This Week: EDITORIAL: Books tore us apart, they can bring us together | Local author Steve Watkin’s Stolen by Night | UMW Theatre’s production of Matilda.
Books Tore Us Apart … Now They Can Unite Us
The new school board – and most important, those parents who supported the change in power – need to live up to the ideals they said they supported. The first test comes December 2.
by Martin Davis
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Since Tuesday night, there have been celebrations across Spotsylvania over the demise of the School Board regime that openly supported book banning. There has also been talk of next steps among the outgoing board’s supporters who saw their 15 minutes of fame burn bright, then burn out.
Both need to be wary. The voters weren’t advocating for a liberal bloc on Tuesday (Megan Jackson and Belen Rodas are decidedly independent), nor were they voting out a Tea Party bloc (concerns about books and what’s being taught remain among parents in the county). Rather, the voters made clear that they’re tired of the chaos.
And they want it to stop – now.
Whether that occurs is now firmly in the hands of the newly elected school board – as well as those who put them in power.
How does Spotsylvania get back to a functioning school board? And restore a school system that had made significant gains over the past decade? How does it get past 9-hour School Board meetings and actually get work done?
Return to the ideal of the common good, and the dignity of all people. Even those we dislike.
For two years, the School Board and Superintendent Mark Taylor consistently disrespected parents by refusing to answer emails, return phone calls, or allow free-and-open debate in School Board meetings.
They thumbed their nose at committees established to review library books that had been challenged by a lone parent. Instead of respecting these committees’ decisions, they overrode their decisions and removed books from the library shelves the community decided were appropriate.
We must return to the ideal of the common good, and the dignity of all people. Even those we dislike.
The incoming Board has promised to do better. In an encouraging step forward, the Advance has learned through multiple sources that at least one of the Tea Party board members staying on the dais – April Gillespie – is already reaching out to the incoming Board and working to find common ground.
This is an encouraging sign, as Gillespie – who took the gavel on the nights Lisa Phelps was absent – accomplished what neither current Board chair Phelps nor former Board chair Kirk Twigg ever could. She ran meetings that followed Robert’s Rules of Order and respected everyone’s voices.
Let’s hope that this reaching out and reaching back continues at the Board level, and among those who’ve backed the opposing sides in this recent election struggle.
Everyone Has a Part to Play
Books divided Board members and community members alike for two years.
On December 2, the incoming majority and the people who supported them have an opportunity to model how books can bring us together.
Taylor is holding a celebration at Riverbend High School that will feature Christmas music, food trucks, and former child-actor-turned-born-again-activist-and-book-author Kirk Cameron of Brave Books.
According to Brave Books website, “cultural forces are hard at work attempting to steal the hearts and minds of your most prized possession, your children. This enemy would love nothing more than to leave your family weak, your children confused, and their value system destroyed.”
I certainly don’t share Cameron’s apocalyptic narrative about books and literature, nor his belief that educators and writers are looking to destroy children.
Nor do I agree with Cameron’s or Taylor’s narrow reading of Christianity. They both live in a world of Christian belief that Reformed Evangelical Christian and scholar Mark Noll described thusly in his classic book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind:
The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind. An extraordinary range of virtues is found among the sprawling thongs of evangelical protestants, in North America … however, evangelicals are not exemplary for their thinking, and they have not been so for several generations.
In the 2022 preface to the new edition of this book that was originally published in 1994, Noll was no more optimistic:
… when the American population is divided into constituencies defined by religion, “white evangelicals” invariably show up on the extreme end of whatever question is being asked.
There are two undeniable facts, however:
In Spotsylvania, many parents and their children embrace this evangelicalism
They are also a part of our school system and have every right to a free, public education. And they have a right to be active participants in that process.
As surely as I disagree with evangelicalism, it’s equally sure that Taylor and – I would guess – Cameron just as strongly disagree with me.
And this is where the common good comes in.
Our nation is not founded on the ideals of religion. And for good reason. Our nation was founded on the heels of the wars of religion that tore Europe apart. The Founders wanted nothing to do with the trauma that religious practice could have on political life.
