All their scenarios for voting 3d party leading to a better society involve implicit accelerationist assumptions &, in the real world, would only come to fruition on the other side of fascism. Fuck their "the worse, the better" shit. I don't want to deliberately live through worse to spite the libs.
if third parties in the US want serious consideration they should win in some uncontested seats in local/state elections before throwing a couple million down the trash for a federal election campaign that isnt going anywhere
a big part of why the US is anomalously duopolistic for is that the quality of the third parties just suck ass, the libertarians and greens to a lesser extent did better than most before they went off the deep end
there’s no inherent reason other deep blue states can’t have something like the vermont progressive party, its just that most of the folks who could do it either waste all their time in deadend marxist orgs and green parties or they see what they’re up to and decide to just be a leftlib democrat
The lack of proportional representation is the main legal barrier IMO. And proportional representation would only result in small parties being represented according to their actual votes if we had national party slates instead of representation by district.
well yeah that’s a problem but even in other FPTP countries like canada and the UK there are sizable third parties that can at least challenge sub-national elections, scotland has been lead by a third party for most of my life
There are also efforts like the Farmers' Non-Partisan League, that virtually controlled the Upper Midwest for a while. And dual party tickets like Bryan running as both Democratic and People's Party candidate.
honestly i think dual ticketing and fusionism are almost always a mistake, the libertarians probably could have gained a lot more ground if they weren't utterly toxic to 90% of folks left of center, the peoples party probably got killed by it outright