Equally condemned by God is homosexuality, according to Buchanan. "With 80,000 dead of AIDS, 3,000 more buried each month, our promiscuous homosexuals appear literally hell-bent on Satanism and suicide."

And finally, the Jews and the State of Israel rank high on the Buchanan list of scapegoats. In 1989, he declared, "To orthodox Catholics, the demand to be more sensitive to Jewish concerns is becoming a joke. Referring to Congress as an "Israeli-occupied territory" and as a Parliament of whores incapable of standing up for U.S. national interests, if AIPAC is on the other end of the line," Buchanan has deservedly been subject to charges of anti-Semitism. Furthermore, Buchanan is known for his hyper-sensitivity to comparisons between him and Hitler--I wonder why. Is it because he referred to the man who came closest to annihilating the Jewish people as "an individual of great courage" or that he equated Holocaust Survivor Syndrome with "group fantasies of martyrdom and heroics"? As a man hoping to distinguish himself from Hitler, he ought to rethink his oratorical strategy.

After hearing statements like these, it comes as no surprise that Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, the Russian ultranationalist candidate, could call him a "brother in arms" and acknowledge a problem they share. "You say that Congress is Israeli-occupied territory. We have the same situation in Russia. So to survive, we could set aside places on U.S. and Russian territory to deport this small but troublesome tribe."

The anti-Semitic rhetoric understandably struck a personal nerve. I feel uneasy knowing that nearly one in three Republican voters in New Hampshire felt nothing uneasy about Buchanan. The truth is that his is a platform which goes beyond fostering uneasiness. His is one repulsive to the very system we have fought so hard to create. Pat Buchanan has identified certain prejudices and fears embodied in our people and has used them as a foundation on which to erect his candidacy.

Many are chuckling now as they watch this fanatic, making light of his extremism and trusting our system to disqualify him before he disqualifies us. But as this demagogue rises in the political rankings, the laughter will die down. Those who did not beforehand will then recognize that our political filtering process needs reforming. They will then realize the grave implications of the New Hampshire primary--that out of the popular vote can come one whose very platform is utterly antithetical to our constitutionally-based political system. That is, the ship of American democracy is going down, and it is most definitely our ship.

Erica S. Schacter '97 is an editor of the Harvard Crimson.