Savrola: Critique of the Constitution Party

Editor’s Note: I (Red Phillips) recently posted that I want to make CHT a hub of Constitution Party news and commentary because the CP has few such unofficial outlets on the web. Savrola objected and when asked to clarify why, asked if he could submit a stand alone article with his rational. Here it is below. The paragraph breaks were messed up in the word document he sent me so I had to guess at some of them. I hope I got them right. My reply will follow.

In the past few months, I’ve had the opportunity to observe the campaign of former Rep Cynthia Davis, probably the most electable Third-Party candidate since Joe Young ran for State Representative in North Carolina on the Libertarian Party ticket ten years or so ago. Rep. Davis will not win her race for Liutenant-Governor. It costs approximately ten millions to win such a race. She has no network in the counties of Missouri, and declines to focus on issues relevent to the people of Missouri—just as the more mainstream parties do.

Which brings us to the question: why does the Constitution Party continue to field candidates? Rep. Davis was formerly the most conservative Republican legislator in Missouri, and has recently termed out. Joining the Constitution Party is eminently practicable from her perspective—but considerably less so from the Constitution Party’s.

Why? Because the Constitution Party is based on culturalism. Its constituency consists of people who consider themselves capable of being governed by a document they consider to be Sacred—the Constitution.

The problem with the Constitution is that constitutions have gone the way of monarchies. Lip-service is paid, but the document has no relevence.

Republican like to tout their opposition to political-correctness by making a token show of opposition to Sharia Law. Nearly all Americans are against Sharia Law, because Sharia Law doesn’t suit them.

Constitutionalists, in the Constitution Party, like the Constitution because it does suit them, and their families—and has suited them—the old-stock Americans, for generations.

The number of Americans of Scots-Irish and Germanic-Scots descent is in precipitious decline.  Unfortunately, it is these descendents of old-stock Americans, which make up the main electorate of the Constitution Party.

The Party is made of almost entirely of Religionists and Religionist home-schooolers. It’s appeal to other groups will always be negligible, in the current paradigm.

Why does this Party exist—as a Political Party? Because Howard Phillips actually believed that the presidency was an important office from which to committ activism?

Howard Phillips had enough experience in politics to know that winning campaigns in the United States are simply exercises in quantitive logistics, combined with just a touch of finesse in managing the media.

So why all the disastrous runs for presidency? Why all the longshot races for congress and senate? Because the Constitution Party’s leaders expect too much of the American people. They believe that the average “conservative” voter is just like them.  In fact, Constitution Party voters are literally a rare and dying breed.

Any impartial observer who regularly attends Constitution Party and Republican Meetings will notice that the Constitution Party members are better dressed and mannered, with a better carriage than their Republican counter-parts.

So defeat follows defeat.

John Derbyshire is the intellectual face of the Constitution Party. He admits in an interview that his public-schooled children rejected his “talk” on race-relations out of hand.

So what’s the answer? Very simple: the formulation of a political party is not the correct path to political power or prominence for a movement.

The Constitution Party is, again, a Culturist Movement, and not equipped or prepared to function as a political party.  Elected offices are not worth having, without a powerful media and cultural presence. It’s meager energies and funds should be directed towards fostering the fragile society of its it members, and ensuring their future—through the creation of institutions of learning and production, and for the arts.

As for the media presence, we may either continue to isolate ourselves from the sattellites or buy some of our own.

Again, in the current political atmosphere, elected office is not worth having, much less campaigning for. Any politician seeking to use the Party as a vehicle to obtain elected office should be treated as a parasite or an ignoramus.

Casa Pound shows us the way forward. The reason that third parties lose and insurgent parties like the BNP fail is that they will not understand that electing representatives to office is not the purpose or goal of a successful political party.

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>