This almost mechanical source of power enables government not only to propose, but to dispose whatever they wish to dispose.
It might even violate the solemn pledges which it made at the time of general elections. True democracy, it is maintained, consists in free expression of opinion and every kind of opinion should get due representation. Under a two-party system the choice of the electors is reduced to a simple acceptance or rejection of the whole political programme of one of the parties.
There is no other alternative. The modem State, it is contended, is a complex structure with diversity of economic interests. It is, accordingly, essential that all these interests should be duly represented. By dividing the political life of the country into two parties, we deny representation to many interests. A multiple-party system provides greater elasticity and mobility and gives an opportunity to various opinion groups to organise themselves.
“It does not divide the nation into irreconcilable groups. People can associate and organise without a serious compromise on principles.” The two-party system, its critics further assert, “substitutes blind devotion for intelligent appreciation and choice in both the followers and leaders.” It creates strong vested interests and party prejudices. Extreme rigidity and discipline discount free expression of opinion and encourage spoils system.