>In a manner of speaking I agree with him. I call 'em the Republocrats
>myself. jks
The Democrats and Republicans are simply left-center and right-center wings of the same capitalist party. The Democrats are pro-capital and use progressive rhetoric; the Republicans are pro-capital and use conservative rhetoric. Democrats are liberal Republicans, and Republicans are conservative democrats. The only reason they vie for power in the political arena is that they represent slightly different sectors of capital: Democrats tend to represent domestic capital and the trade union bureaucracy; Repulicans tend to represent transnational capital and banking institutions. (I'm sure there are people on this list who could flesh this out more, i.e. the particular economic arrangements vis-a-vis capital.) But, in the final analysis, they are both representatives of the same class interest, the bourgeoisie.
I would venture further to say that some other "third parties" (which are really, as someone else pointed out, "second parties"), like the Greens, the Liberal and Conservative Party, the Progressive Party, Working Families Party, and even the Socialist Party, seem to be more like ideological stop-gap parties. They siphon off votes from either side in order to get the main capitalist parties to "swing more their way." But they really do not have any significant financial basis outside of the capitalists. (I am sure that the Greens have some labor unions supporting them, but I don't think it is significant). They tend to be more like your rich, eccentric uncle, if you know what I mean.
Now, it seems that in many of the European countries, things are a bit different. In countries like France and England, there are large Socialist and Labor Parties that workers vote for in large numbers, and that hold high offices. Now, of course the Socialist party in France, and for sure as hell the Labour Party in England, need a LOT of work if they are truly going to become to workers' parties that represent workers' interests. But, at least they have the ideological and organizational structure whereby struggles WITHIN these parties could feasibly end their dependence on the capitalist parties. Because they were formed in explicit opposition to Capitalist business interests. The same could not be said about the Democratic Party in the united states, though probably about 50% of workers here vote that way....
I'd love to get some comments, corrections, contribution, critique to this....
-- David