Joshua Fauver: How to Destroy a Duopoly

The following was originally published on the Independent American & Constitutional Review (IA&CR). Joshua Fauver is the current vice-chairman of the Clarion Call to Unite Committee (CCTUC), an organization working to unite all right-wing and constitutionalist minor parties under one banner. 


How to Destroy a Duopoly

Published June 12, 2013

By Joshua Fauver


If you’ve been in involved in a third party for any time at all you’ve heard about the “duopoly” that controls our nations political system and that it needs to be broken. I couldn’t agree with that anymore than I do right now; however, each party has a major misconception that it is their party that is going to do just that. (And I direct this towards parties on both the left and the right.)

No singular party, on either side of the political spectrum, possess the ability to single handedly destroy this duopoly. No, it cannot be done by a single political party, at least none that exist as is at this point in the time. The strongest third party in our nation today is without a doubt the Libertarian Party, and in 2012 they couldn’t muster up the numbers to get their candidate, Governor Gary Johnson, into the debates. Make no mistakes my friends, if a party cannot get their candidates into the Presidential Debates, they will not be able to break the stranglehold that the Republicans and Democrats have on our political system. (I mean no disrespect to the Libertarians, merely illustrating a point.)

If those in third parties want to really break through the duopoly they’re going to have to do things differently, and this goes for those on the right as well as the left. You see, the duopoly can’t be torn down just from the right or just from the left; it will have to be torn down from both sides. Lets start with the left shall we?

The far left is as splintered as ever. It is torn into a true plethora of political parties, starting with the Greens, but they won’t be a part of this discussion for now. The left ran several different presidential candidates, none of which even eclipsed 100,000 votes. The candidate who fared the best was without a doubt Rosanne Barr who pulled in about 70,000 votes followed closely by Rocky Anderson pulling in around close to 40,000. But there were several other candidates promoting a socialist ideology, 5 other candidates to be exact (again, excluding the Green Party’s Jill Stein.) who together pulled in a grand total of 16,183 votes. bringing the total votes canst for the far left to around 121,270. By now you should see what I’m getting at. A unified socialist left out performs a splintered left. Instead of 7 candidates splitting the vote, one candidate all of the sudden does only slightly worse than Constitution Party candidate Virgil Goode, who performed in the top three of third party candidates. If the socialists parties had worked together, ran one single candidate, their ballot access would have been far better, the money would have been pooled behind one candidate, as would their resources and their time; the results would have been far better. One very loud voice advocating for socialist ideologies would draw far more attention than 7 or 8 tiny voices. I’m calling upon socialist to practice the principles they advocate, pooling everyone’s resources together for the betterment of all participants. (for the sake of argument, had we included the greens vote totals would have jumped to 526,171.)

Now for the right! It too is torn into several smaller parties. I’m perscribing the same medication for the right that I am for the left. Unification. The right has several small parties and one large part all advocating the same durn thing but not working together to achieve the goal they all want. The far right also ran a group of Presidential candidates instead of all rallying behind one agreeable one. The candidate with the largest portion of the vote was Virgil Goode who was the only candidate to eclipse over 100,000 votes (122,00 roughly). Tom Hoefling came closest to Goode’s performance bringing in 40,000 votes. None of the other candidates than ran pulled in more than 15,000 votes. But if you combine Goode, Hoefling, and the other spread of Constitutional leaning candidate’s votes together you get approximately 187,688 votes.I’m calling on the right, the Constitutional Conservatives, yes the Bible believing evangelical liberty loving far righters to practice what they preach and come together. (“Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous; not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary blessing, knowing that you were called to this, that you may inherit a blessing.” 1 Peter 3:8-9)

In both illustrations ballot access, funds, support from other third party leaders, and combined resources aren’t taken into consideration. Imagine the combined efforts of all of these activists and party members on both sides all working together. Imagine a unified left led by Ralph Nader, Jill Stein, Rocky Anderson, and Rosanne Barr. Imagine a strong right led by Virgil Goode, Alan Keyes, Chuck Baldwin, and Tom Hoefling. If this vision were to ever be realized the results would be, in my opinion, astonishing. I’m convinced that this, and only this, will be the way to break through the duopoly and allow alternative ideas to be heard. This is the only way other voices will be heard in debates with the Republicans and Democrats. If those of us who support alternative ideas can’t work with those who share our same views, then we will never see the goals we have, the changes we want come to fruition.

Article source:

30 thoughts on “Joshua Fauver: How to Destroy a Duopoly

  1. Cody Quirk


    I think those that want to end the two-party system, regardless of what side of the spectrum they’re on, should read and follow this.

  2. Steven Berson

    Completely Agreed! aaannnddd – it unfortunately ain’t going to happen. It’s the old story that basically all of the factions of each of those movements agrees on 95% of everything with each other – but they’ll spend 95% of their energy debating the 5% that they don’t agree on. Circular firing squad ftw!

  3. Sam Kress

    The LP is doing better in this regard than the far left and far right parties. Sure, we have the Objectivist Party, and for a while had the BTP, etc., but few people pay attention to any of those, even by third party standards.

