Thursday, November 17, 2005

To-day I left the G.O.P.

I am currently dealing with post-partum depression. T0-night, for the first time since I was 18, I am going to bed outside what George H.W. Bush called "the Big Tent of the Republican Party." I reregistered this day as an American Independent.
My annoyance with the G.O.P. has been growing for a long time, and I suppose this step wasinevitable since the time I voted third party back in the 80s, when pro-abort Republican Ed Schau was running to unseat pro-abort Senator Cranston. Why this action?
Well, of course, as a committed Monarchist, I never really liked the party name. But beyond that there was the growing conviction that I was simpky participating in a meaningless political ritual, a sort of political Kabuki. Apart from tone and rhetoric, it becomes increasingly obvious that there is little or no difference between the policies of the Clinton and Bush II administrations. Whether or not one is pro-Iraq war, the fact remains that our intervention there was conducted according to the Clinton Doctrine, the idea that we would intervene anywhere we deemed a threat, regardless of national sovereignty. The feminisation and homosexualisation of the military continues apace, there will be no advocates of overturning Roe v. Wade appointed to the High Court, and on and on.
Yet the G.O.P. continue to take the "social conservative" vote for granted, all the while giving them nothing, materially. The Democrats do the same to their core constituencies, the minorities and organised labour. The central committes of both parties have more in common with each other than with their own rank and file. (Of course, the SC, labour, and minorities have much more in common with each other than either do with their party leadersip).
The rivalry between the two parties is more apparent than real. The British, Canadians, Australians, and subjects of various other Crown Commonwealth realms are wonderful for their own empty political rituals. The openings of Parliament by the Queen, Governors-General and other viceroys always showcase the Monarch or her standins offering the "Speech from the Throne, in which she or they offer the current government's agenda (although she menions "my government in the course of the oration, she has no control over the contents pf what she utters.
This is responded to by the "Address-in-Reply." Debate over this introduction constitutes the first debate on new policies. The debate may be lively, but the formla of the address is unchanging. The version used in the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales is typical:
"To His/HerExcellency [name of the Governor], Governor of the State of New South Wales in the Commonwealth of Australia.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY___We,the Members of the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales, in Parliament assembled, desire to express our thanks for Your Excellency's speech, and to express our loyalty to the Sovereign.
2. We assure Your Excellency that our earnest consideration will be given to the measures to be submitted to us, that we will faithfully carry out the important duties entrusted to us by the people of New South Wales, and that the necessary provision for the Public Services will be made in due course.
3. We join Your Excellency in the hope that our labours may be so directed as to advance the best interests of all sections of the community."
It would be easy to smile at the idea of the primarily republican NSW Assembly expressing their loyalty to the Sovereign, considering how many of its members want to overthrow the Monarchy. But it is no more fanciful than the Governor referring to "My Government" during the throne speech.
Now, so long as the republicrats have a lock on power, our elections are essentially meaningless exercises in Kabuki (admittedly without the beauty or grace of that ancient Japanese artform). I wish it were not so (though, to be sure, I wish that Speeches from the Throne and Addresses in Reply meant what they said too). But things are as they are, not as we would wish.
Friends have told me that voting Third Party is a waste of vote; but having voted Republlican all my life, with the likes of Anthony Kennedy as reward, I think that I have been doing so my entire adult life. Perhaps, now, my voting really will mean something!

9 Comments:

Blogger Éstiel said...

Well, Charles, welcome to the Party of the Disenchanted. You have reiterated my own feelings (already known to you)regarding the spectator sport of politics. It cannot be taken any more seriously than a football game. The television commentators are fans--as are their viewers--and their passionate loyalties are identical to those of any other sports fans. Republicrats, indeed.
I voted against Kerry in the last election (not 'for' anyone) because of his proud display of a total lack of integrity--mimicked so well by you in your last post (the immodest proposal!) But I feel that, although it may be the best form of government now available, the real conribution of democracy to history is that it provides solid proof that the common man is no better than the king.
Éstiel

4:24 AM  
Blogger n said...

Yes, I agree. The whole situation is a tragic one considering the downward slope after the Reagan years. As a monarchist, I recognize that I shall never really see this form of government here in the US in my lifetime so I vote as I can to prevent the death culture policitians from getting even more of a stranglehold upon the citizens. Unfortunately, the pool is so bare that often I have to write in a candidate of a third party or, for example, put in the name of a person like Alan Keyes for the presidental election even though he wasn't running and thus I had a wasted vote. The whole affair is quite sickening... I often wonder if the best way to "fix" things is for someone to start a 3rd party with the specific platform of "pro God" (Christian) as the founders intended to pull away the votes from Democratic/Republican parties. And then once the country starts healing its moral crisis, start re-pushing a monarchist agenda. But the problem is that such a party cannot exist, not because of lack of funds for I believe that would overflow, but because only Catholics have it right and there is still the Protestant bias against Catholics running the show.

8:13 AM  
Blogger szandor said...

Charles, you know that I left the GOP some thirteen years ago.

So what can be done to draw you over to us Falangists? You know, Br. Matthew and I need a third member in the party! ;-)

9:32 AM  
Blogger Jovan-Marya Weismiller, T.O.Carm. said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3:24 PM  
Blogger Inquisitor Generalis said...

Lately, we've been sympathetic to the idea of divided government. Both parties have agendas that would be disastrous if fully implemented. The current experience of having the Republicans control both congress and the presidency is a case in point. It would be preferable if both parties would simply veto each others policies.

11:26 PM  
Blogger W said...

Well done, Mr. Coulombe. As a Canadian monarchist, I have gone a step further and decided not to take part in the democratic process at all. It seems purely pointless.

Until this summer past, I was a card-carrying member of the Christian Heritage Party, Canada's version of the "pro-God" party that Catholic Monarchist dreams of. The problem is, they are still deeply rooted in many of the diabolical errors of 1776/1789 and it is populated mostly by Evangelical Protestants (need I say any more?). I therefore couldn't give them my full support anymore.

6:40 AM  
Blogger willa_cather said...

I have thought many times of leaving the Republican fold, only to be foiled by dreams of mutiple Ginsbergs on the supreme court. Perhaps voting "Falange" is preferable to voting Republican, but at least the latter will, in some circumstances, put a Scalia or Thomas on the supreme court; whereas if you want liberals like ginsberg and breyer on the court, vote falange (which tilts the votes to the democrats--think of kennedy with a rare smile on his flush, abortion-loving cheeks)....

9:22 PM  
Blogger Pommarede said...

Hello Charles - why not become a Democrat and feast on red meat? Actually just hoping to find a current e-mail address for you - I have a question I'd like to ask you (off-topic, of course). Plese drop me a line at pommarede@hotmail.com.

Best, Tim de Carmain-Perillos

5:51 PM  
Blogger SVKcon said...

Great article Mr.Coulombe /however, I`m not American, but Slovak - so we have the same problems with our politics/... I`ll be also happy, if we could publish this blogg in our journal in Slovakia - conservative Don Quichotte /www.donquichotte.sk/. Best wishes, PF

12:22 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home