Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Our two political parties: A resemblance to WrestleMania

Our two political parties: A resemblance to WrestleMania
Getty Images

Leland R. Beaumont is an independent wisdom researcher who is seeking real good. He is currently developing the Applied Wisdom curriculum on Wikiversity.

In the realm of politics, the rivalry between our two dominant political parties often resembles the spectacle and drama of a WrestleMania event. Like professional wrestlers vying for championship glory, these parties engage in heated verbal sparring and theatrical maneuvers while indulging passionate fanbases. However, as captivating as the political spectacle may be, it is essential to recognize that the current state of our political system is far from ideal. The intense competition and focus on winning elections have resulted in a polarized and dysfunctional political landscape that often fails to address the real issues faced by the nation.


One of the key parallels between WrestleMania and politics lies in the lack of genuine competition. The traditional two-party system has created a duopoly, where the focus is on maintaining power rather than delivering meaningful solutions to the people. This lack of competition stifles innovation and accountability, leaving voters with limited choices and entrenched party ideologies.

Furthermore, the quest for victory in politics often overshadows the pursuit of problem-solving. Political parties become more interested in defeating their opponents than collaborating on effective policies. As a result, we witness extreme stances, negative campaigning, and a growing sense of division among the electorate.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

However, there is hope for reforming the politics industry and steering it toward a more constructive and accountable system. The book, The Politics Industry by Katherine M. Gehl and Michael E. Porter, presents transformative solutions that aim to address the core issues plaguing our political landscape.

The first proposal is to introduce open primaries, allowing all voters, regardless of party affiliation, to participate in candidate selection. This change would increase competition and force candidates to appeal to a broader range of voters, making them more responsive to the public’s needs and concerns.

Ranked-choice voting is another reform suggested in the book. By allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference, this system reduces the spoiler effect and creates space for third-party candidates to compete more effectively. As a result, the political landscape becomes more diverse and representative of the people’s varied interests.

Addressing the problem of gerrymandering, the book recommends implementing independent

redistricting commissions. These commissions would draw electoral district boundaries impartially, eliminating the manipulation of district lines to favor one party over another. This measure would foster a fairer and more competitive electoral process.

Non-partisan leadership is a crucial aspect of the proposed solutions. By encouraging the appointment of non-partisan leaders and legislative committees, the focus shifts from ideological battles to evidence-based policy solutions. Such an approach ensures that decisions are made in the best interest of the people rather than party-driven interests.

Lastly, the book emphasizes the importance of adopting a customer-centric approach to politics. By viewing citizens as customers, politicians can concentrate on addressing the needs and concerns of the public. Building trust and delivering tangible results become the primary objectives, fostering a more constructive and accountable political landscape.

In conclusion, the similarities between our two political parties and WrestleMania highlight the dramatic and the theatrical nature of contemporary politics. However, this captivating spectacle should not distract us from the urgent need for reform. Our current political system is polarized and dysfunctional, with a focus on winning at all costs, rather than solving the real issues faced by the nation.

The solutions proposed in The Politics Industry offer a transformative path forward. By introducing open primaries, ranked-choice voting, and independent redistricting commissions, we can foster a more competitive and representative political landscape. Non-partisan leadership and a customer-centric approach will ensure that politicians prioritize the needs of the people over party interests.

Ultimately, by embracing these reforms, we can break free from the WrestleMania-like spectacle and move toward a more constructive and accountable politics industry—one that prioritizes the well-being of the nation and its citizens above all else. Only through such meaningful reform can we revitalize democracy and ensure a brighter future for our society.

ChatGPT contributed substantially to writing this essay.

Read More

Could Splits Within the GOP Over Economic Policy Hurt the Trump Administration?

With Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) by his side President Donald Trump speaks to the press following a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Tasos Katopodis

Could Splits Within the GOP Over Economic Policy Hurt the Trump Administration?

Republican U.S. Senator Josh Hawley from Missouri is an unusual combo of right and left politics—kind of like an elephant combined with a donkey combined with a polar bear. And, yet, his views may augur the future of the Republican Party.

Many people view the Republican and Democratic parties as ideological monoliths, run by hardcore partisans and implacably positioned against each other. But, in fact, both parties have their internal divisions, influenced by various outside organizations. In the GOP, an intra-party battle is brewing between an economic populist wing with its more pro-labor positions and a traditional libertarian wing with its pro-free market stances.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Language and Cultural Barriers in Healthcare Plague Seattle’s Latino Community

stethoscope on top of a clipboard

Getty Images

How Language and Cultural Barriers in Healthcare Plague Seattle’s Latino Community

A visit to the hospital can already be a stressful event for many. For those in the Seattle Latino community, language and cultural barriers present in the healthcare system can make the process even more daunting.

According to Leo Morales, a healthcare provider at UW Medicine’s LatinX Diabetes Clinic and co-director of the Latino Center for Health, communication difficulties are one of the most obvious barriers in healthcare for Latinos with limited English proficiency.

Keep ReadingShow less
How the Trump Administration Is Weakening the Enforcement of Fair Housing Laws

Kennell Staten filed a discrimination complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development after he was denied housing. His complaint was rejected.

Bryan Birks for ProPublica

How the Trump Administration Is Weakening the Enforcement of Fair Housing Laws

Kennell Staten saw Walker Courts as his best path out of homelessness, he said. The complex had some of the only subsidized apartments he knew of in his adopted hometown of Jonesboro, Arkansas, so he applied to live there again and again. But while other people seemed to sail through the leasing process, his applications went nowhere. Staten thought he knew why: He is gay. The property manager had made her feelings about that clear to him, he said. “She said I was too flamboyant,” he remembered, “that it’s a whole bunch of older people staying there and they would feel uncomfortable seeing me coming outside with a dress or skirt on.”

So Staten filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in February. It was the type of complaint that HUD used to take seriously. The agency has devoted itself to rooting out prejudice in the housing market since the Fair Housing Act was signed into law in 1968, one week after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. And, following a 2020 Supreme Court rulingthat declared that civil rights protections bar unequal treatment because of someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity, HUD considered it illegal to discriminate in housing on those grounds.

Keep ReadingShow less