The American political season is in full swing, with the presidential, local and state elections set for November 2024, as mandated by the Constitution. This grand spectacle of the world's "greatest" democracy presents a unique opportunity to analyse the significant policy differences between the Republican and Democratic parties-ironically, the two dominant political forces representing one of the most pluralistic nations for nearly 200 years.

The absence of viable alternatives to these two parties raises global concerns about the concentration of power and influence. Nevertheless, a closer examination of their key policy distinctions offers valuable insights for Nepal, a "young" republic, as it shapes its own political future.

So what are some of the major political issues that harken back in the American lexicon for the last 70 years? I will argue that all of the cacophony and demagoguery can be boiled down to two inter-related issues: taxation and immigration.

Let's start with taxes. Americans often say: "There are only two certainties in life: taxes and death." It's no secret that the electorate is cautious about how much of their wealth is funneled to the government. Yet, most Americans agree that paying a "reasonable" share of taxes to local and federal authorities is a basic civic duty.

I'm not here to debate how much tax is "too much" or "too little". Those judgements depend on individual perspectives of fairness and justice.

Historically, the Democratic Party, representing "blue states", favours progressive taxation, while the Republican Party, representing "red states", emphasises personal autonomy. California, a reliable blue state, imposes significantly higher taxes than Texas, its red state counterpart.

Does relying on the government foster complacency and stifle entrepreneurship, innovation, and risk-taking-qualities essential to a robust economy? This is an argument frequently put forth by the Republican Party, sometimes in a combative manner by some of its recalcitrant elected officials.

On the other hand, does a more generous welfare state separate the so-called "first world" from the "third world"? This is a viewpoint strongly supported by Democratic party advocates in a dogmatic manner.

As a young federal republic, Nepal must face the reality of how much its citizens are willing to contribute in taxes. The adoption of the constitution nearly a decade ago was a landmark achievement, but the people should recognise that taxation is the foundation of federalism.

Now, onto the more divisive issue: immigration. In this issue, both Republicans and Democrats manipulate public sentiment through a mix of fear and hope. Republicans advocate for limiting immigration in a country founded by immigrants. They claim to support "tax-paying" educated foreigners who won't burden the already overstretched welfare state. However, these views often drift toward xenophobia, igniting their base.

Meanwhile, Democrats offer promises that frequently fail to materialise into concrete legislative reforms, leaving 15 to 20 million undocumented immigrants in a perpetual state of uncertainty.

In truth, the public's attitudes towards immigration and chain migration have become the zeitgeist of the post-globalisation era. From the rise of far-right groups in Europe to the election of nationalist leaders, from Brexit to Japan's demographic crisis, it's evident that developed nations are grappling with the question of how many "outsiders" – who may not look, act, speak, or live like them – they are willing to integrate into their societies.

Historically, American society has faced immigration challenges before. Waves of Irish and German immigrants were followed by arrivals from Southern and Eastern Europe. Immigrants like the Irish and Italians endured prejudice similar to what Mexican and South Asian immigrants experience today. However, over time, second- and third-generation immigrants tend to assimilate, reducing societal tensions.

Other issues, such as climate change, abortion rights, universal health care, and the Supreme Court reforms, also stir political debate. But, many of these concerns intersect with the broader issues of taxation and immigration. Immigrants, once naturalised, can shift electoral outcomes.

Ultimately, discussions about taxes and immigration are about power and authority. As a species, we are reluctant to relinquish power voluntarily, which explains why we often seek comfort in the idea of divine authority.

So, during this American political season, when you hear partisan talking points, ask yourself where these arguments ideologically align on the issues of taxation and immigration. Before allowing your personal biases to take over, remember that bias can cloud judgement, and even the most intellectual person, when influenced by amnesia, can sound surprisingly uninformed.

Pathak is education management consultant at Islington College and founder of brand voyageride.com.