Article by Kurt Anderson in New York Magazine (April 24, 2006) proposing a new political movement: the Purple Party.
Central claim: “WE ARE PEOPLE WITHOUT A PARTY.” Moderates are alienated from both major parties.
Observations: nationwide disaffection with Democrats and Republicans; in 2005, poll numbers for both parties toward the generic positives fell to the low single digits; many voters are neither Democrat nor Republican (roughly 0.33≤p≤0.39).
NYC example: many voters backing Republicans for local offices despite Democratic leanings; reflects broader national trend of independents and moderates.
Core Concepts: The Two-Party Duopoly and the Call for a New Party
The two major parties are dominated by old-school ideologues and non-decisive leaders; both favor government intrusion and resist hard reform.
Critiques of each party:
Republicans: anti-science (e.g., stem-cell research concerns), tax-cut mania with deficit concerns, hints of racism in political strategy, and opportunistic foreign policy.
Democrats: protectionist tendencies, union influence hindering experimentation (e.g., charter schools), reticence on globalization-era reforms, and perceived weakness on national security.
Main question: Can there be a serious, innovative, truth-telling party beyond the duopoly that can win and govern?
Vision: The Purple Party
Core identity: not merely centrist; aims for honesty, pragmatism, and a willingness to be immoderate when necessary.
Electoral aim: create a robust independent party in the middle, not a single-candidate shell or protest party.
Strategic idea: a workable third party that can win, govern, and shift national politics away from the current duopoly.
Policy Platform Highlights
Domestic policy: universal health coverage with government guarantees, spanning birth to death, to decouple health care from employment; promote labor flexibility and entrepreneurship while ensuring access.
Economic philosophy: pragmatic, pro-competition economics with protectionist tendencies; skeptical of unfunded entitlements and over-reliance on old policy paradigms.
Foreign policy: prioritize a strong national security posture; well-funded military and (depoliticized) intelligence; clear, credible use of force when necessary; long-term struggle against Islamic jihadism.
Religion and morals: strict separation of church and state; embrace religious pluralism; oppose teaching creationism in public schools; allow religious symbols when appropriate; avoid moralistic governance.
Party temperament: liberal on individual freedoms and social values, American in the traditional sense, and allied with pragmatic, policy-driven reform rather than ideological rigidity.
Detailed Policy Snapshots
Health care reform: universal coverage for all Americans, with a government role to ensure access and reduce costs; break the job-health linkage to enable mobility and entrepreneurship. Universal coverage financed by a mixed system
National security: sustain a capable military and credible deterrence; resist simplistic or rash approaches; combine military, diplomatic, and cultural strategies.
Separation of religion and politics: maintainFounders’ separation; avoid claiming divine endorsement for policy; promote secular governance while respecting religious diversity.
Education and science: oppose public schools endorsing creationism; keep science-based curricula; embrace evidence-based policy.
Historical Context and Feasibility
Historical precedents for third-party influence: 1992 Perot era (Perot won 0.19 of the national vote); 1912 Roosevelt’s Progressive party impact; Republicans’ origins with Lincoln as a rising party.
Practical hurdles: creating a new party would require significant funding (e.g., a Bloomberg, Jobs, or similar philanthropists) and credibility to convince voters it is a sound long-term investment, not a protest vote.
NYC as model: a historically moderate, independent-minded leadership (Koch, Giuliani, Bloomberg) demonstrates a successful governance model outside strict party lines; suggests a Purple Party could emerge from a city-like blueprint.
Greenspan quote cited: the ideological divide leaves a sizable center untapped, potentially enabling a well-financed independent candidate in 2008 or 2012.
Party Characteristics and Values
Central claim: the party will be centrist in practical terms, but not in a bland, risk-averse sense; honesty and pragmatism drive policy choices.
Moderation with bite: policies may be radical in practice when necessary for effectiveness.
Moral stance: highly moral (but not moralistic) and laissez-faire in economic terms; ambitious reform that blends liberal social goals with American traditionalism.
New York City as Incubator and the Call to Action
NYC’s governance history shows a successful model of moderate, independent leadership under different party labels.
Vision: a Purple Party that bridges the center, with a realistic path to national influence through credible candidates and clear policy propositions.
Final question: \"Are you in?\" inviting readers to join and participate in building this new political force.