February
2007
Why I feel the Way I do about the Greens
It’s really a conflict.
As far as policy matters, they are for the most part, pretty sound. The problem exists in them not embracing reality that we are now a two party system. Our political system is made so that whenever one side swings too far to one side they begin to fail. The problem exists when even the party that is supposed to be more moderate decides that their winning strategy is to embrace most of the values of the extremist party. This is what happened with may dems in the US Congress over the last 8 years or so. They simply didn’t know what it was like and how they were supposed to react in the minority party.
Instead of working to pull dems back to the left, some progressives abandoned the left and embraced the greens.
That’s giving up.
Being a quitter is not a virtue. The entire premise of the green party is that the democrats aren’t far enough to the left. Therefore, they surmise, it’s better to abandon them and start up a left of their own. This theory splinters and dilutes the votes of those on the left which allows the right to win victories when they really don’t have a majority of voters backing their extreme ideas.
It’s what happened in Florida with Al Gore and is one of the reasons George W. Bush is in office today.
This is not to say that the greens were the only factor that lead to the loss of Al Gore. Yes, there were more votes cast for the green party candidate, Ralph Nader, in that election than Gore would have needed to put himself over the top to win Florida. But there was also the fact that there was voter suppression in dem leaning areas, there were the voting machines where people thought they were voting for one candidate when they were really voting for another and then there was the disastrous supreme court ruling which over-rode the Florida supreme court which allowed hand voting to continue.
Still, without those Nader votes, Gore would have been President.
Was there a reason to splinter the progressive vote? What was the end effect? Are the core values of the democratic party any different from the 10 key values of the green party? Because if there is a difference, I’m not seeing them.
When is there a time when progressive activists fail to get their candidate elected as a democrat that it still makes sense to run as someone from the green party? Can they win? The answer is no. They can manage to be spoilers in the race which benefits the republican. Is there a value to that? That’s a risky strategy. It essentially says that it’s better to have a republican than a democrat who doesn’t meet their litmus test. It also means that the republican will get at least two years to become entrenched.
Who does that serve? Is it not contrary to what their end goals are in the first place?
Yes, there are always going to be the Joe Lieberman’s of the world but remember, Lieberman is now an independent who simply caucuses with the democrats.
What am I missing?
But many of the greens out there appear to agree with what democrats are saying. For instance, is there a green out there that can say they don’t agree with the following recent statements of democratic candidate for President, John Edwards?
And so I ask you, will you stand up for that tired father forced into emergency rooms to get health care for his little girl?
Will you stand up for the brave young boy in the refugee camp?
Will you stand up for the working men and women in our labor movement who have to fight for decent working conditions and living wages?
Will you stand up for the young man who knows that education is his way out of the cycle of poverty and yet it seems beyond his grasp?
Will you stand up for that hungry eight-year old girl so she doesn’t give up on her life before it’s even begun?
Will you stand up for all the American families whose loved ones are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Will you stand up?
Will you stand up for America?
Because if we don’t stand up, who will?…
If greens are principled, wouldn’t they support the same sentiments?
Jim McGuigan
Jim McGuigan
RSS feed
Link
I have to say, this is a much more thoughtful post then your last one about the Green Party. This is honest, fair, and invites a discussion.
I agree that John Edwards has a strong message – I liked him in 2004, I wish he would have been the Democrats’ candidate for President. I think he could have won.
From my perspective as a Green, there are Democrats who are good politicians, good legislators, who are Green-Friendly, and believe it or not there are Elected Democrats who work with Greens on issues, even solicit input on the drafting of some bills. Also, in many communities Democrats and Greens work together on issue campaigns, or volunteer for the same groups and causes. I have a number of very good friends who are Democrats, and this is no big deal.
However, Greens are not just disgruntled Democrats, or former Democrats, or Democrats who gave up on the Democratic Party for whatever reasons. Greens have been around for 20 to 30 years, and the premise of the green party has nothing to do with Democrats. The premise of the green party is Action and Activism over Electoral Politics, although the green party has taken on electoral politics on a more equal footing with activism over the last so many years. The Premise of the Green Party is that the world is a beautiful place, and our world is on the brink of collapse, and our society needs to radically re-think the way we operate in order to take radical actions to save our planet. The Green Party is the political wing of a social movement.
