Over a year ago I wrote a piece detailing why I would not be voting for either Donald Trump or the Democratic nominee in the upcoming election. Without even knowing Joe Biden would get the nod, I was firm in my conviction that nether the Democratic Party nor the GOP could offer a vision for this country that merited my vote. I stand by that conviction today. Many more pages could be filled laying out the myriad ways Donald Trump and Joe Biden have failed this country and continue to promote policies inimical to human flourishing. Instead, I would like to put forward a positive justification for voting third-party and for Brian Carroll of the American Solidarity Party specifically.
Vote your conscience. As a Catholic, I believe I have an obligation to vote in a way that best promotes human flourishing according to a conscience well-formed in the teachings of the Catholic Church. I believe that a vote for Brian Carroll is such a vote. I do not agree with everything in the American Solidarity Party platform. But, it is the only platform that even attempts to conform itself to basic fundamental principles of the nature and dignity of each human being, our relationship to the earth and the rest of humanity, and our obligations to the poor. The American Party’s slogan is: “Pro-life for the whole life,” a principle that I know most, if not all, my fellow pro-lifers agree with. Care for the human person begins before birth, and it does not end at birth. The dignity of each person requires compassion and care from conception to natural death. I believe this principle rejects abortion, euthanasia, and the death penalty at the bookends of life, and it also demands caring for the poor, welcoming the immigrant, and rejecting racism throughout life. There is ample room for honest disagreement over how best to pursue these lofty aims, but I believe neither major party gets it right. I intend to vote for a positive vision of the good that I can get behind and be proud of. That, for me, is the vision put forward by Brian Carroll and the American Solidarity Party. I anticipate two major objections to voting third-party. The first and most obvious is that third parties cannot win, and so by voting for a third party you are throwing away your vote. The second, and related, objection is that a vote should not be an individual act of self-expression but rather a political act to be taken in view of what is best for society, not simply for preserving your own sense of integrity. Throw away your vote. The first objection is an appeal to realism: There are two candidates who can actually win, those are the real choices, so pick between the two. I have two responses to this argument. My first response is a practical one: in most states, your vote does not have any affect on the outcome of the election. It is a complete denial of reality to suggest that the way I vote will have any affect on which way Nebraska will go come November 3rd. On that Tuesday night, we will all see Nebraska go red (excluding perhaps an Omaha-shaped blue spot) whether I vote for Trump, Biden, Kanye West, or sit this one out. If the concern is about throwing away your vote, I would wonder why anyone would vote for Biden in a solidly red state or Trump in a solidly blue state. Brian Carroll has just as much actual chance of winning California as Trump does. My second response is that an appeal to realism must consider the actual likelihood of your preferred candidate fulfilling the promises that earned your vote. Some of you live in swing states (or swing Omaha-shaped electoral districts). If you are voting there, then the case for voting for Trump or Biden is much stronger. I admit I do not know if I would be voting third-party if the result was up for grabs. But it is important to ask yourself: If my preferred candidate wins, what am I really winning? For example, will Donald Trump and his conservative judicial nominees overturn Roe v. Wade if he is elected to another four years? He and Pence both indicated in their debate performances that they are not interested in securing that outcome. Both parties’ raison d’etre is to stay in power and they will not jeopardize that power by eliminating the problems that continue to ensure their candidates are elected. Polarization is beneficial to both parties, and both parties will work to perpetuate it. Political, not individual. The second objection to voting third-party is that a vote should not be an act of individual self-expression but rather a political act. In 2016, I voted for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party. I can honestly tell you that I did not look thoroughly into his platform and was not really voting for him. I was voting against Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton. I did not want to do the considerable mental work required to figure out which major party candidate would best lead the country (or, more accurately, would do the least damage), so I opted out and voted third-party to uphold my own sense of integrity. I did it for myself, conscientiously objecting and leaving the fate of the country to the rest of the voters. Voting for Gary Johnson may still have been the right thing to do, but I did it for the wrong reasons. I did not vote for the good of the country, but to save face. I hope to not make the same mistake this time. I believe Donald Trump is a better choice for president than Joe Biden. Even though I will not vote for either, it is important to make this determination. It is only after recognizing the relative good of one major party candidate over the other that the decision to vote third-party can genuinely be made. The good of voting third-party must be balanced against the difference in good between your preferred major party candidate and the opposing major party candidate. In this way, a third-party vote is not an exercise in self-expression but a bona fide political act for the good of the community. The question, then, is if a third-party candidate cannot win, how could the good of voting for a third party overcome even the slightest good that would be accomplished by the victory of your preferred major party candidate? A third way. There are two reasons why I believe voting third-party is a political act in furtherance of the common good. The first is the influence that third-party voters can have on the major parties’ platforms. It is likely that a significant number of people will either vote third-party or abstain from voting in the upcoming election. One side will lose and will begin to investigate why. They will see that there were millions of voters united by their distaste for both parties. A losing party may look to adopt these ideas to secure that bloc of voters. My vote for the American Solidarity Party indicates which ideas I believe the major parties should incorporate to gain my vote in the next election. This is not a pipe dream that my third-party candidate will win, but a reasoned judgment that my single vote for a third-party will have a greater affect on the issues that matter to me than a single vote amongst the hundreds of millions that will be cast for the major candidates. I do not need the American Solidarity Party to win if the Democratic Party or the GOP adopt its positions. The second reason voting third-party is a positive political act is that it is a rejection of the two-party system. The relative good of your preferred major candidate winning is severely limited by the perpetuation of an electoral system that inevitably devolves into a choice for the lesser of two evils. The problem with the lesser of two evils is that both are still evil. The best the two-party system can offer is Joe Biden and Donald Trump, how much longer are we going to accept that? I admit the likelihood of taking down the two-party system is slim at best. It is not going away any time soon, but I believe perpetuating the two-party system does actual harm to real people. The only way to begin to challenge the system is by refusing to let it dictate the terms. The only way to empower third parties is by voting for third parties. No third party will ever have a chance of winning until more people believe they have a chance of winning, and that will only happen if people are willing to vote for them. A vote for a third party is a small step towards rejecting a broken system. ****** I want to acknowledge that the American Solidarity Party is not perfect. Sam Rocha has identified serious allegations against the origins of the party and its founders. I discovered the party just this year. None of the alleged problems are apparent in the party’s current platform or in Brian Carroll’s interviews and debates that I have watched. I have not experienced anything problematic in my admittedly cursory interactions with the American Solidarity Party of Nebraska’s Facebook page. I do not know enough about the party’s history to state convincingly that I support it beyond the principles on which it purports to stand. Given my reasons for voting third party above, those principles are enough for me. Link to the American Solidarity Party's website: solidarity-party.org/ A great podcast interview with Brian Carroll: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3Byb3V0LmNvbS85NTc4NjIucnNz/episode/QnV6enNwcm91dC01OTMxNjU4?fbclid=IwAR3zPYJASm2WX_T31HUDoJdGB-wWknYtD3i5ranmlE3_c_rL4jdINEYd-ks
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorTwitter: @BenSwanson7 Archives
October 2020
Categories
All
|