The following comes from a May 6 interview by Mary Rose with James Hanink, American Solidarity Party candidate for California governor.
Why are you running for governor?
Hanink: I think that the American Solidarity Party has a great deal to offer the people of California and I want to make that known to as many people as possible. The party is neither right, nor left. We are a party that’s committed to a consistent ethics of life. We’re a party that’s committed to the common good as understood in Catholic social teaching.
What is your background?
Hanink: My wife, Elizabeth, and I have six children. I taught philosophy for 40 years at a faux Jesuit institution called Loyola Marymount. My wife and I have worked with the New Oxford Review for at least 35 years. We’ve long been active in the pro-life effort. During the Vietnam War I was a conscientious objector.
Can you talk about the American Solidarity Party platform’s economic section?
Hanink: To put it in a nutshell – where no philosophy belongs – we are distributists in the noble tradition launched by Pope Leo XIII, who talked about the danger of an unbridled capitalism and the danger of a materialistic, unchecked socialism, and spoke in terms of cooperation at every level. The pope talked about the need to have ownership at every level. Part of having a rich civil society is having as many people as possible own, starting with their homes with some land, and with what they use to do their work.
How do you get there from here?
Hanink: Start. You start with your own family and look for ways that the role of the family can be expanded. The role of the family can be expanded in growing food. It can be expanded in family ventures in business. It can be expanded in family recognition in local politics. All of these things, people could start on tomorrow.
If the way to get to this American Solidarity Party ideal is for individual families to do it, what role does the American Solidarity Party running the government play? What would they do?
Hanink: We would look at state-mandated public education that promotes gender ideology, that promotes abortion, that promotes a spirit of division, and that restricts and limits local education. The public education system is such that one ought to avoid it as it currently exists. Another thing that the state does that affects families, is that it suggests that homelessness can be cured at one level and it ignores the responsibility that we have to fight homelessness at a more local level and a familial level. One thing that has to be done at the state level is the freeway system. It’s the same for climate issues. We can do things at a personal level, a local level, but when it comes to land and water and basic communications, there are some things that can only be done on a state level and the state should show leadership and vision in doing that.
Part of the platform says that funding of public higher education should be increased; do you agree with that?
Hanink: In so far as public education does what it’s supposed to do, yes.
How would the American Solidarity Party prevent the waste of money given to schools?
Hanink: One thing the party would say loud and clear is that education is really education of the whole person. That does not mean taking over the person’s private life. But a tech education is not enough. A STEM education is not enough. The sense of civic friendship is more critical than either of those. A real sense of history is absolutely essential. Right now, in the humanities, which include literature, languages, history, philosophy, theology – only 7-8 percent of full-time undergraduates are majors. So you have less than 10 percent majoring in what a society really can’t live without.
How would the American Solidarity Party solve that problem?
Hanink: We would solve that problem by identifying it loudly and clearly, by giving people a political home who recognize it to be a problem, and by challenging the excesses that we have of one fashion or another. For example, the understanding of the human person that Hollywood presents us with is grotesque. I think what the American Solidarity Party could do is say, “One of the things that’s important in education is art, real art.”
Do you have anything else that you would like to say to the readers of Cal Catholic?
Hanink: If you’re serious, read the platform. Email me at jhanink70@gmail.com.
Has he got access to any $$$? Campaigns require advertising, travel, air time, etc. Good ideas are only a starting place
Zero chance
Have to start somewhere.
Well, yes, “Zero chance” simply due to the melancholy fact that most “Catholics” could give a flying fig leaf about adherence to the Church’s (traditional) Social Teaching either due to ignorance and /or just being to comfortable with maintaining the neo-conservative / Republican status quo.
Inquisitor…you have got that right… it is far past time to stop thinking like democrats or republicans but like Catholics…and no lefties that does mean embracing people like McElory , Cuspich, or Tobin but openly confronting them
Takes more than catholics to get elected
We need a strong party and I agree with a lot of this party’s platform. I did not think I would ever see a party or politician in opposition to no-fault divorce again.
The Democrats are already a strong party. They’re so strong they control California. They’re so strong that a feeble-minded presidential candidate got more votes than anyone else in history.
