer proportional representation to the scheme.
  • Campaign contributions can more easily corrupt a two-party system - since it has fewer players to receive donations.
  • In The Federalist No. 10, James Madison decried the liability of representative legislatures to be controlled by single factions holding a majority of the seats. Madison argues that because getting rid of factions is nearly impossible and leads to highly undesirable side-effects, ensuring that all factions are represented reduces the likelihood that any one faction will control all of the seats and institute any and all changes they desire, thus preventing majority tyranny.[3] A two-party system often leads to one faction winning a majority of the seats and governing without compromise. [4] A multi-party system or proportional non-partisan system could be more consensus-based, allowing for laws to be passed less hastily and with more sincere debate on the issues.
  • In the plurality system which encourages two-party system, most voters have perforce to engage in tactical voting, voting for candidates that may not be their first choice - either to help a perceived potential "winner" or to block a potential enemy.
  • Similarly, some voters tend to have one issue that highly motivates - or even completely motivates - which party they will vote for. Because two dominant, opposing parties tend to take opposite sides on many issues, these "one issue voters" will automatically vote for the party that represents their view on the one issue, even though they may disagree with most of their other positions. Candidates often concentrate on popular issues (especially issues considered "moral" or ethical in character) to influence voters who are undecided or "swing voters." The issue at hand tends to be one that sparks a lot of emotion - in the United States, for example, the issue of abortion rights carries strong emotions on both sides of the fence, and a candidate's position on those rights is, for some voters, the deciding factor, even if most of their political ideals are espoused by the other candidate.
  • Smaller parties suffer from under-representation: they will not receive a number of seats in the country's assembly that reflects the number of votes they receive (and therefore the amount of support they could or do receive). Some see this as undemocratic, arguing that citizens who vote for small parties should receive fair representation. Others see it as fair to discourage unpopular opinions.
  • Special interests can establish a lock on political discourse, media, etc. and establish a narrow dominant ideology which both parties serve so that in effect it is a one-party system tending to corporatism.
 
Best Answer
Multi-party system or coalition governments which form due to their inefficiency to win majority singly. The major disadvantage is that there will surely be no unity in what the representatives speak...as the govt itself is a mixture of many parties with different ideologies. If the parties are broad-minded and accomodate each other's demands, then multi-party system forms base for development but in reality, this is not happening. For instance, the UPA govt...and the left parties who withdrew support from Upa
 
Best Answer

Multi party system becomes merely a race , political competition.

no party do anything for their peopleas they think that they have  2 quit after 5 years

 

 

 
Best Answer

1 Lead to alliances, which at times create political uncertainity / instability

2 Parties fail to grow beyond the regional vision