As we approach the presidential election, I can proudly say I am not supporting either of the main candidates, but that I am a member of the American Solidarity Party. Like Don Quixote, I shall don my saucepan helmet, ride out on Rocinante, and tilt at some windmills.
We all know the set reactions to third party politics in the USA:
“Why go with a known loser?”
“You have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning.”
“It’s a wasted vote.”
“You’re dividing the votes for the good guy!”
“You’re only throwing another vote to the bad guy!”
… and so forth and so on.
There’s an old saying that “Good news is only good when its subversive.” By “subversive,” I do not mean revolutionary, but “undermining,” more in the manner of the court jester than the sanctimonious activist—more Marx Brothers than Marxist.
So here are twelve reasons why a good conservative ought to support the American Solidarity Party: five based on their platform and seven based on broader principles.
- The ASP party platform is pro-life. Not only do they stand against abortion, but they defend workers against exploitation and have sensible, positive ideas about gun ownership and health care.
- The ASP calls for a generous response to immigrants while also demanding that the government secures our national borders properly.
- The ASP supports common-sense environmental initiatives. Without being crazy tree-huggers, they promote responsible care for the environment that corrects wanton commercial exploitation.
- They uphold family values—upholding marriage as fundamentally between one man and one woman for life, and they call for the repeal of laws that undermine the family, and for legislation that supports and promotes the traditional family.
- Their platform calls for the USA to be a force for peace in the world, avoiding un necessary conflicts and for foreign policy to be guided by time-tested just war principles.
- In many states, supporting a third party will not affect the outcome in the electoral college. One can therefore proudly vote according to one’s beliefs and principles instead of holding one’s nose and voting against the other guy.
- There is something noble about voting against the tide and supporting the underdog—knowing that you will not win. This is a Don Quixote/Cyrano de Bergerac sort of lofty resilience and resistance.
- Supporting the ASP means holding your head up (because you are gazing at the stars) rather than hanging your head because you were gazing at the gutter.
- Great things start small and are built brick by brick by people with principles, passion, brains, and determination. ASP may be small now, but given time ASP may stand also for the “American Stubborn Party.”
- The corrupt and extremist two main parties are united in one thing: the determination to quash third parties. By joining and supporting the ASP, you can give the main parties their due respect.
- The platform of the ASP is one of common sense for the common good. Most people recognize the need for balance, and ASP provides it.
- When you donate to and support the ASP, you can be sure your donations and support are valued. Who hears you among the donkeys and elephants? Be a pelican. (P.S.: The nurturing pelican is the ASP mascot)
So, as we approach the presidential election, I can proudly say I am not supporting either of the main candidates, but that I am a member of the American Solidarity Party.
Lest anyone start wringing their hands and worrying that I, as a Catholic priest, am publicly endorsing a particular candidate or party, let it be on the record that I am NOT endorsing Pete Sonski for president nor am I endorsing the American Solidarity Party. Far be it from me to endorse a faithful Catholic candidate or to endorse a party whose platform aligns with Catholic social teaching!
Instead, as an American citizen with the right to support a candidate and a party and to speak my mind, I privately support Pete Sonski’s campaign and the platform of the American Solidarity Party. Whether I can actually vote for them or not depends on whether they are able to appear on the ballot.
In the meantime, like Don Quixote, I shall don my saucepan helmet, ride out on Rocinante, and tilt at some windmills.
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
The featured image is courtesy of Pixabay.
Let us Don Quixotes join together.
Political reality does not exist merely in the realm of ideas. It is practical. “Render unto Ceasar.”
I prefer to the above beautiful ideas what Dennis Prager says: in politics it’s not about voting for the best, but voting for the lesser evil.
It’s nice to be a supporter of a party that has virtuous intentions. But the opposition isn’t going to be vanquished by the existence of virtuous people doing good.
I don’t feel I’m “looking in the gutter” at all by supporting Trump. The world of politics is of this world, the temporal world. It’s a battle ground with flawed humans fighting it out. I have no illusions about Trump, but he represents the best chance to restoring a rule of law to the country. There are other ways to fight the spiritual battle.