First maybe run for Head Dogcatcher-in-Charge. Governor is no entry-level position.
PS: Conscientious Objector means someone else went and possibly died in his place.
Hymie– yes, that’s true. Hope he didn’t burn his draft card, run off to Canada, or do other very bad things. Hopefully, if he was a good Catholic lifelong, he never joined the horrible hippies and violent war protestors. I am thinking also of the poor, suffering POW’s– and MIA’s, too– that is so sad. While another guy sat home, earning fame and glory and “the good life,” in grad school and beyond– safe, happy, well, and successful. I am not saying the Vietnam War was “right ” either– but to be a “big shot” with one’s opinions and save your skin, refusing to serve your country, that really bothers me. Of course, for love of God, one can request to be placed in the Medics, or a similar helping role.
And to follow up on this– I would like to know Dr. Hanink’s views today, on funding our police force, to protect our citizens, as well as our military protecting us from potential attacks (like Pearl Harbor). Scary! Would our West Coast be safe, with Dr. Hanink at the helm? I have read a lot of material on Dr. Hanink, but not enough. Our country’s beliefs are based on Biblical beliefs, of self-defense– America was founded as a Christian country, and does not believe in military aggression. I still believe his best place would be in education. He is outstanding in that field.
The Pope has the Swiss Guards, so I hope Dr. Hanink’s platform stands for lawful protection of all California citizens!
Hooray for brave Prof. James Hanink, who “taught Philosophy for 40 years, at a faux Jesuit institution called Loyola Marymount.” Loved that accurate phrase. Hope LMU gave him a good retirement package. Don’t know how he could stand to teach there, for even one day. Wonder if he was ever attacked for his sincere Catholic beliefs? Bless him. His new American Solidarity Party platform sounds ideal. Sadly, most Americans– and few Californians– have any knowledge or education in this subject. Many never heard of Pope Leo XIII and his excellent “Rerum Novarum,” either. Even many Catholics would not understand or trust his ideas, which is sad. He may not make it politically– but too bad he couldn’t serve as “top dog” in the State Education Dept., for California– or nationally, in the cabinet of a good President, someday, as Education Secretary. His ideas on education, STEM, and everything else, are exactly my own beliefs. This horrifically poor, shabby “post-1960s,” “post-Christian,” (rather, “anti-Christian”) Intellectually and morally worthless society is in desperate need of good leaders with Hanink’s beliefs and ideas. Our poor ship is almost shipwrecked beyond hope.
It does bother me, that Dr. Hanink was a C.O. (Conscientious Objector) during the Vietnam War. I knew of many young fellows in that time, who went and dutifully served America, risking their lives. We prayed for them all! And some joined the “Medics,” or similar helping roles, if possible– for religious reasons– and never believed in the Conscientious Objectors! We prayed for them all! God bless all who have valiantly served America, and risked their lives! And God bless all the wounded and dead!
A long time ago, I knew of some extremely gifted musicians and extremely intelligent academics, whose fathers secretly went down to local draft boards, and figured deviant ways to get their gifted sons excluded from the military, during WWII. A couple of these young men never knew the real truth until years later. They all later suffered guilt over their fathers’ deviant, unlawful actions.
i spent two years in the Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club. in 1969-1970. My brother let his 1-A status stay open for a full year [while having paperwork for a 2-S in his backpack].
I’m no expert, but I now believe Eisenhower supported the wrong side after Dien Bien Phu. All Ho wanted was the French out [didn’t we want the same thing regarding the British in the 1770s?]. But Ike couldn’t tell the French to leave, since they were a major WWII ally less than ten years before.
Interesting to speculate on how history would have changed if Ike had called Ho.
Dr. Hanick may be a nice man and a good Catholic, however, he has never managed anything other than a classroom. There is no way I would vote for a person who has no experience in government or leadership at an executive level. I voted for a presidential candidate in 2016 who was pro life but had no experience in government. He made a real mess of things and nearly turned the country into a Putin-styled oligarchy. California has the 5th largest economy in the world, we can’t turn it over to a governor with such limited experience.