Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Why One Young Engineer Rejects the Two‑Party Binary

Opinion

Capitol building in Washington, DC

Government reform

Getty Images

When Joshua Summers was in elementary school, his dad would come to class to perform science experiments. One time, they did an experiment to show how lightning bugs lit up.

“That was pretty cool,” he says. There was never one moment that drew him to science, but it may have helped that his mother was a nurse and his father was a mathematician.


“I was raised in a house where the benefits of science were made known,” says Joshua. “It can help you get ahead in life if you align your beliefs with something that can be proven. You’re just going to be able to do more.”

The popular science-infused YouTube channel Vsauce and his high school physics class helped him get into the University of Pittsburgh, where he recently completed a degree in mechanical engineering. So too did Minecraft, the sandbox multiplayer game where players can gather resources and build structures.

“I think Minecraft actually had a huge effect on me,” he says. The game’s constraints made it interesting. “You can’t do everything in the game, but you have to use the building blocks of the game to do what you want. And to me, that’s what engineering is.”

These days, he designs printed circuit boards at a lab. He’s hoping to pursue graduate study in engineering, with long-term aspirations to work in a university lab or for the Department of Energy.

“Being a scientific thinker can help you avoid a lot of fallacies,” he says. “You can have as many beliefs as you want, but believing in science helps you make sure that your beliefs are aligned with reality.”

That mindset applies to realms beyond engineering—including politics. An independent voter, Joshua seeks exposure to different viewpoints. Collecting many perspectives, like data, helps him sharpen his political positions.

“Imagine you’re looking at a house,” he says. “If everyone is standing on the north side of the house and looking at it, you’re only going to have twenty-five percent of the picture. You don’t know what exists on the other sides.”

However, hearing different voices can clarify the picture: “If you have people on the other side all looking at it, and you’re all communicating, you can have a better view of the house and a more informed view.”

A more informed view also entails going beyond the Democrat-versus-Republican binary. “I think if there was a two-party system and one of the parties perfectly represented my views, maybe I wouldn’t be complaining.”

Yet, he says, nuance across many political issues prevents him from affiliating with either party. With guns, for example, he sees some value in safety regulations: “I think you can treat a gun in some ways like a car,” he says. “But I’m not someone who’s like, ‘we should ban all of them.’ I think giving some power to the common citizen is a good thing.”

On foreign policy, he doesn’t identify as a hawk. “But I’m not pro-appeasement. As a Jewish person, I look at the historical background of what happened in World War II, and obviously, I don’t want that to happen again.”

But he doesn’t allocate too much political attention to the big issues. “If everyone spends their energy and money trying to get, for example, abortion or gun laws changed, we’re at a political equilibrium. We’ve been debating these issues for hundreds of years.”

In contrast, government reform has greater potential. “I think something like entropy exists in the government. It’s like rust. In general, the forces of business interests and all of these people add rust to the machine. And I think our government could operate more efficiently, like a brand new car. We can do things to get rid of the rust.”

Some starting points include making it easier to pay taxes, imposing term limits, and instituting prohibitions on stock trading by members of Congress. These issues go beyond viewing politics through a “Democrat” or “Republican” lens.

“From a general standpoint, only having two options is a terrible thing,” he says. “If you went to the grocery store and there were only two types of bread, two types of fruit—they only had apples and oranges—and there was no variation, it would suck.”

Harry Patton is Managing Editor of Independent Pennsylvanians and a Swarthmore College Lang Social Impact Fellow.


Read More

The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
Historical documents representing founding principles of United States on flag backdrop

As the US Constitution turns 250, one expert argues it was designed as an antidote to tyranny — and warns that antidote is now at risk.

photovs/Getty Images

Why the Constitution Remains Our Defense Against Tyranny

There are many analogies for constitutions, for example, a social contract, a blueprint, a roadmap. But as we mark the 250th birthday of the United States of America, I propose another: constitution as antidote.

Constitutions are always intentionally and carefully designed, more often than not as antidotes to heal and ward off ills that a country wishes - or existentially needs - to avoid. This is, and has historically been, true all around the world, although the study of how constitutions and constitutional change can address root causes of conflict and instability has evolved greatly, allowing us to harness their healing power more effectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
A rose stands on the 9/11 Memorial for the North Tower in front of 3 and 4 World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A rose stands on the 9/11 Memorial for the North Tower in front of 3 and 4 World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

The 9/11 Town Hall That Helped Rebuild Ground Zero—and Democracy

As the nation and the world pause this week to honor and reflect on the 25th Anniversary of the terrorist attack that brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center and killed more than 3,000 people, I am moved to share a very personal reflection.

After serving as Chief of Staff to Governor Celeste of Ohio and in the Clinton-Gore Administration, where I experienced firsthand how the major institutions in our country interact to favor the powerful over we the people, I became deeply concerned about the health of our democracy. It was clear to me that, beyond voting and national polling, the American people were not at the table to influence the decisions that most affect their lives.

Keep ReadingShow less
People casting their ballots.

Voters cast their ballots at the Buckhead Library for the primary runoff election on June 16, 2026 in Atlanta, Georgia.

Jessica McGowan/Getty Images

Bridgers in the House Face Disproportionate Headwinds in the Midterms

Congressional collaboration on Capitol Hill has become a lost art.

At Bridge Grades, we compile non-partisan 3rd party data to rank members of Congress on how collaboratively (or divisively) they govern. Our thesis is that a more collaborative and bipartisan Congress benefits Americans through a healthier Legislative Branch, stronger checks-and-balances, and more win-win legislation in our common interests.

Keep ReadingShow less