Constant Mutual Rejection: How the US Election Highlights Weaknesses in the 2-Party System

In Japan, we say, “three heads are better than two.” The idea is that, even if one ordinary person can’t come up with a good idea, ideas can be produced with the cooperation of two others, and one can produce ideas as inspired as any that could be put forward by the Buddhist symbol of wisdom, Monju Bosatsu.

The political system, or more formally, parliamentary democracy, is often thought to embody the “three heads are better than two” concept. It is better to think in big groups than to do so as an individual. The Charter Oath promulgated at the time of the Meiji Restoration stated, “Deliberative assemblies shall be widely established and all matters decided by open discussion,” and was the starting point of Japan’s parliamentary democracy.

There is a stroke of genius in the idea of discussion specifically among three people. If A and B disagree, their positions are likely to run parallel to each other without touching, resulting in an argument. But the addition of C means that good points raised by both sides can be adopted, and it becomes possible to find a realistic conclusion that is not pulled toward either extreme.

Getting back to the point, I couldn’t help but feel the U.S. election highlighted the shortcomings of the two-party system. It is notable that rather than three heads, there were just two.

Confrontation between the conservative Republican Party and the liberal Democratic Party is central to U.S. politics. Various conflicting values exist when it comes to issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage and gun control in American society. These disagreements are reflected in the antagonism between the Republican and Democratic parties.

In his term of office, President Donald Trump has stoked social discord and aggravated the problem posed when conflicting values are imposed on the confrontation between the two major parties. Politicians from both parties, as well as their supporters, openly attack each other without listening to the opposing side.

The chaos over mail-in ballots was also due to both parties failing to agree in advance on the fundamental rules of casting and counting votes. There are fears that supporters who refuse to accept the election results will riot.

The intensification of conflict between the two major parties alongside the worsening social divisions is putting American society at risk.

A similar phenomenon can be seen even in Japanese politics, which has come to be oriented toward a two-party system.

In 2009, when the Democratic Party of Japan came to power, it was expected that there would be a revitalization of politics led by the two major parties, the Liberal Democratic Party and Democratic Party of Japan. However, the political situation that has emerged after the subsequent Liberal Democratic Party administration is one in which the Liberal Democratic Party and Democratic Party of Japan and its affiliated opposition parties completely reject each other, which has normalized the absence of constructive discussion.

By engaging in debate that is obsessed with winners and losers, participants prioritize attacking their opponents for running a “nightmarish administration” and so on, and in doing so, lose the opportunity to discuss ideas and find the best solution. It becomes impossible to admit failure, which can have adverse effects such as the stubborn enactment of strange policies carried out to the end, as in the case of the government-sponsored mask policy that became known as the “abe-no-mask.”*

The public debate about how well the government is doing has become senselessly aggressive, due in part to the unique nature of expressing opinions online. Political factions and divisions in society agitate each other, and eventually the conflict leads to the breakdown of society. This is a concern for all of us, because what happens in the United States often happens in Japan as well.

Next year, it will be a quarter of a century since the two-party system’s single-member districts were introduced into Japan’s House of Representatives election in 1996. How can we apply the ancient wisdom handed down to us that “three heads are better than two” to modern Japanese politics? The time has come for us to ask this question.

*Editor’s Note: In August, former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stopped wearing his government-sponsored mask, which faced criticism for its poor quality and slow delivery to the public, a mask which became known as the “Abenomask.”