None other than Thomas Jefferson understood well the danger in mixing church and state. And it was he who most strongly advocated for the idea of “separation of church and state.” The idea is enshrined in the First Amendment. And Jefferson spells out this idea in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I believe firmly in that separation, as well as the idea that personal religious belief is an intensely personal matter (which, itself, is grounded in Protestant thinking, a la Martin Luther).
What I don’t agree with is stifling the written expression of anyone, or shielding students to those ideas – even those I profoundly disagree with.
Even books that I believe to be as poorly written and, yes, in some ways dangerous, to the ideals of multiculturalism and American freedom that Brave Books are.
My personal feelings – or yours – about Brave Books, however, is not the point. Protecting the right of Brave Books to express their view is what must be protected. Then let the citizens decide how to navigate the tensions that exist between Cameron’s worldview and that of Toni Morrison, or mine or yours.
So let tens of millions of titles be printed – those we agree with, and those we don’t.
We should fear no published words. Only those people who would limit our access to them and their ideas.
This new School Board, and its supporters, must do better than the last. But putting book titles back on the shelves isn’t enough. They must be willing to read, and hear, the words of those with whom they profoundly disagree. And find a way to work with them in a multicultural institution built to support the common good.
So welcome, Mr. Cameron. We at the FXBG Advance look forward to seeing and speaking with you at Riverbend High School on December 2.
We hope you, our readers, will, welcome him, too. Whether you agree with what he has to say or not.
I welcome the debate with Cameron, as well as finding a pathway forward to make our schools work as efficiently as possible for as many people as possible.
Let the debates burn long and bright.
But the chaos has to go. It’s up to this new School Board and its supporters to ensure that it does.
Book Review
STOLEN BY NIGHT
by Steve Watkins
Published by Scholastic Press (November 7, 2023)
Hardcover $18.99
Kindle $11.99
Reviewed by Drew Gallagher
Full Disclosure: author Steve Watkins is a friend of mine. If not for Watkins, I would have never had a poem published in a literary magazine titled Kumquat Meringue. That’s not the kind of thing you ever forget in a friendship.
Watkins is a Fredericksburg-based author who has written a number of young adult (YA) novels including the very popular Ghosts of War series. I believe I have read and enjoyed every one of his novels, but his newest, Stolen by Night may be the most affecting of any of his works.
It is unfortunate that I now read most YA novels through the lens of wondering if the novel would stay on library shelves in Spotsylvania County schools or be banned because a single parent and a willingly obtuse Superintendent find them offensive, but that is the county I now live in. There is no rape, bestiality, or sex in Stolen by Night. The character Jules might be gay, but the fact that I am unclear on that point means it’s likely not a disqualifier. But what would disqualify Stolen by Night is the whole reason it exists and should be read; it is a heart-rending story about the Holocaust which most assuredly did happen and should never be forgotten or whitewashed from the pages of history.
Stolen by Night is set in Paris as the Nazis begin to take over the city in 1940. Nicollete is a 14-year old who has cut her hair to pass as a boy simply to compete in a cycling race with her friend Jules. Nicolette is certainly aware of the increasing Nazi presence, but her father, a policeman, does not believe that the German occupation is necessarily a bad thing and fights often with his oldest daughter, Charlotte, about the Wehrmacht’s intentions. Slowly, Nicolette’s insular life can no longer focus solely on cycling and being a teenager, and it becomes obvious to Nicolette that Charlotte is on the right side of history, and rebelling against the Germans, in any form, is her duty even if her father disapproves.
Nicolette forms a small group of resistance fighters among friends and classmates to spread leaflets throughout the city alerting their fellow countrymen of German atrocities. In time, Jules realizes that they need to be more disruptive and make use of a small cache of weapons that Charlotte and her boyfriend have hidden in a secret room within Paris’ underground tunnel complex. At this point, a reader envisions a novel of French resistance carried out by patriotic teenagers. Vive la France!
Watkins had other ideas.
The progression from handouts to hand grenades is catastrophic for Nicolette as she is captured by the Nazis and taken to the only concentration camp on French soil, Natzweiler-Struthof. She is not Jewish. She is not gay, but she is clearly an enemy of the Reich and is treated accordingly despite the fact that she’s not old enough to drive a car. The horrors at Natzweiler-Struthof are never-ending, and any signs of humanity are snuffed out as quickly as they are observed by the prison’s guards and soldiers. This is no place for children, and yet therein lies the inherent importance of Stolen by Night. We must learn and we must remember. Especially our children.
