Redstate

By HeavyM Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Why do political parties exist?

It should be a foundational, easy-to-answer question, but as we get tangled up in the middle of elections, debates, scandals, and the like, the answer becomes clouded. It is worth taking a step outside of the fray to consider the larger picture – because sometimes there is no better method of getting your bearings for where you should be heading than remembering from where you came.

Why do political parties exist? If you were to say they exist to win elections, unfortunately you wouldn’t be too far off from what politics has become. Too often, we as Americans reduce the political process down to this lowest common denominator. We like watching football games where one team wins and one team loses. We enjoy reality television shows where one guy walks away with a million dollars to the dismay of the rest of the contestants. And we watch politics like some sort of spectator sport and find comfort in the fact that at the end of the day there will be a winner and a loser.

Politics equals power in our day and age, and nothing can show that more clearly than recent elections. The Democrats wanted to win the election – why? To be back in power. Not to advance a particular agenda necessarily – their commercials and mass mailings and speeches were strangely absent of that kind of language – but so they could be in the majority. And for a few long years now, we’ve seen what a grand old party can become when they value holding on to power and winning elections more than advancing their agenda.

Ah, yes… the old “agenda”. If you were to say that political parties exist to advance a particular agenda, you would be closer to the answer but still be incorrect. A party cannot simply exist to advance an agenda, for what becomes of that agenda when they lose the support of the general populace they serve? What becomes of that agenda if they are voted out of power? Is that party’s only goal then to reduce itself to having to winning elections once again?

No, a political party cannot exist simply to win elections or to advance agendas, or a combination of both. For a party whose sole mission is to win elections can never govern rightly after, and if, they achieve that goal. And a party who exists only to advance an agenda can never expect to fully enjoy support from the very populace it pretends to represent and lead.

A political party should exist for one, and only one purpose: because that party encompasses a group of people who believe their particular vision and philosophy for governing (and the policies that are birthed from those) are what is best for America.

That should come as no surprise to you, but it is easy to lose sight of that valuable and indispensable goal as elections, campaigns, ads, scandals, news, speculation, and everything else in between comes flying at us from every angle.

It is precisely why a political party cannot focus primarily on winning elections or on advancing an agenda: you can do both of those without fulfilling the mission of the party.

But what is that mission then? If a party exists because the people therein believe their vision and philosophy is the best one for America, then the mission of that party must be to advance that vision and philosophy. One can argue that the only two ways to do that are by winning elections or by advancing an agenda, but I would argue those are two of the worst ways to accomplish the mission. In fact, those should be the end results of the mission, not the vehicle to achieve the mission. And that huge difference has massive implications on where the Republican Party, and the conservative voters it mostly encompasses, goes from here.

One can win elections by adhering to cultural whims and adjusting stances according to the latest polls. One can also lose elections by sticking to unpopular stances on major issues. When faced with those two choices, which one will someone interested in maintaining or gaining power select? But there is a third way.

The same can be said for the process of advancing agendas, and the two are unfortunately intertwined far too often; that is, instead of doing what is best for America (and thus fulfilling the mission of your party’s existence) agendas too often are tailored to win elections and keep people in power. That third way spoken of above is the same way to untangle these two issues – agenda and elections.

What it all comes down to is vision casting. It’s how great leaders inspire and empower great followers. It’s why movements are built around charismatic leaders. It’s the source of hope, the sense of right, and the start of the passion we all crave and desire. It’s why we cry out for another Great Communicator – not so we don’t have to worry about him or her floundering in a televised debate and putting the election in jeopardy, but so we can feel empowered by those things.

And even more than that, so other people can feel empowered by that hope and passion. This is how to achieve the mission of a political party – to win over the hearts and minds of the people you desire to govern through vision casting. Conversations and speeches that make people say or think, “I’ve never thought about it like that before…” or “You know, he’s got a point there…” are priceless. Presenting things in new and fresh ways that touch on both logic and emotion is beautiful. And telling people it’s okay to change your minds on issues both large and small is key.

That is the vehicle. The end result is one of winning elections and advancing agendas that people already agree with, because you’ve taken the time to explain and persuade, to empower people with hope and passion towards something they sense is right. And they sense that because of your vision casting.

The Implications
Obviously, understanding politics in this light has huge ramifications on how we ought to act and react, and how we should expect our leaders to act and react. For instance, there has been debate in some GOP or conservative circles over whether or not it would be generally “good” if the Democrats govern as liberals for the next two years. Sure, they would harm the country, put our security at risk, raise our taxes, and so on and so forth, but at least then Americans will get fed up with them and vote us back into power.

Can you see how absolutely backwards this line of thinking is? Vision casting never relies on others’ failures for your own successes. That line of thinking is the direct result of believing that political parties exist for the purpose of winning elections – a belief which must be dropped.

Instead, consider the scenario where Democrats govern as more centrist Congressmen and women. Shouldn’t we applaud this? I answer with a resounding yes, because what that represents is the fact that we are achieving our mission without even being “in power”! If advancing our agenda and philosophy is our mission, we can measure the results of that in how the political debates of our time are being framed. If the Democrats are being forced to govern more moderately or conservatively in order to win elections, that means we are beginning to win hearts and minds of the people. We should passionately reject out-of-hand the notion that bolstered the feeling of hatred in the Democratic Party for the past six years: the notion that what is bad for the country is good for the party out of power. Instead, we ought to wholeheartedly embrace the idea that we always applaud what is best for the country, no matter which party brings it about. And by releasing our passion to win elections, we can instead take up a passion for advancing our vision and philosophy.

This whole idea is why I look for something different in my leaders that I get to have a say in choosing. I not only want a candidate who shares my views on the issues – for what good will merely subscribing to the same views have in the long term? – but a candidate who can clearly and passionately share why they have those views. I don’t want a candidate who will merely promise me they will vote my way – especially when choosing a President. I want a candidate who will promise me they can cast a vision for conservative philosophy and win not only elections, but the hearts and minds of their countrymen.

Is this a pipe dream? Perhaps. Perhaps the political process is too bogged down in winning elections and advancing agendas to ever regain its true purpose. But I remain hopeful that somewhere exists a conservative leader that can truly end the partisanship of this nation – not by “reaching across the aisle” to make bad policy compromises and not by making buddy-buddy with people waiting to stab them in the back – but by casting a beautiful vision that empowers people with hope and passion towards the conservative ideals that they can then, finally, sense are right.