"The founders were very worried that if parties developed in America, you might have something like the modern Italian system, where you have 20 different parties that divide Congress and the country and can't govern"
About this Quote
Beschloss is smuggling a warning inside what sounds like a civics lecture: faction isn’t just messy, it’s a structural threat to governing capacity. By invoking the founders, he borrows their prestige to frame partisanship not as today’s unavoidable background noise but as a problem the system was designed to resist - and perhaps failed to. The line is doing two things at once: reminding listeners that “parties” were once seen as a pathology, and quietly suggesting that America’s current political fragmentation isn’t an innovation so much as a feared outcome.
The Italy comparison is strategic shorthand. “Modern Italian system” functions as a cultural meme for chronic coalition instability, short-lived governments, and ideological splintering. He doesn’t need to litigate Italy’s actual constitutional mechanics; he’s using it as a cautionary mirror. The image of “20 different parties” exaggerates for effect, but the exaggeration is the point: it turns fragmentation into a math problem where no one can reach the threshold to act.
Subtextually, Beschloss is also pushing back against the American myth that more parties automatically equals more democracy. His anxiety is about governability, not representation: the nightmare is a Congress that accurately reflects every sliver of opinion yet can’t translate any of it into policy. In the current U.S. context - intra-party schisms, razor-thin majorities, performative brinkmanship - his remark reads less like antiquarian trivia and more like a diagnosis: the founders feared factional multiplication; we’ve achieved a version of it inside two labels.
The Italy comparison is strategic shorthand. “Modern Italian system” functions as a cultural meme for chronic coalition instability, short-lived governments, and ideological splintering. He doesn’t need to litigate Italy’s actual constitutional mechanics; he’s using it as a cautionary mirror. The image of “20 different parties” exaggerates for effect, but the exaggeration is the point: it turns fragmentation into a math problem where no one can reach the threshold to act.
Subtextually, Beschloss is also pushing back against the American myth that more parties automatically equals more democracy. His anxiety is about governability, not representation: the nightmare is a Congress that accurately reflects every sliver of opinion yet can’t translate any of it into policy. In the current U.S. context - intra-party schisms, razor-thin majorities, performative brinkmanship - his remark reads less like antiquarian trivia and more like a diagnosis: the founders feared factional multiplication; we’ve achieved a version of it inside two labels.
Quote Details
| Topic | Decision-Making |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Michael
Add to List
