I want to start with a confession. I am a political junkie. And so, while I have no principled affinity with the major presidential candidates, still I check Politico and Five-Thirty-Eight to follow the race. I rationalize my habit by using Aristotelian maxims of being a “political animal,” but this year that was not quite enough justification.
And so I have exercised my political nature by diving a bit deeper into three voices on the periphery of our major media frenzy. I want to share a few thoughts about these voices, and what they might mean during this time of focus on politics. And this blog—dedicated as it is to elevating conversation even beyond the national arena—is a fit place to share what I am learning.
And so take a moment to move beyond Republicans and Democrats. Rather, these players go by the names of “Tradinistas,” “Integralists,” and the American Solidarity Party. At the end, though, for fellow junkies, I will share what these three political animals have to do with Election 2016.
First, the Tradinistas. These young Christians promote the social “kingship of Christ.” Clearly, that have looked at modern society and seen the way it represents a kind of anti-Gospel of exclusion, violence, and vice. Their response is to turn to “traditional orthodoxy” in order to suggest a “politics of virtue and the common good,” while being clear-eyed that this will mean “the destruction of capitalism” and the establishment of a socialism marked by robust subsidiarity.
Greater social control of labor and wealth, especially when it ensures workers, local communities, and families have more access to personal property, is needed to combat the inequality and exploitation of global markets, where decisions are made based on the priority of capital. As I examined the Tradinista Manifesto, I found myself appreciative. No doubt, the vision seems abstract and impractical—especially when the current choice for president involves two super-capitalists—but the Tradinista response at least gets to the heart of the problem.
The second voice that garnered my attention this election season came from The Josias, a website full of interesting and thoughtful essays that promote Catholic integralism. Integralism is, like the socialism of the Tradinistas, built on a commitment to the truth that Christ is king not of a cordoned-off spiritual realm but rather of all life, including the socio-political realm. The integralists thus believe that political principles and structures—which should promote the natural good of human life—ought to be subordinate to theological principles and ecclesial structures, which extend natural goodness toward our ultimate end of communion with God and the saints.
Writers at The Josias are complex thinkers and recognize that a variety of models can perform the “integration” necessary to help communities pursue the two-fold path toward goodness and holiness. I certainly am not sounding the bell for a Catholic monarchy—even as depressing as I have found our choices this election,. But it is hard not to pause for a moment, think of our candidates and global leaders, and wish that more of them had the moral vision offered by the Church, in particular of someone named Pope Francis!
I do believe that we Catholics should always be on guard against triumphalism—the Gospel indicts us all, not just Democrats and Republicans. Yet we might also take a look at Catholic Social Teaching and say: “that might be about the best vision of justice on offer in the world today.” Of course, many will say “fine, but that still is not a practical option in this election.”
Or is it? The third voice I have been following is the American Solidarity Party. These folks—shall we call them/us “the Solids”?—are committed to a pro-life, pro-family and pro-peace and justice vision. Check out their platform and you will find no daylight between it and the social doctrine of the Church. They do not run as candidates seeking an establishment of Catholicism as an official religion, but to me they do show that if you get the ultimate end of persons right—we are made for communion—then you also are on the path to a pretty good politics.
Their presidential ticket, Mike Maturen and Juan Munoz, has mainly write-in votes as its option, but is actually on the ballot in the swing state of Colorado. Still their goal in 2016 is more modest: to begin to develop the party as a real alternative, much like the Greens have hoped to become for liberal progressives. Will see more of the Solids—or how about “Virtue-crats”?—in coming local and national elections? The answer to that may depend on the very people reading a blog like this.
And where does this leave a political junkie like me? I write this on election eve, though many may read it after that fact. And like many friends, I have gone back and forth about my votes. When folks have asked what I will do, my musings about tradition or integralism or a third party seem at first not to help much. But now that I have learned more from these voices, I am in better shape to share three conclusions which may even approach the realm of practical.
First, go to the polls—and consider the write-in option. One thing I like about that option is that if there is any writing at all on a ballot, it gets counted by hand. That means that somebody actually reads it. Why not even share a brief sentence like “hoping for more pro-life and pro-peace candidates.” Your ballot, or other votes for listed candidates, will not be dismissed. That would be illegal—and besides, the people who work on Election Day take very seriously making sure every vote counts.
Second, let’s go back to the idea that Christ really is King of our social and political lives. Here we have to remember that clearest of lessons from the Gospel: the kingship of Jesus does not emerge in the expected ways. This time of year, it’s true that many eyes (especially mine) are on the political structures that are up in the air. But our neighborhoods and social circles are also political structures, too, and they may be up in the air waiting for our involvement. At least we could help redeem these places.
Third, let us use this moment to widen our capacity for political options. It has been a long time since I really dived into Catholic integralism, or Catholic socialism, or even the viability of Christian Democratic parties. But standing here, in the middle of the American “democracy,” seeing that of all the women and men capable of leading us we have “chosen” the two most established and flawed political and economic insiders… well, if that’s not a call for considering a few more voices, than all we have left is Politico, Five-Thirty-Eight and a pretty boring sense of politics. Or we can join the conversation, the movement, to see what principles and shared visions emerge when we look to Christ as king not only of heaven but of earth too.