Watkins is a marvelous storyteller with an ability to engage readers with plots that move quickly. In Stolen by Night though, there is a need to slow down and consider the story at intervals so Nicolette, even as fictional construct, and all those at Natzweiler-Struthof are never forgotten.
Drew Gallagher is a freelance writer residing in Fredericksburg, Virginia. He is the second-most-prolific book reviewer and first video book reviewer in the 136-year history of the Free Lance-Star Newspaper. He aspires to be the second-most-prolific book reviewer in the history of FXBG Advance.
Theater Review
MATILDA
University of Mary Washington Theatre
Roald Dahl’s Matilda the Musical
Book by Dennis Kelly; Music and Lyrics by Tim Minchin
Tickets $33.00
KleinTheatre, University of Mary Washington, performances through November 19th
Reviewed by Dennis Wemm
For children are innocent and love justice, while most of us are wicked and naturally prefer mercy.
– GK Chesterton
Is Matilda just a “revolting child”, or a good human being becoming great? This adaptation from Dahl’s classic children’s tale lets her have it both ways, all by getting a little bit naughty.
UMW’s Klein Theatre crew brings it to lively life in all aspects of the show. As you enter, the stage is covered with children’s letter blocks, stacked and painted on perspective arched wings. Primary colors and white predominate; shafts of light highlight areas in the hazy, open space. (Warning to those who are sensitive, there is a lot of stage haze used throughout the show.)
We’re introduced to Matilda (Emmy Beach) and her family as she is born, and her father (Mason “MO” Oberle) has shown up to the maternity unit armed with everything he might need to greet his new little boy. Boy? Boy, is he in for a surprise. His wife, Mrs. Wormwood (Kyleigh Friel), is irritated by his reaction-almost as irritated as she was with being told she was pregnant. So inconvenient!
It’s not long before an older Matilda is introduced as an introverted genius and her family as dishonest (read criminal and philandering) TV addicts. They have not bothered to get to know her or what she can do. There’s also a firstborn son, Michael, who does almost nothing but watch TV and roll around the stage on his heelys. Matilda is the talented one.
Some of the loveliest moments in the show take place in a library where Matilda tells stories to Mrs. Phelps. This provides background for what Matilda is like when she’s allowed to express herself and a place where she can use her special talent.
What is her special talent? Flipping scripts. Righting wrongs. Rewriting stories and sharing them. (Some other paranormal abilities will show up later, but they only help her to change the story of her life and those of people she loves.)
So, Matilda-the naughty, revolting child-goes to school with uniforms, regimented behavior reinforced by older student bullies, and worst of all with world-champion hammer throwing Headmistress Miss Agatha Trunchbull. Headmistress Trunchbull is the meanest of meanies, the most controlling authoritarian you will ever see. Professor Dolores Umbridge of Harry Potter fame is a subtle politician compared to Agatha (played with a unibrow of doom by Matthew Monaghan).
Matilda meets many children who are fellow Trunchbull sufferers. When you dare to challenge Trunchbull’s rules, she changes the rules in order to suppress the child. You can tell that these two are not going to get along.
At home, Michael watches TV, plays on his handheld games, and rolls around on his heelys. Mr. Wormwood is going to pull one over on some Bulgarians, selling them junker cars by rolling back their odometers, and Mrs. Wormwood is taking dance lessons from Rudolfo (Ryan Bailey, who is, in the only word available to describe him, a hoot). And so, home is no refuge from the insanity that is school for Matilda.
The one sweet spot in the school is a young teacher, Miss Honey, who sees each child and teaches them just what they need in the way they need to be taught. For Matilda, it’s love at first sight. Soon, we learn that Matilda is so precocious because she is so brilliant. When none of the other kids can do arithmetic or read books, Matilda does complex math and reads high school and adult level books. Miss Honey is in love as only a teacher who has a truly brilliant and willing student can be in love. And that’s all the story I’m going to give away here. See the show.
