Pandemonium on the Right

Are you "tired of talking about the issues?" Perhaps you should join the Harvard Republican Action Council (HRAC), the college's newest unofficial bastion of conservative ideas. Do you want to be "connected in the state and national parties" or see "big speakers"? Then this club is for you.

There I was, having been steeped in liberal, social democratic beliefs all my life, at a meeting with the enemy. And what a heartening fiasco it was. Sure, I'd be up for some big speakers. But the flyers and stated goals of the HRAC, quoted above in part, are just the beginning.

A loyal liberal visits the Republican Circus of the Stars.

Consider that 15 of 17 of the people at the first meeting were white males (nothing personal, I'm one myself) and 15 of 17 are or were members of the Harvard-Radcliffe Republican Club (HRRC). Do the names sound similar? They're not supposed to--according to the Young Republicans Club Guidebook only one "College Republicans" club can exist on any campus. Randall A. Fine '96, HRAC's first vice-president, should know this. He used this book to lead his "foot soldiers of victory" to "a club in every county" in his native Kentucky.

The first meeting of the HRAC (that's the new one) was at 8:00 p.m. on Thursday in Lamont Library, and it was a veritable Republican Circus of the Stars. For the first time since high school, I got to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Former HRRC (that's the old one) president Harry J. Wilson '93, current HRRC publicity director Bradford P. Campbell '95 and recently resigned HRRC board members Fine and Brian J. Erskine '96 were all in attendance.

Peremptory speeches by HRAC officers were included priceless gems of inanity. HRAC president N. Van Taylor '96 called the HRRC "a debating society" and HRAC second vice-president Brian J. Erskine '96 bemoaned the "stigma about being a Republican."

When the meeting was opened for questions, this reporter asked why the club had not been named the Harvard-Radcliffe Republican Action Council. Anne W. Walker '96, the lone woman at the meeting, expressed a desire to change the name accordingly, whereupon Whitney D. Pidot '96 contested that such action was unnecessary. Erskine added, "If you ask a woman student where she goes to school, she says Harvard University, not Radcliffe College." (Fred A. Decaro '93 added, "this is a policy issue and we shouldn't discuss it.")

Therein lies one of the differences between the HRAC and the HRRC. When Karen E. Boyle '94, current president of the HRRC, was asked for her response to Erskine's hypothetical question, she said, "I have felt a member of both Harvard and Radcliffe College." Walker was contacted after the meeting and said she was not going to join the HRAC. So much for diversity.

A considerable amount of suspicion surrounds the actual formation of the HRAC. In the forefront is the recent HRRC vote to adopt an anti-abortion position. Early in the meeting, Taylor said the vote represented "an extra springboard" for the creation of his club.

Later, Wilson insinuated that Erskine, Fine and Taylor had orchestrated the passing of the pro-life resolution because it gave grounds for the party fissure. More questions arose when a Wigglesworth resident said he had not even been informed of the meeting at which the vote was held, and Fine admitted to having been responsible for door-dropping in the student's dorm. Decaro concluded that, "either one of you is lying or one of you is mistaken." When I talked to Boyle, she was more convinced. "I'm sure they did it; I can't prove it, but I wouldn't put that past them," she said.

One must ask why these Republicans, members of a small minority on campus, decided to split up rather than band together. Indeed, Benjamin Franklin predicted that similar action in a radical organization two hundred years ago would be disastrous: "We must all hang together, or surely we shall all hang separately." Several of the players have indirectly put forth their hypotheses.

Boyle said, "these are freshmen who are frustrated with what they did in the organization [HRRC]." The fact remains that Erskine, Fine, and Taylor--all first-years--continue to be members of HRRC. In fact, Campbell is currently on the executive board of both clubs, and advocates "simultaneous membership."

The HRAC refuses to render unto Boyle that which is Boyle's.

Taylor was not kind to his fellows at the HRRC, however, saying, "this is not the kind of club we want to be in." Van, you and the others are in the club. I suppose it's possible that most HRAC people have retained their HRRC membership just in case the HRAC goes bust. (It seems a good time to mention that only 12 out of the 17 in attendance on Thursday actually signed up to be dues-paying members.) The confusion was furthered by Saurov Goswami '96, who said that "these are two groups that have entirely different goals." Entirely different goals? Perhaps one of them seeks to elect Democrats.

An ideological question managed to slip into the discussion when Christopher L. Garcia '95 pointed out that "Conservatism is based on internal reform." Essentially, Garcia meant that, as loyal Republicans, the HRAC leadership should have confined its objectives to changing the HRRC. When Wilson pressed Fine and Taylor to say whether they had actually taken up their concerns with Boyle and others, there was no direct response. Fine only answered by saying, "Let us try and fail."

Perhaps these students seek the same sort of notoriety that Henry David Thoreau obtained after refusing to pay his taxes. Instead of attempting to change the political system from within society, he effectively gave up his citizenship in a protest against that system. Ironically, the piece he wrote during his subsequent term in jail, "Civil Disobedience," quotes the well known "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" passage of the New Testament. What is most peculiar here is that the principals of the HRAC have not given up their "citizenship" in the HRRC, though they refuse to render unto Boyle that which is Boyle's.

All the hullabaloo distresses Boyle, who said she would "seriously question their motives and their dedication to the club, the club they campaigned in so fervently." The fact that Fine and Taylor lost hard-fought battles for HRRC offices last semester does indicate that the HRAC might be a power play on their part. Still, nothing will happen until the Committee on College Life approves the organization's constitution.

That constitution is quite a piece of work in itself. Article II states that the club will not "interfere in campus politics" and will bring speakers to Harvard "who will not represent the views or opinions of HRAC." It would seem that HRAC has no views, and will only "provide its help and manpower to all Republican nominees." Presumably, everyone from Alphonse D'Amato to David Duke, could apply for support. Incidentally, HRAC members use that "foot soldiers of victory" thing again in Section 4. Forgive me, but I think LePen's youth brigades of budding French fascists use the same slogan.

The goals of HRAC do not sound too far removed from those of the HRRC, despite what members said at the meeting. The recent fissure seems to have been caused less by an identity crisis than by a mutiny in the ranks. After the official adjournment of the meeting, a shouting match broke out between the Wilson-Decaro-Garcia faction and the Fine-Taylor-Erskine faction over the the club's mission. Wilson stated that he wanted "to see [HRAC] succeed," Sun. Harry.

As far as the possibilities of any action coming from the Harvard Republican Action Committee, the next major election is still more than a year and a half away. It would seem idiotic for the two clubs not to work together as the election neared, even if only one pursued "action". As a good Democrat, however, I am encouraged to see that the complete disorganization and disruption evidenced by Pat Buchanan's speech at the Republican National Convention last year has extended down to the grass roots. And I highly recommend all future HRAC meetings as an excellent source of an hour's entertainment.