|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rice Thresher
Phone:
|
The emperor wears no clothes The "Republicrat strangle-hold on our political system" aside, this year's presidential election might have included a promising aspect of American democracy: a national third-party campaign in the proud American tradition of Norman Thomas, two Wallaces (no relation), John Anderson and Gary Hart. The most visible proponent of this year's splinter group wants to decrease corporate influence on American lives and seeks a trade policy that will protect the interests of American workers. This rabble-rouser is so subversive that he went to Seattle to protest against the World Trade Organization on behalf of a whole coalition of radicals. I speak not of Ralph Nader, however, nor of the clove-smoking, tofu-eating freaks who run the Green Party. I speak of Pat Buchanan and the nation's one true third party, the Reform Party. The Greens will sound their objections: The Reform Party lacks a coherent agenda. It's Nader and the Greens who represent the Republicrats' worst ideological nightmare. The Greens are polling much better anyway. And Pat Buchanan - he's a ... a fascist! These complaints, however, merely underscore the Reform Party's potential primacy over the Green Party in forging a threat to two-party, one-party rule by the Republicrats. First off, the Reform Party's pan-ideological soup is what makes it a viable contestant in American politics. The Republicans and Democrats have survived for so long by rallying behind incremental platforms which confer benefits on targeted voting blocs but resist the urge to propose fundamental - in history, read "bloody" - change. The Reformers also could have trounced the Greens in potential power because Pat Buchanan, while in many ways a fascist, cannot dominate his party as thoroughly as Ralph Nader dominates his. Unfortunately, he would like to, and his overtures toward domination now appear to be the downfall of his party. The Reform Party had scheduled its convention for early August in Long Beach, Cal., but everyone got overenthusiastic and they ended up having to throw two. All this in celebration of a man I suspect we will ridicule less thoroughly in future years, H. Ross Perot. Unlike all the other arrogant third-party gurus who've struck out on their own this century, good ol' Ross built state-level affiliates and even shepherded a few allies to electoral success at the local level. And, more important, after it was clear that his political career had run its hilarious course, Ross stepped aside and let other people play with his money. Problem was that Buchanan struck a deal with party leaders to assume control in exchange for tempering his more directly discriminatory views. Run on the free trade issue, they said, and we'll hand you the national party structure. Then John Hagelin, a professor from Iowa - Maharishi International University, no less - entered the fray. Hagelin is a respected physicist who has frequently consulted for the government. Over time, he's developed some tofu-eater ideas, including developing renewable energy sources, tightening regulatory controls on pharmaceutical companies and solving crime through - get this - mass meditation. (On the day he marched on Washington to hold a peacemaking mass meditation session, the crime rate soared.) Buchanan didn't appreciate Hagelin's challenge for two reasons. First, Buchanan wanted to win. The second was that Hagelin already represented the Natural Law Party and therefore refused to support the Reform Party in the event that Buchanan won its nomination. Hagelin, for his part, had two objections to Buchanan. First, Buchanan sent busloads of his "Buchanan Brigades" all over the country to elect themselves delegates to the Reform convention. This seemed to violate the venerated tradition, so assiduously upheld in twentieth-century Chicago, that people should vote where they live. Hagelin's second criticism was personal: Buchanan is an extremist, homophobic, protectionist, misogynistic hyper- conservative fascist. Yet Buchanan, for a blissful six months on the campaign trail, had toned down his fascist rhetoric to drive home his staunch positions on free trade and the containment of American empire. Then the LBC exploded. The delegates, all essentially handpicked by Buchanan, voted to discard the results of the Reform Party's national mail-in primary and directly nominate their leader for the presidency. Hagelin's faithful objected to this legal flouting of democratic principle and, after some ungentlemanly pushing and shoving, held an impromptu convention across the street at which they nominated the physicist. Buchanan, invigorated by the trench-warfare politics, rose to address the main convention with the most vituperative, angst-ridden, uncompromisingly fascist speech of his life. The courts must still decide which candidate should receive the Reform Party's campaign funds, but whoever eventually prevails, Ross Perot's careful work appears ruined. So if you're intent on seeing a genuine third-party movement in American politics, a vote for the Reformers is your best bet. Physicist or fascist, fascist or physicist, the Reform Party proves that some people will vote for anyone to avoid voting for a Republicrat.
James Dallal is a Lovett College junior.
- back - |
|
|
Search the Thresher pages:
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of: The Rice Thresher, Rice University MS-524, PO Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251-1892, USA. The Thresher Online Project -- ethresh@listserv.rice.edu |