Performances are uniformly strong. Staging and direction by Gregg Stull are clear, clever and for the most part seamless. Even if there are occasional pauses for scene changes, they are well filled by a fantastic lighting treatment that turns the blocks into an endless tunnel. The orchestra, led by Music Director and Conductor Angie Benson, is in tune and in step throughout. Choreography is snappy, angular, for the most part percussive, and fits the music and language of the songs well.
Scenery, costumes, and properties are well-integrated and stylish, so much so that when something intrudes from the real world (ordinary trophies decorating Trunchbull’s desk) it’s a jolt. The lighting supports the scenes well and is timed well. The very few special effects are effective and fit the expressionistic style of everything else in the design.
I had a couple of quibbles, mainly having to do with understanding lyrics. First, in many of the very fast ensemble numbers the balance between vocal sound and instrumental sounds shifts a bit much to the instrumental side of the scale. This makes it difficult to distinguish voices from the background beats, and we lose the meaning of the lyrics. Second, the dialects plus the child-like voices most of the singers use plus the drive to “rock out” especially when building to a climax in a song sometimes causes the lyrics to become indistinguishable from each other. Finally, especially in moments when the entire chorus has an entrance into a song in the middle of a section, those entering the stage with the song enter with a different tempo than is already being sung on stage. It makes the words muddled, and the show’s lyrics are built on verbal wit and byplay.
That’s enough quibbling because the show is energetic, imaginative, fun and a visual feast of images. You need to see this show, and judging from Friday night’s lack of empty seats, you need to act very fast to get in!
Dennis Wemm started directing at age 17 and didn’t stop until he retired three years ago. He loves his new home in Fredericksburg where theatre is an art, a community, and a diversion.
Odds & Ends at FXBGAdvance.com
Send your questions, thoughts or story ideas to [email protected].
To view local obituaries or to send a message to family and loved ones, please visit our website by clicking on the link below:
Support Local Journalism
The FXBG Advance is off and running, but we can’t do this without your help. You can support local journalism here in Fredericksburg by donating $8 a month. Your dollars will go toward hiring journalists so that we can broaden our reach and strengthen our coverage.
The content is now, and will continue to be, free.
Help us bring aboard the journalists who will elevate our coverage and strengthen the community we all share.
Consider joining for $8 monthly, $80 yearly, or becoming a supporting member for $200 or a Founding Member for $500.
Thank you for reading and supporting FXBG Advance.
-Martin Davis, Editor
Apparently there’s now a limit on comment length. You think they would let you know what the rules are somewhere.
Anyway – short version – if you are continually compromising with the uncompromising – eventually you’ll find yourself in a place you no longer recognize. And being represented by Tara Durant, when either Joel Griffin or Monica Gary is who you preferred.
So maybe your plan isn’t as smart as you think, eh?
Now I’m curious what the parameters are. So I’ll try posting the original comment this way, as a work around. Maybe it’ll work, maybe it won’t.
I went to the grocery store the other day. As I often do. NO matter the store, the transaction’s pretty much the same. I choose what I want, walk to the counter, pay for it, leave.
On the rare occasion something is wrong, I return, we talk about it – attempt to reach a satisfactory consensus – and consider the matter resolved. If not, we both have known options for resolution. Suit, complaint, courts.
That resolution, though not perfect, is built upon tenets of trust. Things that are given. So built into the process, we rarely think about them. We don’t need to.
That money is a satisfactory tender. Laws are applicable. We have a mutual desire for success.
The food they sell me isn’t laced with an unexpected poison (fentanyl as compared to alcohol, sugar, or nicotine). They will not rob me on the way out of the store. I will not try to steal the item without payment.
It works. Mostly. Modern capitalism is built upon those intangible trusts. From them, we all profit.
But what if one of us has proven themselves, time and again, to be untrustworthy? Who has goals beyond mutual benefit?
Would we approach the transaction the same way with a kidnapper, terrorist, or enemy? Someone who wants something more than to just make a profit. Who has other aims rather than just our mutual success?
What then?
Is it wise to approach the transaction the same way?
Time and again, many – myself included over the last 30-40-50 years, have tried to apply those same rules of marketplace consensus, respect, and compromise you describe to the political arena.
Yet, increasingly, over that time – whether they call themselves the Republican Party, conservatives, Christian nationalists, Tea Partiers, John Birch Society, MAGA, or whatever; they have increasingly realized that they are most successful when they operate in that system, with the stated goal of destroying it.