Thank you, and I would be interested in a further discussion (perhaps already posted here) of voting from a theological perspective. When can or should you vote for the “lesser evil”?
Is it better to take the “Quixote option” describer here, and vote for the genuinely better option that will not win? How bad does the worse alternative have to be, before voting for the less-bad alternative that has a realistic chance of winning? How bad do the two ‘realistic’ alternatives have to be, before voting for one of them is just wrong?
Thanks. Tilting at Windmills is better than spinning with them.
Oh! Will look into the ASP! I have no problem voting 3rd party. Only 2x’s in my life have I voted for a mainstream candidate, my first election (Carter) and the last (Trump). Happy to have an alternative to look into. Do they have bumper stickers? I think a pelican bumper sticker would be awesome
I am still not sure what they stand for specifically.
I used the link in Father’s essay to go to the ASP website and read through the party platform. While there is much to commend there, I also saw much that in my opinion is worrisome. While the platform praises “local control” —the subsidiarity principle, I assume, although that language isn’t used—much of what is proposed would most likely have to be imposed through some top-down authoritarian scheme because much of the populace would oppose it. For instance, the ASP platform calls for the “immediate cancellation of existing medical debt.” How is that fair to people who paid into full coverage insurance plans for a lifetime? Who took care of their health–exercised, did not smoke, do drugs, indulge in other excesses? (I’m not saying here that there aren’t people who did all of those things and still suffer because of situations beyond their control, but that’s not what the platforms says. It calls for the immediate cancellation of existing medical debt with no qualifications.) How would we pay for such debt cancellation?
Another plank of the platform calls for the revamping of our entire electoral system, replacing our legislative districts at the federal and state levels with “proportional representation” and going to a “ranked choice voting system.” Presumably the ASP, if it should come into power, would abide by the amendment process of the constitution, because at least at the federal level, passing an amendment would be necessary to institute such changes. I’ve looked into both proportional representation and ranked choice voting, and in my opinion, such changes would be a “wash”–any benefits would be countered by different disadvantages that we don’t currently have to deal with. The arguments that these systems are new, in contrast to our “outmoded” system, or that they are what “most of the rest of the world” uses are in my opinion, not serious arguments. The ASP platform also calls for making voting easier, so that more people will vote. In my mind that’s like saying let’s make it easier to attend Mass, so that more people will go to Mass–let’s broadcast it into everyone’s bedrooms, so no one has to be bothered to change out of their pjs, and deliver the Eucharist via Uber Eats. There are some things that deserve some seriousness, and a bit of effort, and in my opinion, voting is one of these things.
These are just a couple of examples of things that bothered me about the ASP platform. As I said there is much that is commendable too–the platform is definitely pro-life, pro-religious freedom, pro-small business and the family farm. However, such a “party platform” by it’s nature is going to rely on policy prescriptions that are going to require top down coercive action in order to be implemented. My feeling is that few real changes will take place in our country without large-scale conversion. Yes I mean conversion–spiritual conversion, religious conversion. How can we expect a people to be pro-life when they view sex as nothing more than a vehicle for pleasure, interchangeable with eating, drinking, partying, etc.? How can we expect people to work to build up a family or a business or a community when they view life as devoid of both God and meaning? If our culture was one of virtue, oriented around God, our families and our communities (in that order) we would not need any party’s innumerable “policy prescriptions,” because we would be able to take care of what ails us.
And Father, you do not have to justify your decision to vote third party. Your vote is your own, and you should cast it in whatever way your conscience tells you to. Unlike the supporters of ranked choice voting, I do not believe in the concept of a “wasted vote.”
Well nobody’s perfect!
I am looking for a third party that reflects the tenants of the Catholic faith. If such a party were to at some point years from now actually capture enough support, the major parties might take notice and perhaps modify its platforms and perhaps the character of its nominees. Chasing after windmills, sure, for this notion is the longest of long shots but at least offers some solace in the now to frustrated Catholic voters who find themselves exasperated by the wholly unacceptable choices they are given.
