The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1922-11-11
The Pulse of the Nation

contented fiocled in 1920 and which they
are said to be preparing to desert the
next national turn Of the wheel" 1t is
the opinion Of the Atlanta Journal
(Dem.), that ':most of US can get along
freely enough with two parties. People
who are sick OF both parties may have
excellent reasons for being so, but as
rule. though history presents notable eX-
ccptions, the constructive reformer learns
to work from within. Americans, when
they observe present entanglements in
even so common place a country as Eng
land, may we'll be content with only two
ma jor parties and pray never to be pes
tered with nineteen" National aims of
the major parties differ within them
selves in the several states the New
York World (Den1) points out as the
president and vice-presdent are the only
nationally elected officials in our gov
eminent, and they are elected by coal
ition Of state parties which changes from
one election TO another. But IN congress,
az in the state themselves. the detern1In-
ing thing is not the national platform but
the state or sectional party alignment.
That is the reason why LaFolette and
Lodge, and Ladd and Butler and MunSey
seem to live together in one party. Act
ually they live in their state parties,
rarely meeting and rarely cooperating
; except once in four years to elect pres
ident. The local divisions are the health
lest part of our political system and it is
at least doubtful whether two highly CEN
tralized national parties with fixed and
constant creeds would be an Improvement.
In a nation that has the scale Of con-
tinent there is something to be said for
illogical diversity as against logical uni
formity''
Even putting the plan over" the
Raleigh Times, (Ind. Dem) points out,
MI inc
/ people who, in spite OF the prodding.
pushing, nagging and muzzIing of the il
! liberals have attained and still retain
! positions of honor, trust and emolument
| that they are loath to leave. The country
p; might have much to gain by their leav-
| ing the old parties in the lurch but they
have somewhat to lose. Of course If the
| radicals decide to throw the liberals out
of both parties there might be some hope
of forming Doc Buffers republican, dem
ocratic organization: but the resultant
! party would be an outgrowth of that mis-
| cry whose love fer company has become
| automatic and not the product of liberia
| lism in political thinking"
| The Birmingham Press Und.) sug
! gests that somebody ought TO tell DR.
Butler the war is over" in view Of the
fact that in 1920 the combined vote of
the socialists and the farmer-labor par
ties was slightly over l.o0Q0 600. In the
same year the united republican and dem
ocratic vote was in excess OF 1900. 900.
II ratio OF 20 TO isn't sufficient 10 re-
liaye his fears for the safety OF the coun-
try probably nothing would be" The
Nashville Tennesseean (Dem). rather
sarcastically holds that the suggestion
IFS a great advance fer Dr.. Butler That
he would consent to association with
democrats, even to combat radicaiism is
condescension in the nth degree. The
democratic party has weathered every
storm in the history of the country and
it has been entrusted with power longer
than any other party. The republican
party. on the other hand, is the party OF
the opportunist. 1t is so hopelssly divided
against itself that nothing can save it"
In the view Of the San Francisco
Bulletin. (Indl. the microscopic differ
cnccs between the two traditional parties