In this political argument against the two-party system, the author begins by tracing its origins back to 1642 when Charles I “declared war on his own Parliament.” This led to civil war, a government under Oliver Cromwell, political confusion, and the reinstatement of the monarchy through Charles II. Eventually, Parliament was divided on the issue of the divine rights of kings, among other things, and the two-party system of Whigs and Tories took root. When George III became England's king, his government’s excessive taxation and unfair policies imposed on the American colonies led to the American Revolution. Winn argues that by foregoing a party-less government and modeling the American government on a two-party system, the inherent corruption of such a system is detrimental to the American public. He goes on to establish his theory: Americans should become independent voters, which will eventually lead to a more representative government.
Winn presents his argument in a step-by-step method in which he successfully builds his hypothesis to show how citizens can exert more control over their government. He asserts that citizens should register as independent voters and run as Independents in elections on the city, county, and state levels. His discussion includes a comprehensive examination of the unfair way independent voters “have been prevented from being elected to public office since that time by party control of elections.” His arguments are well established through the use of historical documents and information concerning requirements to run for election, which favor the two parties in control. Winn offers much to consider about the American government in this work. His arguments are thoughtful and backed up with documentation. It is a fascinating read for both history and political science buffs or anyone interested in learning more about the government of the United States.