My latest, on voting third party, is up at Inside Catholic.
I expect a lot of love.
Nov
03
2008
03
2008
Steve Skojec
Armchair Commentary, Free of Charge
-
Support This Site
Now Reading
Planned books:
- Great Heresies by Hilaire Belloc
- The Age of Martyrs: Christianity from Diocletian (284) to Constantine (337) by Abbot G. Ricciotti
- What Were the Crusades? by Jonathan Riley-Smith
Current books:
-
The January Dancer by Michael Flynn
Recent books:
- Brave New Family: G.K. Chesterton on Men and Women, Children, Sex, Divorce, Marriage and the Family by Gilbert Keith Chesterton
- Passport by Christopher Blunt
Powered by WordPress | Theme: Aeros 2.0 by TheBuckmaker.com
Hi. Mr Skojec.
), and I follow ‘Inside Catholic’ daily, among other great sites (Ignatius Insight, etc.). …
I’m a Catholic in England (not ‘UK’, to which many like to refer to it
I have to say that once I read your article, I breathed a sigh of relief.
The kind of sheer vitriol being lobbed about between those who, in all other circumstances, seem to be Catholics faithful to the Magisterium, seemed to be losing sight of being faithful to their mission to love.
From outside, not only did it look like the whole thing was becoming obsessive beyond reason, but that it was being based purely on promises which might be broken, as neither candidate seemed to be able to claim that their ‘word was their bond’.
What if McCain was like the son who said he was going to the vineyard, but didn’t in the end?
It is a very well reasoned article that restored my faith in the ability of Catholics to reason ‘across the pond’. But, not only that, votes aren’t the only things that ‘work’. Fervent prayer does too, and whichever candidate gets in, they’ll be needing lots of it. As you point out, McCain isn’t the easy option.
I really cannot understand the sheer level of vitriol in the comments of InsideCatholic. Despite your clear and concise reasoning (most of which I agree with, though some not), there are still people treating you as if you are a selfish heretic who hasn’t bowed down to the GOP. The “A Vote For X Is A Vote For Y” is so ingrained in American politics… I can’t help but think it’s engineered, in no small part by the public education system, to keep our unchecked, elite rulers in power.
Well put, I couldn’t agree more! Here’s another good take on saying no to both evils. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/dilsaver1.html
There is only one candidate who can beat Obama. That is McCain. Therefore, the fewer votes McCain receives, the greater chances for an Obama victory. So while a vote for a third party candidate is not directly a vote for Obama, it indirectly takes away an obstacle to his victory.
There is only one candidate who can beat Obama. That is McCain. Therefore, the fewer votes McCain receives, the greater chances for an Obama victory. So while a vote for a third party candidate is not directly a vote for Obama, it indirectly takes away an obstacle to his victory.
That logic assumes that McCain was entitled to the vote in the first place. If McCain was not entitled to said vote, than the obstacle, that you claim is taken away, never existed in the first place. You could argue that by voting third party, it is failing to place an obstacle in front of Obama, but you cannot rationally argue that we are taking obstacles away.
Aaron,
You said it before I had the chance. McCain never had my vote. He guaranteed that back in 2000, and while one might be able to argue that I could have been persuaded on the issue, my not voting for McCain was, in the abstract, entirely irrelevant. It wasn’t his to begin with, so it couldn’t be taken away.
I was never, in the sense that I would have voted for McCain, an obstacle to an Obama victory. I could therefore not be removed as an obstacle.
Of course, this is all highly esoteric, and a moot point besides. Obama will win with at least a 6 point margin. Possibly more. This is the logical consequence of the prevalence of neo-con ideology over the past decade or so, combined with the growing liberalism of the electorate as a whole.
Of course, this is all highly esoteric, and a moot point besides. Obama will win with at least a 6 point margin. Possibly more.
Does the margin really matter? He could lose the popular vote and still win. It’s the states that elect the president.
The point is that it’s not even going to be close. Obama will have his mandate from the people, and the emptiness of a McCain ticket will be made starkly manifest.
I just pray that the next 4 years goes by quickly.
[I]t is failing to place an obstacle in front of Obama…
Fine. Then choose to not place an obstacle in front of him. Choose not to do what you can to prevent a naked racist, anti-Christian, infanticide-supporting Marxist radical from winning the presidency.
Aristotle was devastatingly accurate when he wrote that, “A young man is not a proper hearer of lectures on political science.”
Aristotle was devastatingly accurate when he wrote that, “A young man is not a proper hearer of lectures on political science.”
Not the first time I’ve heard that. I remember a class in college when our Catholic professor was trying to get us to do a commercial for a non-denominational community organization that did “AIDS outreach”. Hmm. What could that mean? When I pressed him on whether that involved giving contraception to poor people, he wound up bringing in the rector of the Cathedral, who informed us that if we were older, we’d understand. Nobody would ever answer me directly on whether we would be promoting a contraception-distributing organization, which told me that’s exactly what we’d be promoting.