What has morphed from the original Republican narrative of being conservative, and pro-business, yet realizing that the social constructs inherent in 20th century American democracy have been a core part of their success, has now become a structure – where at least on paper – they are looking to destroy the 20th-21st century American democratic republic we all depend upon.
What then?
When you are seeking to compromise with the uncompromising, how do you do it? When you are dealing with those who are not looking to work within the system, but rather to use your faith in the rules of that system to destroy it, and place you under their power.
Again, what then?
In a way, it’s ironic. In that, often, though they see themselves as independent – and therefore are contemptuous of our form of government – they are the ones most dependent upon it. The school teacher, firefighter, cop, or soldier who is anti-government – yet gladly takes a government paycheck every week. Who enjoys much better medical care, paid time off, defined retirement benefits, etc. as a member of that government than they would as a common laborer in the system they claim to despise.
Also, the business owner, farmer, builder. Getting low cost loans to improve his land because he is polluting his neighbors with his activity. Tax write offs, subsidies, oil and tax credits. Etc. Access to public roads underwritten by those very taxes they despise. The deficit didn’t explode because working people got their tax payments lowered to 15%. They still pay over 1 dollar out of every 20 for Social Security whereas a rich man quits paying once he gets over $150k. Which happens for someone like Elon Musk about what, January 3rd? They don’t mind welfare, they just don’t like it for poor people.
A country boy can indeed survive, long as his dole check comes every month.
And let’s not forget the most holy. Definitely let’s don’t forget them. Competing with the private sector with gyms, daycares, coffee houses, etc. All while enjoying tax free status. Why do they receive that, when – as you note – one of the first commandments of our Bill of Rights is that Congress should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” – so why do they get a monetary pass on their weight room?
Yet they are all the most contemptuous and detesting of our way of government. “Do not hold us to any standard, or any law, but don’t you dare touch our tax status.”
Liberty University owns about half of greater Lynchburg; ’cause God needs a Division 1 football team, eh? Really? Is that really what Jesus would do, if He could have gotten the tax breaks. I ain’t buying that. Something is wrong with that picture.
And don’t forget the Republican state legislatures. The states that consistently vote to tear down the federal system are the ones who typically receive the most money from it. Which was why Mitch McConnell quieted down pretty quick when Chuck Schumer offered to have states only receive from the federal government the money they paid into it. Fact is, Republican states are welfare states.
So the question is, is your suggested meek and trusting method of compromise with the uncompromising in the best interests of those of us who do believe in the America of today?
It’s certainly more enjoyable. Pleasant. And tempting. I can see why you and others like it. It is the path of least resistance. Yet, often time, the easier way is not necessarily the best way. I wish it were, but it isn’t.
When time and again, you compromise with the uncompromising, eventually you’ve moved so far in their direction – you no longer are where you thought you were.
Best example I can give is immigration. I think of my views on the matter, and they mesh perfectly with the ones that were expressed by HW Bush and Reagan in their debate for the Republican nomination in 1980:
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=bush+reagan+debate+immigration&mid=CBA21940F3C7644CEE18CBA21940F3C7644CEE18&FORM=VIRE
I have pretty much kept those views my whole life; views of compassion, honesty, and pragmatism regarding how we treat a whole class of citizens – and yet – whereas 40 years ago – they would have landed me solidly in the Republican camp – now days I would be run out as an apostate. A, dare I say it, liberal.
Yet, I haven’t moved an inch. So who moved?
Likewise, Obamacare was originally a nationalized version of the Romneycare plan that had been successfully implemented in Massachusetts.
Suggested as a compromise, which Democrats and independents accepted – when they really wanted the guaranteed healthcare that the rest of the first, as well as most of the second world enjoys.
Yet Republicans, rather than accepting the compromise that was based upon their very own ideas – look to undercut it every chance they get. Is that good faith?
Now sure, we’ll muddle along – when the Tom Cotton’s, Mitch McConnells, Ted Cruz’s, or Glenn Youngkin’s are in charge. They are only paying lip service to the Klan, they don’t really mean it.
Going along just enough to keep in the game. But when push comes to shove, they just want to feed of the government teat with the power they receive. They don’t really want to destroy America. Why would they, nobody depends upon it more.