  4. Deran

    And the Personal Freedom Party and the Personal Choice Party, and now the Twelve Visions Party. And a couple Tea Parties here and there. Give the LP a few more decades and you’ll have as many splinters as the Left!

  5. Sam Kress

    The tea party political parties don’t seem too libertarian, or too lasting, and the rest seem rather peripheral and uneventful, even by third party standards.

  6. George Phillies

    The Twelve Visions Party has a candidate for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts this June. Mr. Heos has a general statement of objectives that most libertarians will find very familiar.

    As an interesting historical note, which might steer merger of right-wing minor parties by implementing the agreement that no party’s name will appear in the name of the new party, in 1952 Douglas MacArthur was run for President as a third party candidate. One of the Party names being used by his supporters was “Christian Nationalist”.

  7. Sam Kress

    12 visions is part of neo-tech, a quasi-religious group that copyrights and sells all of its materials, if I’m not mistaken. I don’t think they will pose much of a splinter threat to the LP.

  8. Daddyfatsax

    If any groups are looking to combine effort with the Libertarian party, all they need to do is agree not to use force against another person…meaning the ideas that education, health care and the rest are not rights…they are commodities that you need to work and save up to buy…not expect others to pay for. That is what keeps these splinter groups from joining the LP…they believe they have the right to tell everyone what they want paid for, how to pray or act or have sex or what they can smoke or eat or drink. Even the liberty minded tea party was corrupted and turned into an evangelical mob of people who think they know how other people should live. I wish we had a national “Brewster’s Millions” candidate that ran a NOTA for president…

  9. Sam Kress

    For parties like BTP, Objectivist Party, Personal Freedom Party, Personal Choice Party and 12 Visions Party those ideological issues were not the problem so much, but more organizational/personal issues, and their problem in turn is or was for the ones that are defunct, mainly insignificance.

  10. Catholic Trotskyist

    The problem Daddy, is that 95% of us want to use force against some people in some way. Not too much, but just enough to keep society from going at least somewhat in the direction we wish for. To convince people that healthcare and education are not rights, and or that the state of the family doesn’t have an impact on society that is worth doing something about, is too much for our imperfect humanity.

  11. Sam Kress


    For the sake of the survival of the human species, and for the sake of having lives worth living, let’s hope you are as wrong as can be. Of course, I believe you are wrong, and I believe most people will come to realize that the initiation of force is wrong and unacceptable within our lifetime many of us.

  12. Daddyfatsax

    @11, you reference the need of family structure…before we started rewarding the calving out of a litter of kids from the social coinpurse, women and men used to form parterships and swear an oath to love and protect and defend each other…but since the advent of welfare and our progressive state, why do we need a family? I think you want a return to days of solid structured family and society…but to want that while still propping up a system that discourages it is futile. Stop incentivizing bad behavior and people will revert back to being responsible out of self preservation.

  13. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    There are multiple reasons, at this time, that the proposal above will fail inclusive of the author himself.

    A) Alan Keyes sought the CP Presidential nomination not to campaign for the office ( surface reason ) but to destroy the CP ( the REAL reason ) in service to his backers of the Republican Party ( RINO division ) and their fellow travelers of the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League. Once he failed at Plan A he and his mole associates within the CP, specifically Mark Robinson and Mark Seidenberg, went to Plan B – deliberately filing fake documents ( the crime of fraud ) with the California Secretary of State office in order to seize control of the American Independent Party so that they could break it away from the CP.

    Bottom Line #1 – Alan Keyes is a deep cover mole within the conservative movement. He is dedicated to Alan Keyes and his controllers – and NOTHING else; i.e.; he is a backstabbing traitor to the nation.

    Bottom Line #2 – Tom Hoefling was Keyes right hand man. He is controlled by, and loyal to, the same people ( Republican ” moderates,” SPLC, and ADL ) who are dedicated to destroying the conservative 3rd party movement within the nation.

    Hence there can never be, and will never be, ANY true successful conservative movement that includes in any way any of the traitors/moles whom I have named above. They are ALL personally dedicated to, in service to their Masters/controllers, destroying what they, as spies/moles within the movement, publicly proclaim to support.

    B) Fauver is simply a RINO Republican as he is A) part of the Quirk/Twerp movement to claim ” unity ” among conservatives while attacking and excluding evangelical Christians from such movement; i.e.; a fake movement from the start which has no intention in the slightest of achieving its claimed objective except in the most divisive sense; and B) a noted ranter against the moral foundations of the Illinois CP; i.e.; an attacker of the Christian foundations of the party, in this case via his defense of various manifestations of the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement such as lyingly referred to as ” marriage equality.”

    Bottom Line – when the moral foundations of the nation are gone the nation is gone. When we decide to legalize and then teach ( yes – TEACH ) homosexuality to the children of the nation we will destroy the nation within 2 generations at the very most.

    Question – Exactly WHAT do we win if and when we ” win?”