Elections may bring different parties and candidates into office, but the administrative-remedial regime endures. By slyly providing the illusion of active participation for everyone, liberal democracy allows ostensible majorities to justify their actions, no matter how oppressive they may be. Liberal democracy encourages everyone to participate in the political process since there is no harm in providing suffrage for individuals or groups with minority opinions, as their losing votes will only legitimize the majority’s actions. Meanwhile, the notions of democratic elections, one man, one vote, and majority rule indicate that “We the People” have power over our destiny — contrary to all the evidence. It logically follows that when “the People” do not affect changes in our system, we must not want to change it. Likewise, if people wish not to participate in an election, this is still interpreted for all practical purposes as their consent to the majority opinion since they could have voted against it if they had wanted to. There is no escape — unless nobody shows up to vote.
Without a more general critique of liberal democracy, progressive and liberal factions often voice the dubious conclusion that “Our state, our government, and our institutions fail us because we, the people, are too apathetic, too unaware, or too irresponsible to apply our immense power as we ought to. If we could better mobilize, inform, or educate the public, everything would work out well.” So, one sees presumably intelligent people anxiously trying to reform a system that can only hope to oppress everyone equally in its best and most functional form. The ruling elites can rest comfortably as long as we blame ourselves and not them for our alienated position in modern society. This condition will continue until we realize the inherent flaws in the concept of liberal democracy itself and refuse to reproduce it.
Elections are a scam. Their function is to create the illusion that the people control the government, not the elite, and neutralize any actual resistance movements. Voting strengthens the ruling class and the governing elites; it is ineffective in changing government policy.
I want to invite the idea of “not voting” as a form of protest as we consider civic strategies that will help us create the world we want to see. What could the “powers that be” elite do if no one cast a vote again? To claim that “democracy works”? Or to claim they, their stooges, institutions, and systems have been democratically elected and approved by the people? Or to claim they are representing the people? Or to claim they are legitimate?
Peter, have you been reading Patrick Deneen? I agree liberal democracy is highly overrated. Democracy has been touted as a sacred ritual, when really all it means is 51 out of 100 people get what they want and the other 49 suffer. Nevertheless, we live in a fallen world, and we will not see “the world we want” until (if) we live with God after death. Therefore, we need some kind of government, and the majoritarian principle is the best we can do here on earth.
Since most liberal democracies presuppose that man is perfectible, and that as we perfect ourselves we can build utopia–heaven–here on earth, they have all created infinitely expanding bureaucracies charged with the task of reforming man and enforcing utopia. Each of the thousands of bureaucrats has their own ideas of how to bring about utopia, so that eventually the average man/woman is trapped in a spiderweb of regulations and decrees from which there is no escape. Long ago we had the common sense to know that bureaucracies had to be continually beaten back for the good of the nation, but that was before people were taught to rely on the government for their comfort and succor.
This is the biggest concern that I have with the ASP, that despite the Christian/Catholic values in the platform, there are also a lot of vague policy prescriptions, for example reducing our reliance on long haul trucking in favor of railway transportation of freight (really?) that would inevitably require a large and probably far away bureaucracy and many many regulations to enforce. I would absolutely vote for a third party. I have voted third party in the past. But not this particular third party.
Peter, I don’t see your idea of having a “don’t vote protest” working. The scheme to change our voting laws in the ASP platform is predicated on getting more people to vote. Our overlords would just change the system to compel people to vote. Australia was considering making not voting a crime, I’ve heard. And of course the Soviets got people to vote at gunpoint, and ensured consensus by giving them only one choice.
I still say the real need, and the only solution, is conversion. This will always be a world of sin, but it doesn’t have to be a world of AS MUCH sin as it is now. Pray for a new Great Awakening in the Judeo-Christian world, one that will shine a light on as many people as possible. I would advise voting. Seek information, pray on it, and vote your conscience. Don’t worry about tilting at windmills or short term gains or “wasting votes.” Those things don’t matter.
Thank you. I had not heard of them.
Excellent explanation of the virtues of voting third party.
Well, Father, Don Quixote is extremely apropos. Of course, you must vote your conscience, but if I may comment briefly.
