4
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Thursday, November 21, 1968
Third party assets and liabilities
American political history is rich with the legacy of third or minor parties. But third party movements in this country have historically captured more interest than votes.
A recent speech by Sen. Eugene McCarthy touched off speculation that he may attempt to organize a third political party. While admittedly the possibility is still in the speculatory stages, with one eye on history and the other projecting into the future, we may speculate further and attempt to determine how a third party might arise in the U.S. and to what degree it would meet with success.
Third parties have historically led short and relatively unproductive lives in the national political arena. This year George Wallace became only the fourth third party presidential candidate since the Civil War to capture more than 10 per cent of the popular vote. The others were James Weaver, Theodore Roosevelt and Robert LaFollette.
Minor parties have traditionally fallen into four general categories: single issues, broader, racial ideology, personality-oriented and splinter parties. These are not absolute classifications, and it is entirely possible that a single party may fall into more than one of these categories. But the fact that minor parties can be classified explains to some degree their failures in this country.
The Prohibition and Vegetarian parties exemplify the single issues parties. Although the Prohibition party, for example, has broadened its platform, it remains more an interest group than a truly national political party.
Other parties, with broader bases of ideology, have from time to time appeared in American history. Some of the most successful include the Progressive and Populist parties, and to a lesser degree, the Socialist party and its various offshoots. These parties, aiming at few issues and/or a particular class of people and often with a radical platform, can not match the broader coalitions of the major two parties. The effect of parties led by the likes of Eugene V. Debs, Norman Thomas, and Bob LaFollette can be measured more in terms of later policy change by the major parties than in immediate popular support.
Minor parties may also arise from the strong, charismatic appeal of a certain leader. The obvious case in point is Teddy Roosevelt and his Bull Moose party. Parties in this category frequently overlap with those of splinter parties. Indeed, George Wallace may fit into this overlapping category. Spliner parties often arise due to the divisiveness of a single issue, and consequently these major party offshoots have a narrow unperpetuating ideological base.
In all these historical examples can be seen a few predominant trends which may aid in forecasting the likely outcome of a contemporary third party movement.
A majority of these third party movements, because of their single issue, class or sectional
Editor's note: This is the first in a two part series examining the possibility of a third party led by Sen. Eugene McCarthy and the probable outcome of such a third party.
appeal, remain sectional or regional parties. The Greenback party, for example, was unable to move out of the Midwest, while the Socialist party is not likely to make inroads into the American rural sector.
On the other hand, splinter parties and personality-dominated parties tend to be spontaneous causes which arise for one election, often only running a candidate for the presidency. Consequently, these parties have no opportunity to organize fully at the grass-roots level. Furthermore, with no solid base or framework to fall back upon, these parties tend to vanish with their leaders or become absorbed by the major parties.
With these observations of past third party efforts in mind, it is possible to speculate as to the nature and possible success of a McCarthy-led third party.
third party.
Although there was considerable talk of a splinter party movement coming out of the national Democratic convention last summer, it is fortunate for the supporters of a third party that such a move did not materialize at that time. Such a party could have gotten on the ballot in few states and probably would have been doomed to failure following the national election. The lack of structure and organization would have been its major liability. But now, to a greater extent at least, a third party would not necessarily be doomed to such organizational failures.
A third party movement, beginning this year, would have the seldom held advantage of planning and organizing for at least two years, prior to state elections, and four years prior to national elections. In this period there would be time to organize at the grass-roots level. Precinct level organizations could be formed and manpower and financial support could be recruited for years instead of the usual months prior to national elections.
But if these resources are to be recruited and utilized, the party must have a sufficient appeal to sufficient numbers of people to make it a political power. This is where the variables exist, and herein lies the crux of the problem.
The most significant variables at this time appear to be the Vietnam War, the present third party of George Wallace, and the stability or instability, as it may be, of the present Democratic party.
A rallying point and/or symbol is a necessity for organizing a third party. The movement that McCarthy led (or the movement that thrust McCarthy into the role of leader, depending upon
one's view) had as its focal point the war in Vietnam. While there were and are other issues, they remain secondary to the issue of Vietnam. Not only was Vietnam an issue in itself, but Vietnam also provided an environment of discontent and subsequently a stimulus for the participation in the democratic process by numerous previously uninvolved individuals, primarily the young.
The Vietnam war operated as both a support and a target for the McCarthy movement. What happens then if this issue is removed from the political arena? It is true that Vietnam has been stressed as an example of a generally misdirected U.S. foreign policy. But will the issue of a misdirected U.S. foreign policy, without a focal point which personally affects his would-be supporters, be enough to arouse support? This argument can be extended to all of the alleged failures McCarthy pointed to in the political process. The responsiveness of the political party to the electorate, and the redefining of the role of the presidency, were brought to the forefront because of the ferment generated by Vietnam. Whether these secondary issues can stand alone without Vietnam to bolster them could determine the success of a McCarthy movement. The essential question is whether the McCarthy movement is a one-issue movement.
The second major variable is to what degree George Wallace's American Independent party will be successful.
The present American two-party system has for more than 100 years checked off threats of an established third party. It can be assured that two minor parties could not long find room in the American political system. They no doubt would strangle each other.
Right now the party of the militant right, the American Independent party, is having its day. When the sun will set on that day will be determined largely by the course of events. Prior to the election many political analysts said that Wallace was building towards '72. This, however, overlooks or assumes too much.
Wallace has built up a frenzied following, but no party organization of lasting significance. Wallace has started from the top. He has no truly national party organization to fall back upon. One of the strengths of the two-party system has been that it has had numerous one-party states which have been pockets of strength when national candidates are defeated. These one-party pockets keep the party that is out of national office from being totally obliterated and provide a base on which to build in the next election. There is no secure pocket outside the South in which Wallace may take shelter.
Richard Lundquist Assistant Editorial Editor
Puppet
Letter to the Editor Biafra
To the Editor:
Do 6,000,000 People = 20 minutes?
The government of the United States will spend $30,000,000,000 in Vietnam this year. That is $2.5 billion a month, $83 million a day, $7 million an hour; $2.5 billion is about 20 minutes worth of guns, bullets and napalm. The last monetary figure is all our government can spare to save 6,000,000 starving people. God is Dead: He starved in Biafra.
Michael Duby Lyons freshmar
ASSIGNMENT—NUCLEAR NUDE, by Edward S. Aarons (Gold Medal, 60 cents)—Now THERE'S a title. This new bit of foolishness is about adventurer Sam Durell and the many people he has to get rid of to prevent a Red Chinese torture queen from getting a secret atomic formula. Shades of the Dragon Lady!
Paperbacks
THE LONG WINTER, by John Christopher (Gold Medal,
60 cents)-Science fiction stuff.
The end of the world and what happens when a new Ice Age moves in on the Northern Hemisphere, and we all start fighting for survival.
THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAN
Kansan Telephone Numbers Newsroom—UN 4-3464 Business Office—UN 4-4358
A student newspaper serving the University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except
holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription required.
year. Second class postage required. Kan. 66044. Accommodations,
goods, services and equipment advertised offered to all students without re-
charge or national origin. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas or the State Board of Regents.
Executive Staff
News Adviser
Advertising Adviser
Managing Editor
Business Manager
George Richardson
Mel Adams
Monte Mace
Jack Haney
REPRESENTED FOR NATIONAL ADVERTISING BY
National Educational Advertising Services
READER'S DIGEST SALES & BERVICES, INC.
360 Lexington Ave., New York, N. Y. 10017
---