Competition Makes Parties Better

The worst thing that could happen to the small-government movement would be the creation of a third party.  The best thing that could happen to the small-government movement is the threat of a creation of a third party.  Conservatives could force the bloated Republican establishment to diet if they can convince their natural hosts that they will bolt.  The key is to get the organization to think we’re thinking of leaving.

Obamafoes should be looking forward to next November like it’s a birthday dinner held at a Chuck E. Cheese’s with a full bar.  At present, Americans prefer a party that doesn’t yet exist to the Democratic one (h/t Mary Katharine Ham), as everyone has grown tired of spending limitless sums of money on everyone else.  Barack Obama has given countless people hope. Ironically and perfectly, the hope is to elect non-Obama-style candidates at every level possible.

But Obama’s robustly growing band of foes as dissatisfied to the point that they may create their own option.  A third political entrant would mean we would no longer have to choose between the cold and flu; even better, Republicans, who are allegedly marginally sympathetic to our views, might stop acting like a disease if we begin avoiding them.

We’d be acting like good consumers by at least contemplating shopping around.  It embodies the same principle that causes customers to migrate from Kmart to Target, Pretzel Time to Auntie Anne’s, or Myspace to Facebook: they find an outlet that offers greater value.  Unlimited advocates of limited government will patronize a different business if the Republicans don’t offer fine goods and services at fantastic prices in a welcoming environment.

At least leadership thinks we will, and that’s what’s important.  The GOP can’t wager that we’re bluffing about forming a Rattlesnake Party: conservative voters are positioned to control the deal.  It’s the equivalent of threatening to walk from a car dealership negotiation.  If we actually got up and headed for the door, they’d be forced to ask what it would take to sit back down and get us to sign today.  As with astute consumers angling for a better price on a Taurus, we just want the best deal imaginable.

But would taking our business elsewhere hurt our cause?  It’s possible Republicans and the presently imaginary third party could split votes and simply edge out the Democrats: after all, about four-fifths of people are unwilling to self-identify as liberal.  But splitting the small-government vote would be advantageous to the current power party, even if it just gave them a fighting chance in a three-way matchup.  Still, the Republican hierarchy could stop that middling scenario before it happens: all they have to do is act like they’re supposed to and listen to voters.  Well, that wasn’t too hard.

Meanwhile, liberals don’t have the option to split, in part because they’re reflexively opposed to market-based competition.  Alternately, they prefer sports where everyone gets a participation ribbon and political debates where they treat dissenters from their views as cranks who are oblivious to indisputable truths; as for an example of the latter, read any quote from any Copenhagen delegate.

More significantly, left-leaning Americans not going to initiate a populist movement based upon the notion that the government needs to be more expansive.  That said, I do look forward to seeing what happens if collectivist junkies gather on Independence Day in public parks and squares wearing Che shirts and holding signs reading “Expand the Fed.”

Such a populist yet statist revolt would be fun to giggle at on the way to a Tea Party.  But ultimately, the other side can’t turn elsewhere.  Leftists who think the Senate isn’t currently socializing our health system enough and advocate allowing gays to marry before they join the military are stuck with the Democrats, as a party that leaned more leftward would drift all the way to Havana or Quebec.

On the other hand, those who prefer Red States to stars could invent an entirely sensible faction dedicated to letting people earn, spend, hire, and create at will.  The proposed group already has a natural leader, namely a sympathetic voice and bestselling author who could make a career out of signing books and posing for pictures at booksellers.  Now, we just need a reason not to flip the switch and ask her to lead.  Michael Steele better give us one.

The Don’t Tread On Us posse is prepared to move away from Republicans while standing still in voting booths.  While it would be undoubtedly drastic move, the establishment needs to know we won’t tolerate voting for a Democratic Lite platform.  The process of looking elsewhere is itself exactly reminiscent of the policies Republican leaders and candidates should be advocating.  Citizens who, say, wish to buy health insurance from any company in any state will use the same mindset when pertaining to political affiliation.

Regardless of the product or retailer, conservatives know that heavy-handed guidance is unnecessary.   Customers organically drift to the best option: it’s the free market at work.  Now, does the Republican Party remember that principle?  Just in case they’ve forgotten, I humbly remind them that their very existence is supposed to embody it.

Anthony Bialy is a freelance writer and “Red Eye” Conservative in Western New York.  He blogs at http://thebuffalobean.com and tweets at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy.

Popularity: 1% [?]