Ann Coulter was recently on the Glenn Beck radio program. During the interview, Beck brought up the notion of a third Party. Coulter vehemently disagreed, saying that third Party movements are how nations die. Here’s the story:
Now, I mean no disrespect to Ms. Coulter, but she is wrong: third Party movements do not necessarily mean the death of a nation. Beck even provided her with a clear example: the Republican Party, itself. What many forget is the Republican Party was born of a third Party movement. The same is true of the modern Democrat Party. Although it didn’t become a new Party, it took over the Party platform of the Bull Moose Party movement, that of the Progressivism. When that happened, the old claims to the Jeffersonian heritage of the Democrat Party died and the Communist ideal took over. So, in a very real sense, the Democrat Party died and was replaced by a third Party by the same name.
But let’s go back to the example Beck gave Coulter. Had it not been for the new Party, the GOP, it is ikely that the United States would be a very different nation today – if it still existed at all. In this sense, though I strongly disagree with what the GOP did in the mid 1800’s, it can be argued that the nation was ‘saved’ by a third Party movement – not destroyed by it.
At the same time, Coulter’s focus on the Party ‘uber alles’ clearly demonstrates the inherent danger of Party politics: that of the Party being placed before the nation. Coulter exhibited the same zeal for the Party as many ‘conservative’ commentators exhibit. They see the Party as the only means of achieving their ends, so, naturally, they start to see the Party as their ends. When this happens, they lose sight of the nation and the people it represents. At that point, the Party becomes an enemy of the people, and so do all those who support that Party. If it happens that the two Parties become one, or even that they should collude to mutually support each other, then the threat becomes all the greater — as it is now. The only purpose that is then served by continuing the two-Party facade is to keep the people fighting each other so they will never realize they have a mutual enemy in both Parties — as we do now.
While I have no doubt she means well and sincerely believes she is working for the best interest of the people, Ms. Coulter has become another enemy of the people. By supporting a Party that has clearly demonstrated it cares more about itself and its own preservation than it does about its constituents and the nation, Ms. Coulter is supporting an enemy of individual rights and liberty – period. In fact, anyone who places Party before country – even if only as a means to an ands – is an enemy to the nation.
Remember: one cannot serve two masters. You either serve the nation or the Party, but you cannot serve both. And anyone who starts to think that the Party is the nation or the nation is the Party… Well, hello, Mr. Hitler!