The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1886-11-03
POLITICS AND PARTIES.

I
the revolutionists of monarchial gov
ernments and the watch dogs of popu
lar governments. A democracy with
ont parties would soon lose its identit,
and become the prey of schemers, fall
ing in the hands of ambitious aspirers
! In democracy leaders and office
holders cannot perpetuate themselves
for on constant changes and renewals
depend the safety of a popular govern
ment, whereby each man can ascend
to the highest power and be made tc
descend to the level of bis other fel.
low citizens from which arise pop
ular parties.
In this country two parties only are
now recognized as representing enough
popular votes to command the power
OF the government. Issues are only
collateral to the number of votes
which they represent, for by voters
are they made binding. In the North
although the two leading parties still
hold the mastery, yet unimportant is
sues are raised by small minorities
which are not noticed as they do not
affect any Of the vital issues before
the people.
In the South, however, the case is
different. The South holding the bal
ance of power is virtually the battle
field of the Union, therefore both par
ties are just as compact in their oppo-
site unities and just as apart in their
aims as at the close of the war, repre-
senting not issues but voters, different
in race, aims and influences. What
ever breach would be made in any one
of the parties would not and could not
be made the nucleus of third opposi-
ton, but would go, as a matter of ne
cessity to increase the strength of Ell
ther one or the other of the leading
factions. Therefore division would be
either suicidal or a necessity. If the
party in power can be arraigned for
misgoyernmcnt then change would
become necessity, but in our case the
change would only result in making
two factions ont of one, and thereby
placing the two in hopeless minori-
ty; for the opposition is still there I'M
broken and uncompromising. Either
of the two dissenting factions in order
to keep the mastery would have to
unite with the other opposing party,
which would then be SO overwhelm-
ingly in the majority both in its own
ranks and as general factor in the gen
eral election that it would take the
complete mastery.
Therefore whatever changes have to
be made must be made within our
selves, keeping the party as compact
and as united as it ever was. All
other courses would be suicidal. Once
disrupted the party could never again
be reunited, for out of the general crash
personal aims and passions would rise
to increase the breach instead of
healing it.
De.nocracies are safe as long as they
are not personal, but whenever the
popular voice has become so weak that
it is not needed and it is controlled hy
the personality of its leaders, then OPP
position rises and a rupture is immi-
nent Rotation in office is the only
safeguard and protection which we can
have for the future. 1t alone can in.
fuse life in the dominant body and
strengthen our hold of power creating
within ourselves that emulation for sue
cess which without it would make us
inert and Indifferent.
The chasm before us, in the South,
is perpetnation in office; it is a new
definition of power lately embodied in
our political creed which bodies moth
ing but discussions and disasters
The rule, of course, is not general,
some minor Offices by their callings,
requirements and local holdings be-
come fitted to the parties filing them,
but the rule holds good for all Offices
of popular Importance. The whole re-
solves itself in two questions: Is
party personal or is 1t peoples party!
Ii the party is personal, let the Sc
lected officers serve on as long as they
will, you will then have an oligarchy
II the party is a peoples party, it is
then Democracy, whose foundations
are as vast as the masses it represents,
following forever the changes of the