Many believe the US system of governance grew out of antipathy and fear of the British System.  The British court cannot overrule a law enacted by Parliament, for example.  The fear of a “tyranny of the majority” can arguably be attributed to this unique feature of a governing system built mainly on tradition and empowered by a figurehead extending his or her ceremonial authority on those to whom the people bestow it in elections.

It’s a system maintained by a face saving rationalization, one might argue.  The people vote for a party rather than a specific person as leader.  The party votes its own leader, and he or she goes and asks for the authority to act as an agent from someone who hasn’t had much real power since 1649 when Charles I quite literally lost his head in his struggle with Parliament. 

It's Dorothy paying fealty to the Wizard of Oz as if the Wizard is in charge rather than, well, the Munchkins.

But today Britain woke up to a hung Parliament and likely wished it was in Kansas.  Britain’s Conservative Party led by David Cameron will have more than 300 seats while the Labour Party has 259 under current Prime Minister Gordon Brown.  Liberal Democrats under telegenic leader Nick Clegg came up with 54 seats.  Labour and Liberal Democrats cannot come together to get to the 325 or so needed to have a majority in the 650 seat Parliament. 

Reportedly tradition allows for the incumbent Prime Minister to try to put together a governing coalition with a minority government, so Gordon Brown has a chance to try to pull it together before taking on huge criticism for his efforts including his self immolating comment about an elderly voter being a bigot. 

Conservatives will also be working to find a way to get to 325 with a few outlying minority parties.  Nick Clegg had originally said he could not see himself throwing in with Conservatives, but has since backed off the statement.

Liberal Democrats have historically thrown in with the Labour Party, so the thought of an alliance with Tories, as conservatives are called, seems a little odd.  If you tie two cats together by their tails and hang them over a clothesline, they are most assuredly close, but one wonders if they are really getting along. 

What does it all mean? 

• Third Party Hype
  
  Nick Clegg was the poster child of the televised debates, yet his party did not do as well as expected in the pols.  It is a standard lament after most elections here.  John Andersen, George Wallace, Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader are all past flashes in our electoral pan.  The entrenched nature of the two party systems in the US and the UK gets re-enforced time and again.  
  
  A theory has been posited that the governing parties have become too extreme and strident in their rhetoric and there's a void in the middle for sensible governance with tempered rhetoric that could be filled by the emergence of a pragmatic third party.  Leave bible thumpers on one side and those seeking 50% marginal tax rates and a social program for every affliction on the other and try to rule from the middle.
  
  It seems highly unlikely.  All third party initiatives do is force one or both of the entrenched parties to create a response to the burning issues out of which the third party movement grew.
  
  So Nick Clegg can have greater input into the agenda than his 54 seats should offer him, but he won't be going to the Queen anytime soon to get the keys to the kingdom.
  
  
• Gridlock
  
  The system against which we rebelled 230-odd years ago will seemingly operate in a state of gridlock normally associated with our system.  Conservatives, assuming they ultimately prevail, will have to pick off centrist Labour members to cross over.  This ought to sound familiar to Americans. 

In this way Labour may actually be the big winner.  The economic implosion of the EU through the Achilles heel of Greek debt will consume the next government.  In some instances it is far better to be the perceived opposition party when the ruling party has a small majority.  Holding together a coalition takes far more work and skill than sitting back and criticizing that effort.

Slim governing majorities.  A need for horse trading.  Difficult economic times.  Potential for Gridlock.

Welcome to our world, Britain.  Welcome to our world.  The Founding Fathers are getting a good giggle over this one.

-- ## --

Related Articles:

Gordon Brown Self Immolates 

British Election Results