Third parties have been palookaville for a lot of good and important – and not a few stupid and bad – ideas in American history.

The Grangers, the Non-Partisan League, the Libertarian Party, Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, the Greens, the Reform Ventura “Independence” Party and many more movements and movers have grandiloquently decided that they needed a party of their own…

…which, once the followers’ original fervor cooled, became a marginalized non-entity.

Which isn’t to say third parties haven’t had their effects.  Ross Perot probably put Bill Clinton into office.  Ralph Nader probably returned the favor in 2000.  A swelling of Libertarian sentiment helped push the 1994 “Contract with America”.

Now, the most powerful force in American politics today (after the Teachers’ Unions) is the Tea Party movement.  And as a group of ‘partiers gathers in Nashville, some are pondering the idea of starting a third, “Tea” Party – because neither of the major parties is just right for the Tea Party, or so they say.

Which is not only a bad idea in the long term – see above – but tosses away the Tea Parties’ biggest advantage.

Mark Tapscott:

Third parties have mostly failed thanks to immense institutional ballot access obstacles erected by the two major parties, and the challenge of overcoming geographic separation over vast differences in order to achieve timely concerted action.

But the Internet enables these new armies rapidly to overcome distance and resource limitations that would hobble a traditional third-party attempt, and instead focus effectively on bringing to bear consistent demands with widespread public support on decision makers.

They can also, if they choose and organize to do so, impose enduring consequences on recalcitrant or witless decision makers, as Martha Coakley found out a few weeks ago in Massachusetts.

The Tea Parties, being a decentralized movement that depends less on big top-down direction and more on ubiquitous communication and decentralized grassroots action, have a huge advantage that would get squandered by forming a third party:

The issue then for Tea Partiers and political elites alike was posed by [Instapundit blogger Glenn] Reynolds in a recent Examiner article: When political movements can “bubble up from below, and self-organize via the Internet, what will happen to the political class?”

Going the traditional third-party route will lead Tea Partiers to a dead end. Taking over the GOP probably should be pursued in any case, but even if successful would only win half the battle and likely would be temporary in any case.

Why settle for half a victory when Tea Partiers have within their grasp as an independent third force to be the decisive influence in both major political parties?

The Tea Parties could very well take over the GOP.

But when I spoke at the Tax Day Tea Party, I made a point of asking the crowd “what party do you belong to?  Raise your hand if you’re a…”, and I riffed through the list of parties.  And people who didn’t care about parties at all.  The biggest round of applause were Republicans, with “A pox on all their houses” second – and behind that, plenty of DFLers.

The Tea Parties aren’t affiliated with parties.  That’s a strength (I add some emphasis):

There is no mystery about what most Tea Partiers seek — a limited, transparent government that listens to them and resists ideologues with millennial blueprints to remake America in their own image, minimal taxation and regulation, strong national defense, and an unapologetic commitment to American exceptionalism abroad.

Tea Partiers should seek out or field candidates in both major parties who support those aims and do everything possible to elect them, then hold their feet to the fire of accountability. Just imagine a bipartisan Tea Party Caucus with sufficient numbers in Congress to drive the national agenda.

That could be a conquering army like none before in American politics.

Which is, of course, exactly what the Tea Party – and the country – need.

This entry was posted by by Mitch Berg on Thursday, February 4th, 2010 at 8:48 am and is filed under Liberty. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.