The Constitution Party has a party platform that is almost as good looking as the Libertarian Party platform. And Ron Paul endorsed the Constitution Party in the last election, so the party has some real potential. But the Constitution Party has a fatal flaw, which will prevent the party from ever winning an election.
Anybody who has studied American history can tell you that our Constitution did not end slavery in the United States. In fact, it did not even end the slave trade until 20 years later. So, the Constitution loses its credibility, right off the mark, just based on those facts.
Members of the Constitution Party will tell you that you should just take a look at the Constitution Party website to see what they stand for, and not worry about the name of the Party. But it doesn’t matter what the Constitution Party stands for because the name is flawed beyond repair. They’ll never attract a large amount of minorities, which means that they will never gain a large amount of traction and they will never have a real chance of winning.
It is kind of like naming your organization “The Heritage Foundation“. Right off the bat, people are going to imagine a redneck standing there waving a confederate flag and saying with a thick southern accent, “IT’S HERITAGE, NOT HATE!” The Constitution Party has a name that is going to force them to drive full throttle up hill to ever attract any minorities. It’s like a tobacco store in Macon Georgia that wonders why almost all of their customers are white. The name of the store is “Old South Tobacco.” It is a really nice store, and they are super friendly to everybody that happens to wonder in, but for the most part the name chases away minorities.
The problem is that black people tend to be real sensitive to things like their ancestors being enslaved. I never have been able to figure that one out, but go figure. I don’t think there is anything we can do to change it.
So, I guess the members of the Constitution Party could just say, “Well screw them, we don’t need them black folks anyway if they don’t want to see what we really stand for.” A lot of my Republican friends have been saying something similar to that for years, but we see how well that attitude worked out for the Republican Party in the last election. And we see how well that attitude is working out for the Tea Party Protesters right now.
An up and coming party like the Constitution Party with an almost flawless party platform, should consider changing its name back to something which will be less offensive to minorities who want to consider joining a real movement to end big government in America.
~ A. R. H. A.
This article is hard to read. I need to do a lot of editing.
That’s an interesting take. While I do think that the Constitution Party’s positions are leaps and bounds better than the two dominating parties, I was a little disappointed after I read through their platform. Since they are the Constitution party, I was hoping that they would address the Constitution interpretation issues that led to our current political state and our current bloated overbearing federal government. The biggest of these issues is what is the proper interpretation of the interstate commerce clause?
But the biggest trouble I have with the Constitution Party is that their basic premise severely limits their analysis of any political issue. Their answer to any issue is to quote a particular clause of the Constitution. I’m not saying that is bad by any means, but I consider citing the Constitution the beginning of the answer, not the entire answer. Why is it in the Constitution? What purpose does it serve? What premises is it based on? Basing an entire position solely on the fact that is written down shows no philosophical basis or core beliefs for that position.