By

J. Patrick Flomo

The two-party system is an American political concept and a gift to the republican form of government in the modern world.  The American two-party system was born in policy conflict between the followers of Alexander Hamilton (believers in strong central government – executive) and Thomas Jefferson (believers in states’ rights).[1]  The Liberian electorate anticipates going to the polls in 2012 to elect a new president or to re-elect President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf for a second term.   The author will briefly examine the role of multi-party systems in the 1985, 1997, and 2006 presidential elections and argue that the aftermath of those elections (1985 and 1997: chaos and civil war) provides a preponderance of evidence that the multi-party election process is bad for Liberia.  The best option is a two-party electoral process.   

In a homogenous society (linguistically and culturally), political party ideology or philosophy influence the electorate.  But not so in Liberia, where tribal affinity is still very strong. Racially (Black), Liberia is a homogenous country. But ethnically, culturally and linguistically (tribal dialects), the Republic is a heterogeneous state.  In the late 20^th century, the ruling elite recognized the strategic importance of including the masses in the political, social and economic spectrum of Liberia; they had been excluded since 1847.

The two-party system experiment flourished in Liberia from 1847 to 1877, and thereafter, Liberia became a one-party state till April 12, 1980. In 1954, an attempt was made to establish an Independent True Whig Party but it was crushed by William V.S. Tubman.  In 1964, the introduction of the Unification Policy by William V.S. Tubman created a sea change in the political calculus of Liberia. The masses could now vote, but had to vote only for the TWP. By the mid-1980s, political alliances and affiliations were based more on tribal identity than on ideology or philosophy.  In 1978, the two-party system was reborn when the Progressive Alliance of Liberia became a legitimate and well-recognized opposition party. 

There are two basic functions of political parties: a) nominate a candidate for public office, and b) galvanize the electorate to elect the nominee.  The two-party system is the only system that seems to provide checks and balances to prevent one political ideology from dominating the political system.  In a two-party competition, the prevention of electoral fraud and corruption is maintained by each party through vigilant watch over the activities of the opposing party.  It fosters a better form of electoral democracy---the understanding of the citizens’ political belief and value and how those views connect with the elite policy-making (Mackuen, B and Rabinowitz). 

The French political scientist Maurice Duveger proposed a law and a hypothesis about the relationship between the number of parties in a country and its electoral system.  The law was that “the simple-majority, single ballot favors the two-party systems.”  The law is driven by the idea that in the long run, rational voters and politicians will realize it is futile to have more than two parties competing at the national level.  The current Liberian electoral system is based on a plurality system that requires the two leading parties to determine the winning party.  This system is very expensive and has a tendency to cause run-off elections when one party does not get the majority.  

Elections are the principal methods by which ordinary citizens express dissatisfaction with their lives, support particular public policies, manifest patriotism, experience a sense of political efficacy and self-esteem, and above all, determine which set of leaders shall control the government[2].  When the electoral process becomes complex, corrupt and expensive, these electorate manifestations are not exercised.  

In February of 1978, the dawn of a new political epoch changed the political calculus of Liberia.  President William R. Tolbert supported the registration of “The Peoples Progressive Party” (PPP) as an opposition party to the ruling True Whig Party.  The idea of legitimate opposition– recognized opposition, organized and free enough in its activities — is immensely important to democratic society.[3]  This political earthquake changed the century-old single-party system into a two-party system and created a true democratic electoral process – the electorate now had a choice.

However, the dream was short lived.  It was shattered on April 12, 1980 by the first bloody military coup in Liberia.  The demolition of the True Whig Party had renewed the hopes for a rebirth of two-party system because a new birth of political freedom was at hand.  There were two strong political organizations competing for power. One, the Movement for Justice in Africa (MOJA), was interested in the Liberian intellectual class. The other, The Peoples Progressive Party (PPP), was interested in the majority.  In the intervening years of 1980 – 1984, all political party activity was suspended by the military junta. As Liberia prepared for return to civilian rule in 1985, the suspended political party activity was lifted.  The advocates for two-party system were elated because they believe that MOJA and PPP would exemplify how the two - party system was the best option for Liberia.   Most viewed MOJA and PPP as two political opposites that could provide checks and balances to each other.

The 1985 general elections again shattered the dream of a two-party system. The growth of the multiparty system was a consequence of individuals (motivated largely by tribalism) to form political parties to run for president.  The loss of this opportunity dealt a severe blow to the electoral process; it diminished the power of the opposition to restrain the ruling party from usurping absolute power.  The 1985 general elections resulted in the election of Samuel K. Doe, the so-called leader of the 1980 coup. Because of the many parties that competed in the election, there was no strong opposition party to the ruling party of Doe. 

During his presidency, Doe became what I would describe as “Grendel,” the brutally grim and power-greedy monster in Beowulf.  His government, like that of Tubman in the 1960s, squandered the second Liberian Gilded Age.   Like Grendel, his monstrous actions plunged the country into a brutal civil war and led to his ultimate brutal and barbaric death.  The wrath engendered by the 1985 general elections seemed, however, not to affect the Liberian electorate.  The first general election after the civil war (1997) was a replay of the 1985 general elections — featuring a multiplicity of parties.  The result was the election of Charles K. Taylor, a man I would compare to Morgoth Bauglir (known formerly as Melkor was the most powerful of the Anivr.  But when he turn to darkness, he became Morgoth “the great enemy” and later the ultimate antagonist of Arda from whom all the evil in the world stems) in Lord of the Rings.  Before the Taylor government collapsed under the wrath of the second civil war, his government had no strong opposition party.   The general election of 2006 was again a replay of the 1997 general elections---featuring a multiplicity of parties.  The result is that there is no viable opposition party to Sirleaf.

There is a perverse danger associated with the multiparty electoral process. It can adversely affect a political system that depends on a single majority to determine the winner in a political contest for power.  It weakens the chances for a viable opposition party and strengthens the expansive interpretation of the Executive Branch’s powers.  It has the propensity to create an “Imperial Presidency” as seen during the years of William V.S. Tubman. During the 1985 general elections — the first true democratic election since 1869 — the number of political parties in Liberia had mushroomed. They were largely based not on political ideology or party programs but on tribalism. 

The rebirth of the two-party system that began with Tolbert in 1978 was dead and its advocates were marginalized by the Doe government in the 1980s.  What was lost was a balance between two competing ideas and the ample opportunity for the electorate to weigh the political views espoused by both parties.  In addition to providing a balance, the two-party system has the capacity to filter out the undesirable elements in any political campaign for public office.  Moreover, it forces the ruling party to negotiate with the opposition to establish legislative programs.  Furthermore, it has been a linchpin of political transfer of power from one party to the other in countries like Britain, France, and the United States. 

In Liberia, it is a colossal political failure that after 160 years of experimenting with democracy, we have yet to produce an electoral process that clearly defines the candidates during election processes, and opposition post-election to restrain the ruling party from having “expansive executive power.”   The two – party system fosters strong legislative power and enhance the principle of Separation of Powers.  In 2012, Liberia will have a general election.  My fear is that the 2012 general elections will be a replay of 1985, 1997, and 2006 with no strong opposition party.  An expansive executive power with no opposition is anathema to any republican form of government.  The difference between democratic and totalitarian forms of government is the strict regard that the former has for civil liberties; that make competitive party systems possible.  Constitutional democracies require equal judicial treatment of citizens of all party persuasions.[4]   In order to have a functioning democracy in Liberia, the electoral process has to be democratic, simple and inexpensive.  The two – party system must be the mainstay of the electoral process for Liberia.