So if they were all you had to worry about, yeah – your way would probably work about as well as it has the last 40-50 years. Not too well, getting worse and worse, sicker and sicker, poorer and poorer. But like the frog in the slowly warming water – yeah – it’ll work until one day it doesn’t.
But what about when folks like McConnell, Gingrich, Hannity, etc. have been telling a lie so long, not even they really recognize it as a lie. What then?
That’s when you get your Twiggs, Gosars, MGTs as we see now. They’ve said it so long, so loud; they actually believe it. They don’t realize it’s a cynical bargaining position, not a fact.
Or worse, when a Trump takes over – who is so morally defunct in his own right – right and wrong are irrelevant. It is all just a matter of him, and for himself – he would destroy the world or anyone in it. And if he has to empower zealots like Netanyahu in Israel until war breaks out, so what if it saves him.
What then?
I think we’ve seen, with January 6th, children in cages, book bans, tiki torch parades, civil liberties overturned, dreams of invoking martial law what happens then. And yet you suggest doing more of the same. Will it work?
Probably not.
Is that the abyss you desire?
Not me.
On election day, Ms Uphaus wrote a very informative article about election day. Did you read it?
Included in the article, were comments from a Mr Dahloff:
Protecting access to abortion was also a top issue for UMW freshman and first-time voter Caleb Dahloff, but he identified “fighting within politics” as his “single biggest issue.”
“I hate it so much,” Dahloff said. He said his disgust at the finger-pointing in politics led him to vote for Monica Gary, the independent candidate for Virginia Senate District 27.
Dahloff said he worries that his vote for Gary will mean a win for the Republican candidate, Tara Durant, and that he encouraged his friends to vote for the Democrat, Joel Griffin.
“But for me, I felt like I had to vote for Monica Gary on principle,” he said.
His position reminded me of your own. Like yours, I sympathize with it, but I do not share it. I too wish that Virginia had ranked choice voting. If so, Ms Gary would have been my second choice. Ms Durant my third, Mr Strickland – not at all.
But if wishes were fishes, we’d all cast nets.
We may wish for things to be one way, but until they are, we’d better operate in the world that exists.
I too dislike the arguing in politics – but if my guard dog is fighting with a wolf to protect my flock – choosing to take my support from the guard dog and giving it to one of the sheep because then it will be quieter, is not what I would call the best solution.
As Mr Dahloff presciently noted.
In that – the support given to Ms Gary by folks like him and yourself was enough in a close fight to mean that neither Ms Gary nor Mr Griffin will now be representing this district. With the power of incumbency – they may never be in the next 20 years. Though the majority of voters would have preferred one or the other.
Well done, gentlemen. Well done.
Fortunately, the rest of the state chose wiser. So the damage is staved off for another day. But still. That was despite your choices, not because of them.
So maybe the solution is not just to rest on our laurels that we’ve managed to put out the fire and can start cleaning up. With the assumption that those we are working alongside also want what is best for our system. When many of them state they want to destroy that system and replace it with their own.
Go into our dealings with such folks with our eyes wide open. Willing to work toward resolution when able, but also with a solid foundation of core principles that we will not compromise.
Yes, follow the law. Yes, work toward consensus.
But I like this country. Our laws, our government, our Constitution, our rights. There are core values that we should not apologize for.
Honest accounting. Rule of law. Science, knowledge. Kindness, empathy, meritocracy.
Let’s not be so accommodating that we no longer recognize what we’re trying to protect.
Like someone once said – “Walk softly, but carry a big stick.”
After being thoroughly repudiated by the voters of Spotsylvania County the decent thing for Mark Taylor to do is resign. If he has any sense of fairness he will not continue to take over a quarter of a million dollars a year for a position for which he is not qualified, and for a performance of which the majority of voters strongly disapprove.
As usual, Leo Watkins breaks things down rather nicely. The two-party system in a democracy works when those who don’t get enough votes to win an election remain the loyal opposition. One of our parties has forgotten that. The result is that when an election does not go their way, insurrectionists storm the capitol and those already inside the chambers of government try to bring down the system from within. There is too much at stake for fools to be taken in by so-called third-party candidates and waste their vote “on principle.”