I’m an old man of 86 and have been studying History and Politics since I was about 6 or 7 when my first-generation mom of Irish descent took me to a funny brick building. When I asked what the building was, she said, “This is where you must come to be a REAL American kid.” Of course, it was Independent Hall. History and Politics ultimately became my passion, major at university, and life-long avocation.
I understand that many folks don’t like Trump’s personality and many don’t like Biden. Fair enough. However, this 2024 election is far, far, far from what folks consider “politics as usual.” I could write pages and pages of historical background as to why our nation is in such mortal danger as we approach the election. This is not the appropriate space for that so I will address just a couple of things.
1.. Third parties ALWAYS do damage, as they did when TR formed the Bull Moose Party. Like or dislike Wilson, he did much damage to the county.
2.. Abortion. If Trump’s publicized modification of his previous 100% position to a national ban after 16 weeks will reduce the volume of abortions in the US which is now experiencing some 70,000 abortions per month. Agree with the Rape, Incest, and Death of the mother issues or not – and I’m well aware that in today’s culture with two parents having advanced Syphilis, the baby would be aborted and we would kill Beethoven – I have some issues with those three also. However, common sense tells me that a significant reduction in abortions would be an advance for Life and then there would be a next step. If we don’t look at the issue with common sense practicality we are guaranteed to lose the lives of thousands of babies.
3.. Illegal Immigration through an unconstitutional open border and Biden’s unconstitutional, so-called Parole flights of thousands of unvetted individuals into our country mean that over three years at least 23 Million illegal individuals PLUS at least 2 Million “gotaways” (Border Patrol estimates close to 4 Million) with no understanding of American culture – and no desire to assimilate – have been introduced to get taxpayer benefits. A number of lives have been lost to illegal entrants. We now have various terrorist groups well-ensconced in our country and many more American citizens will die at their hands.
Dear Father, this is not a “normal” election. I will vote for Trump and pray my Rosary each morning, like so many others I know, that he will be elected. Anyone who votes their conscience for a third party is following their perceived duty BUT it is surely well to know the consequences of third-party damages IF we get the Biden puppet of someone or some group back in the White House.
Thanks for the article! This is a great summary of why voting for a third party isn’t a wasted vote. This is a case I have argued at the Advocates for Solidarity Substack. One of the main difficulties third parties have in America nowadays is the fact that people are generally convinced of the narrative that the two parties are locked in a battle of good vs evil for the control of America, whereas a more realistic view would be that our civilization as a whole is declining, and the two parties are fighting to stay on top as the ship goes down. The Solidarity Party’s policy of rebuilding and reinvigorating communities from the ground-up is really the most realistic policy for our situation in 21st century America.
I voted for Trump in 2020 but I can’t bring myself to do it again. He failed us completely with Covid, he started a new round of inflation by handing out stimulus checks financed by printing money, and his reaction to pro-life losses after Dobbs demonstrates that he really isn’t one of us; he’s just another populist who will desert us the moment he thinks the wind is blowing in the other direction. And Biden? I won’t even entertain that thought. I’m tired of hearing the “lesser evil” argument that has been foisted on me for 40 years now. All it ever brings us is more evil as the ratchet just keeps moving further and further left.Voting for the lesser evil is a proven failure. I’ll be casting my vote for a decent candidate who will promote greater goods instead of lesser evils come fall, and that candidate is not named Trump or Biden.
Thanks, Father Longenecker, for laying out a host of good reasons to vote for a decent (though imperfect) party. When the choice itself is unacceptable, it’s long past time that we vote against the choice itself.
The problem with third parties I see is basically structural and institutional specific to the American context and to the Presidential system. In a parliamentary system it makes sense to vote for small parties that align with your views because even if they only get say three or four seats in parliament, that can be enough to be needed for a coalition and so influence the overall direction. But in a Presidential system the election of the President is independent of seat holding in the legislature, so a party that gets single digit support gets no influence at all. Its only impact even if it does really well is to weaken the large party with a chance to win which is closest to it ideologically. Left wing third parties hurt the Democrats, while conservative third parties hurt the Republicans.