    Answer – If we follow the RINO path of a Socially Engineered nation and populace which allows the promotion and teaching of an emotional pathology such as homosexuality to the children of the nation, and this starting ( as is both planned and currently occurring ) in kindergarten, we will be a morally dead nation which will then be a literally dead nation – militarily defeated, economically collapsed, or under tyrannical dictatorship.

    And these monstrous events will be a just reward to a nation of Fauvers, KL’s. Twerps, and Jill P.’s who have been busy spitting in the face of the Creator so that His hand of protection and blessing is withdrawn from our nation so that we may reap our just rewards for our hatred and contempt of Him.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. chronicler of the contempt, hatred, scorn, and ridicule which anti-Christians have for the Creator and Protector of our nation

  14. Daddyfatsax

    I think Christians have done more to ruin Christianity than any group of homosexuals or teachers who don’t spew the closed minded drivel that people use the bible to back it up. A true movement to return the country to prosperity will include individual liberty, a return to a state/local governance based on community standards and ideals as well as a healthy understanding of what the word responsibility means. Right now, we have supposed “Christians” who support wars all over the world but let the veterans who are injured or maimed for life fend for themselves while we spend countless times more money feeding clothing, housing and educating hordes of people who don’t work, don’t care and only vote when something is in it for them. If that system is ok…then take the overwhelming Xian support for Obama and Romney and live with your choices…but for your god’s sake, stop blaming gays for how your congregation votes. If you think Romney was the answer because he believes that gays are an affront to god, then by all means, keep voting for warmongering, big gov’t spending, gov’t dept keeping/growing progressive RINOs. I’m sure they’ll get us to the promised land eventually. hahahaha

  15. Sam Kress

    “I think Christians have done more to ruin Christianity than any group of homosexuals or teachers who don’t spew the closed minded drivel that people use the bible to back it up. ”


  16. Mark Seidenberg

    Look what Obama’s administration has just done
    now approve I-130’s between same sex “marriages”.

    Therefore, the Federal Government will no longer protect a marriage between one man and
    one woman.

  17. Sam Kress

    @19 Good! Way overdue though.


    So do my neighbors
    So do my friends
    So do my parents
    So do my kids
    So do my pets
    So do my siblings
    So do my co-workers
    So my teachers
    So do my preachers
    So do my politicians
    So do my lovers

    And last but not least

    So do my holier than thou religious hypocrite acquaintances…

  18. Jill Pyeatt

    MS @ 19: “Therefore, the Federal Government will no longer protect a marriage between one man and one woman.”

    Great! It’s not their business to be in the marriage business.

  19. Gene Berkman

    For years people in the little far left groups have talked about “unity” or a “united front” but the reason so many little groups exist is because each has leaders that can’t get along with the leaders of the other little groups.

    The Trotskyite movement has over 75 years suffered numerous splits. Periodically two or three of the splinter groups will merge, then the people in each group who opposed the merger will split and form new groups.

    Between 1953 and 1965 there were two major groups claiming to be the Fourth International – the International Committee of the FI and the International Secretariat of the FI. When they merged in 1965, it led to a purge of dissident leaders in each of the factions.

    To run a Trotskyite group, the main computer accessory you need is a “merge-purge” program.

  20. Mark Seidenberg

    Gene Berkman

    I saw the same thing at Los Angeles City College
    in circa 1965. I recall organization Marxist-Leninist USA when they tried to place a Viet-Cong Flag on the main College flag pole. I was
    leading the group of students that stopped them.
    The only thing that came of it about 500 students blocked Vermont Avenue from campus
    North to Santa Monica Blvd.

    Hollywood New Media showed up and thought
    in the beginning that there was another Watts
    type riot. That was when I became a friend with
    George Putnam after he interviewed me, as President of the United States Flag Club (since
    the college administration would not allow YAF
    on campus). In fact Alan Bock got me on the Joe Pyne Show. Alan Bock at the time was attending UCLA and at that time was Chairman
    of the California Young Republicans College Federation. After that event the United States
    Flag Club reorganized into VIVA and formed the
    first college chapter. At the time LACC Republicans was JBS, because the College administration would not let the John Birch Society organized on campus also.

    Bottom line Gene we are get old. This was 48
    years ago.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party of California

  21. Joshua Fauver

    I think the real point here is that as long as the left and the right remain splintered and divided and uncooperative the duopoly will remain in power. There is no way to break through it as long as we are splintered.

  22. paulie

    I recall organization Marxist-Leninist USA when they tried to place a Viet-Cong Flag on the main College flag pole. I was
    leading the group of students that stopped them.

    How cavemanly! Flags are just the modern equivalent of war facepaint. Modern, adult humans should feel silly and embarrassed about all the childish, primitive flag humping 🙂

  23. Joshua Fauver

    Interesting enough is that Grundman supposedly stands for liberty and the constitution then led an effort to infringe on the liberty of others to do what they want with a flag or express their belief about communism or anything else. What a hypocrite.

  24. Joshua Fauver

    I apologize. Wouldn’t want to credit Grundman with a stereotypical act of hypocrisy he didn’t commit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *