John43620 saidHell No! ...The adoption of the parliamentary system could lead to another civil war and we don't need that.
A tyranny of the majority could occur in our US system, too, if any one party attained an overwhelming number of seats in Congress. This fear was expressed in the Federalist Papers over 200 years ago.
Each system has its strengths and weaknesses. The English parliamentary system that so enraged our colonial forbearers in the 1770s (it wasn't entirely about King George III), has today evolved into a fair & democratic institution that is rightfully admired by free peoples around the world.
It's really about what you do with your system of government, and how it performs in the real world. Political theory is one thing, but results are another. Pure communism can be made to look good on paper, but nobody has yet managed to make it to mean anything but dictatorship and oppression in reality.
I once thought, and indeed was taught in school, that our American system was immune to the corrupt & failed examples that litter history. Now after the last 8 years I'm not so sure.
A switch to parliamentary government may not be needed. But rather Constitutional changes that more clearly define the relative roles of the Executive and Congress, so that such radical and un-American concepts as a "Unitary Presidency" can never rear their ugly Fascist heads again.