Ridding of politcal parties

I'm glad to see my opponent back, and with a vengeance after the round 2 forfeit. I would like to start by summarizing Pro's arguments:Round 11.1 Parties are becoming weaker, voters are looking more at specific candidates policies instead of parties (witness split ticket voting)1.2 The two party system limits choices and disincentivizes detailed candidate research. Voters only see the party, not the candidate. Round 3 Pro adds details to arguments 1.1 and 1.2 and adds this:3.1 Parties keep people divided and uncooperative3.2 Parties cause candidates to be misrepresented based on party affiliation. This is a variation of 1.2. Regarding point 1.1, if this is true, then it's unclear what the concern is. Split ticket voting is a good sign too. However, I don't think it follows that the parties are unnecessary or that something must be done to eliminate them. Pro has not stated the approach to be taken to rid our political system of parties. However, since Pro's arguments point out the damaging affects of parties, this implies something must be done to eliminate them. To refute this, I must show such action is unnecessary or even harmful. The benefits I see of political parties follow:1. Parties allow like-minded citizens to join together to fight for a political cause. It's simply a natural human tendency to group in this way. 2. Parties tend to moderate policy because they must appeal across party lines, including independents. This serves as another form of checks and balances in the system. Technically, political parties are private organizations who are simply exercising their first amendment right to free association. While it is true that the two party system we have today has become something of a two-headed monster, that is not a reason to consider violating civil liberties. There are ways to address this monster that don't involve even more government intervention. For this reason, I believe political parties add value and that 1.1 has been refuted. Regarding 1.2 and 3.2, I don't believe it is political parties cause these problems. I will concede the current domination by the two major parties is a problem. However, we could end this problem in the 2012 election by simply voting for other candidates. If there is anything to rid ourselves of, it is voter apathy and laziness. In "Theory and History", Ludwig Von Mises wrote:The struggle for freedom is ultimately not resistance to autocrats or oligarchs but resistance to the despotism of public opinionIn other words, the solutions to these problems must come from actions of free will. If they do not, then we have actions of force, political actions whose results are often worse than the original problem. For these reasons, I believe 1.2 and 3.2 have been refuted. Regarding 3.1, I believe it is core beliefs that lead to people to be divisive and uncooperative. For example, some believe they have the right to tell others how to live their lives and some don't. These two camps will always be strongly divided. The same could be said of many other core believes regarding way, civil liberties, welfare programs, education. In fact, the only cases I can think of historically were nations were not divided in this way were places you certainly didn't want to be. And with that refutation, I think I covered Pro's positions and that political parties will live on.