Partisanship – a problem with no easy solution.

The human weaknesses of  ignorance, misunderstanding, and fear are demonstrated by the idea that voting for a third party candidate, or an unaffiliated candidate is either splitting the conservative or liberal vote, or wasting one’s vote entirely and being disloyal to so-called “conservatism” or so-called “liberalism”.

I am at a loss to explain this mentality when viewed from a principled standpoint.  Any vote, as long as it is cast honestly for the person who one views as the best individual for the job, regardless of party affiliation is no more splitting the vote than voting for a major party candidate. Why should the major parties get to decide whom all “conservatives” or “liberals” should vote for? I reject the idea that belonging to the one of the major political parties is a sign that you are more worthy of a vote.

The whole idea behind popular sufferage is that we should vote for principled men and women.  Men and women who have integrity to stand for what they believe is right.

Han Fei Tzu said:

“The ruler must not reveal his desires; for if he reveals his desires his ministers will put on the mask that pleases him.”

In a republic, the people are the rulers and our representatives are our ministers.  The problem with many modern politicians is that they are following the pattern Han Fei Tzu spoke of.  They tell the people what they want to hear in order to gain favor and get elected.  They are more influenced by what the polls say would get them re-elected, rather than on what their own study and conscience tell them is the right thing to do.

Politicians who stand by what they believe are labeled as radicals.  We are told that they can’t win elections because they are too abrasive or controversial in their opinions.  This is only true if the American people have failed in their most important duty, which is, as Oliver DeMille said:

 … the greatest duty of citizens, the one that makes them good at all the other responsibilities, is clear, concise, virtuous, independent thinking.

We, as the rulers, because active citizens do not have an option to hide what we want from our ministers (this is what we do when we vote), have the responsibility to choose the candidate who demonstrates the most integrity to what they believe, and whose actual beliefs coincide most closely to our own.

My idea for independent communities (that I call Free Commots) would help us do just that.  Small communities of individuals, who are familiar with each other on an individual level, and who know and trust one another would be able to combine their resources to keep tabs on what their common elected officials are actually doing to demonstrate what they  believe.  They would be better equipped and more likely to have their common elected officials listen to what they have to say as a community.

I have several ideas about how to implement Free Commots.  I would like to have other collaborators give their input and insights.  I believe this is critical to the cause of freedom and liberty.  I am inviting all who are interested to join me in developing this idea.  If you would like to participate or just receive updates on the progress, please fill out this form.


3 thoughts on “Partisanship – a problem with no easy solution.

  1. Absolutely agree with the direction of your solution. I believe with the moral integrity of our nation falling into complete ruin we cannot rely on voting and legal action alone. We must combine some of the basic facets of society (family, education, religion, government & business) using the new visual media to take on the needs of us, our children and major threats to humanity.


  2. I believe I’ve stumbled upon a relatively easy solution to the partisanship problem.

    Involve the traditional media (radio, television, newspaper) in local simulations. I believe the parties, the respective candidates, their campaigns, local activists, citizens, etc. would have sufficient incentive to participate in well structured simulated debates and other scenarios where people tried to represent their respective candidates. This would open the door allowing the candidates to educate and prepare people for these interactions (the truth would surface).

    I believe this would eventually topple the partisanship problems as local people got to know each other again and a nationwide dialogue were reborn. This would also open the door to effectively addressing other major widespread problems with locally controlled and enacted solutions.


Comments are closed.