The students in the class joined me in the challenge, and the project got canceled.
You can call me an idealist if you wish, but don’t think for a moment I’m ignorant of the stakes here. This isn’t political science, it’s basic math. I know two things - if my vote went to McCain, I’d be considered a legitimate part of the dying cause to preserve the status quo in order to prevent the new world order, and that my vote won’t matter a damn bit because Obama isn’t only going to win this country by a significant margin, he’s going to win Virginia by double-digits.
But one place my vote does matter is to me, and to God, who I believe would prefer that I follow my conscience. I’ll speak again of long term strategy here - a McCain victory now will make for an even worse situation in the future. We are isolated and cut off, and the base is crumbling. We’ve lost this country through the mismanagement of those we’ve elected, and McCain will be far worse.
And if he did win, it would decimate any remaining good will left for conservatives, and further agitate the leftist, populist sentiment that is already spreading like wildfire in this country. You live in the DC area, so you’ve seen the fervor. There’s something different at work here. The volunteers are aggressive, and the response they get is overwhelming, as they stand on the side of the road with their signs screaming, “Vote for Obama” and the cars driving by all honk with glee.
I don’t want to see Obama win any more than you do. But I won’t be Machiavellian in my attempts to stop it. The ends don’t justify the means. And I will be able to stand confidently before God and answer for my choice without regret.
By the time the new president has been in office for 30 days, I will have four children, and I fear for their future. But nothing I do in the voting booth will change that irrevocable path. If I can’t stand on principle now, what do I have left?
Obama will win. I predict that he will get at least 290 votes in the electoral college, though I admit that there are those with more experience who predict well over 300 electoral votes for him. There is a chance that he will win with more than 50% of all votes cast–the first candidate to do so in a long time.
What this means is that not only is the “a vote for X is a vote for Obama” argument morally and philosophically vacuous, it is arithmetically vacuous as well.
Want to know what kind of vote is really meaningless? I vote for McCain cast for “strategic” reasons rather than sincere conviction that he would be a good president. I bet you guys are glad that you sold out–for nothing. Thanks again for denying all of the good third party candidates a chance.
My advice: pray for the best and keep your powder dry.
After all, a vote for McCain is a vote against Chuck Baldwin.
Danby, that’s a sentiment I can get behind!
I was watching A Man For All Seasons the other night and one line struck me as pertinent to this election, it was:
Sir Thomas More: I think that when statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties, they lead their country by a short route to chaos.
Thanks for the intelligent, cogent and timely article!
I’ve voted 3rd party in the last few major elections, for many of the same reasons you explain so well. I’ve always thought that if the 3rd party option wasn’t meant to be used, it would have been effectively legislated out of existance a very long time ago.
Sure it is that we have the two major parties that we have, and that the winner of the presidency will come from one of them. However, it is also sure that the parties we have are not the parties our country started out with — slow changes — and revolutionary changes — gave us what we have today.
Today’s 3rd parties are the genius of the major parties of tomorrow — or they will be, if enough of today’s people are bold enough to support them.
God bless you.
Politics is about the practical application of principles within a given situation. It’s not about ignoring the reality of a situation and instead attempting to impose as perfect a solution as possible. The reason that you and others are so disappointed with politics is that you expect too much from it. Playing with the cards your dealt is not Machiavellian or unprincipled.
Was Pope John Paul II Machiavellian when he wrote in EV that it is permissible for a legislator to vote for a permissive abortion law in order to prevent a more permissive abortion law from passing? Was he unprincipled for not telling them to “stand on principle” and vote only for an outright ban on abortion?
Was then-Cardinal Ratzinger Machiavellian when he wrote that one could cooperate materially with evil, given proportionate reasons, in order to prevent a greater evil from occurring? Was he unprincipled for not forbidding one in any way from cooperating materially with evil?
Were the bishops Machiavellian when they argued once could vote for the lesser of two evils in this election? Were they being unprincipled for not telling people to vote for the candidate best aligned with Catholic moral teaching?
Voting third party is like going to a sporting event and rooting for a team that’s not on the field. Yes, technically, Baldwin was “on the field”, but there was no way he was going to win. What did your vote for Baldwin actually do to advance your principles? Nothing! The votes he received were barely a blip on the screen. They did nothing to set up some future glorious victory.
Now, did my vote for McCain advance my principles? No. He’s a liberal and quite possible the worst candidate the GOP could have nominated this election. But he was it. He was the only stick I could use to beat back the Obama-maniacs. He was the only candidate with a ghost of a chance of at least defending my principles (he wouldn’t advance them) – or at least preventing a further slide away from them (yes, the status quo). That’s where we are: the status quo or worse. Now we have worse.
Like it or not the GOP is the only viable vehicle for advancing our principles. Time and again, Christians and conservatives have failed to rally around one party that could pose a real threat to the GOP. You and I both admire Buchanan. Learn from his failed third party run. He did.
Applying principles practically is not akin to abandoning them.