American consumers demand choice. The assortment of products in American stores is beyond belief to anyone from the Third World. So why are only two choices for anything political acceptable to Americans?It seems totally illogical. It reminds me of the illogical change in behavior of an addict. These are people who are normal in seemingly every way yet give up everything and everyone in their lives for a drug which is a short-term high, and self-destructive. How can that be? Research has convinced me it's more than coincidence. In terms of political opinion, it's Political Cocaine.How did political parties take over the American form of government anyway? There is no provision for them in the Constitution, yet today they control basically all phases of the process of governing in the United States. There must be something that authorized their power. I looked for years and could find nothing. In fact, that is how they grew into their power. In spite of the fact that nothing authorizes them, there is also nothing that makes political parties illegal, another parallel to cocaine historically. Cocaine was perfectly legal in the United States until the early part of the 20th century. Coca-Cola started off as "cocaine-a-cola" until cocaine was made illegal in 1914!Although nothing authorized political parties in the American form of government, the fact that they were not prohibited allowed them to develop. Ironically, in light of the power they have today, the first party, the Democratic-Republican Party, was organized primarily to oppose the political power that was being assembled by the Federalists. As a result, the Democratic-Republicans are also known as the Anti-Federalists. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison saw the independence they had worked for slipping away, as the merchants and business class were building a stronger government primarily to encourage commerce. The revolution seemed doomed to becoming irrelevant.Again, how ironic: the two-party system arose to lessen the power of big money and its influence on the government! The one-word definition of the word "bastard" is illegitimate. As such, it would be a literal interpretation of the term to call political parties, lobbyists, and political action committees bastards. As many people consider the word improper, I will refrain from using it throughout this book, but I absolutely believe it to be true: there is no legal authorization for the political parties, or their children the lobbyists and political action committees. Bastards all. They exist only because there is no legislation making them illegal. Such legislation could happen. It wouldn't even take an amendment!Believing either political party will fix the system is remaining in old habits without thinking, a mild form of addiction. The political parties are the problem.Unfortunately, as the elimination of political parties in the United States is extremely unlikely, a course of action is needed that will have positive results and limit the power of the existing political parties. My current day job is as safety manager for an oilfield service company. One of the things I like most about working with safety is better understanding hazard recognition, then eliminating or mitigating. Obviously, if a hazard can be eliminated, that is the first choice. As the political system has become a hazard to us all, can we eliminate political parties? No. So we must mitigate! We must work to minimize the hazard so it doesn't bring about a negative result, the most negative being death. Unfortunately, the death of democracy doesn't seem that much of a stretch these days.The two-party system is a primary reason for the "dumbing down" of America. The real powers of the two-party system don't want well-informed citizens making their own decisions; they want over-simplified perspectives with catchy phrases that can be repeated easily without deep thought or even actual facts!