>>/77345/
There is no other side.

Machiavelli was the first to envision the uniparty as the best means of having a group of tyrants who could do whatever they like and the people would never even think to rebel.

You have two parties at least, one party moves toward whatever kind of goals the elites have for themselves (democrats) while the other does nothing but oppose change (republicans), so you have one party of forward momentum toward what you want, and another party that goes nowhere and only acts as friction to slow progress toward your goals.

Then you take turns being the ones who will liberate the people from the other party, the people will welcome you in again and again to save them from the tyranny of your coconspirators, and because the young will age up and the old will age out and information is passed imperfectly from generation to generation, the result is that the people will be perpetually bounced between the two parties, who are really just two faces of one singular party, the uniparty.

Also, by making the debates over policies that the elites don't really care about be really intense between the two heads, the policies that never get talked about which the elites do care deeply about are left to be safely passed and maintained in the background.

It's all about selling the people on an enthralling story, and making them feel as though they are a part of it. The few who know the truth are left alone fighting battles nobody can see.