by Chris Alexion, Copyright November 02, 2006, all rights reserved. 29 views
It's hard to believe that Republicans can still call themselves the party of limited government. Belt-bursting war spending. Domestic spying. A president who's failed to curb government expansion into the lives and pockets of its citizens. Now voters who rolled their eyes when Grandpa used to say there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties are thinking Gramps might have been on to something.
So where to from here? Go third-party, whether Libertarian, Independent, or Constitution? This raises its own set of problems–namely, the candidacy of men with no chance of winning and nominated more for their philosophy than their qualifications. The setup leaves conscientious Christians with a bent for limited government (like yours truly) perplexed indeed.
But to swipe a Democratic phrase, hope is on the way. Christians can have both consistent political philsophy and a chance of winning–just not right away. The problem, as Doug Wilson and others have pointed out for a decade, is that Christians see the battle in exclusively political terms. We're fighting inside the current political arena instead of against it.
But our battle is not with flesh and blood, and this war has many facets outside of politics–such as the arts, the family, and the church. Until we start winning in these spheres, the fact that we call ourselves a Moral Majority won't mean jack squat. And, yes, we can start building a consistently biblical political philosophy along the way, laying the foundations with hard intellectual work, grassroots support, and the transformation of local government first.
"Wait," you say. "This doesn't answer my question about pulling the lever this month, or the big one in 2008." I know.
That's kind of the point.
1 • Hans Bluedorn • November 08, 2006 • 8:18 PM
I especially liked your point about third party candidates being all about philosophy, but no credentials.
——-