Consequently, many who identify as Green are not Democrats, or former Democrats, or stolen from the Democrats. Some are Activists, some are Environmentalists, some are Socialists, some are anti-party people. I have no idea what leads people to the Green Party, but they sure aren’t all former Democrats. Can one be both a Green and a Democrat? Sure. Are Green and Democrat the same? No. Can Green and Democrat get along? Sure! Will they disagree some times? You bet! Anything wrong with that? No!
Anyway, nice post.
Jim:
Was it responsible in the last election to vote Green? NO! I agree with you there …
I personally declare (left-of-center) Libertarian (with Democratic and Green tendencies), but I generally will cross the line and vote democrat - so as not to throw away my vote.
I do have to agree that most thirds weren’t Dems who quit, ever. You are missing that.
I too get a bit frustrated with the amount of thirds now and just how ridiculous it is becoming that we all think we have the answer and that it is that dramatically different .. Seems like a silly waste of time .. but I just can’t agree with a bunch of Democratic or Republican policy, sorry.
The Two Party System (Infighting) Needs to Be Done Away Along With the Electoral College (Sheer-Corruption-&-Bullshit) - then we can just deal with issues of the people and get one with it. PERIOD!
But back to the voting Green; aren’t they are just exercising their right vote for NEITHER and to be counted as willing voters? Also, they are trying to get those votes they need to play fair.
Quitters?? The quitters vote Republican!
Nice comment Ron.
To Ron I will apologize because I know I characterized (in my former comments over the months) many Greens as being disillusioned Dems. If Ron takes exception to that, then it’s because he would know. However, my own experience has been that I have heard many people say that they have looked at the Green Party or have “gone Green” because of the aforementioned disillusionment. So I was speaking from my own personal experience when I characterized Greens that way.
I have voted Green and I am not irresponsible.
In addition, it is misguided to superimpose a TV watcher’s mentality on third parties. That being the expectation that if all the loose ends aren’t tied up by the end of the half-hour segment, then it’s all bogus.
We are in a prolonged period when third party votes may appear in the short run to be “wasted” but are truly not. As the people involved in the new political movement are in foundation-building and survival mode and are in it for the long haul. Not the flash of instant gratification.
Rome-like, the Green (or any third) party will not be built in a day. That is reality, not failure. Susan B. Anthony did not live to see votes for women - were her efforts wasted because the results of her life’s work were not instantaneous? By your own logic the answer should be yes. But I do not agree. I (an independent voter) feel that strong third parties will be beneficial to our democracy. That they are a healthy response to social changes, a global economy, and changing needs and awareness among The People.
Other aspects of our political system are not held back to artificially stunted anachronistic standards - why should that aspect be? Presumably because it benefits certain people. But there is an obvious tendency to cherry pick “advancements” in the system that seems to me to be often quite self-serving and hypocritical.
This kind of snarkery (charges of irresponsibility) is tantamount to a dutch boy’s finger in a leaking dike. In the story the boy was a hero and the sea wall held - will the same occur in reality? None of us really know do we? But the “thirds” are not going gentle into that good night. That we do know.
Good for them.
Babblemur,
We agree on Edwards and we agree that dems and greens can work together on issues. But I’m confused about some other parts. If you agree with the things that Edwards said and you agree with the 10 key values of the green party, it seems to me that you’re really a dem. It’s not that the greens came up with something original here. Just look at the dem platform and you’ll find those 10 items in there. It’s not that the dems don’t support them, it’s just that there are some dems who just aren’t very good dems. A big difference is that we’ll invite all, even dems who aren’t very good dems, into the big tent so we can build a winning majority. Without that majority we get smoked.
As for the Green Party being on the edge of a social movement to save our planet, is it not an irony, or perhaps an inconvenient truth, that the man who would have won with the help of green votes, is the same man who made more people on this planet understand the effects of global warming more than any other man on this planet? Al Gore could have made that happen WAY earlier as President than as an activist.
If the green party is more about action and activism, then you have to hand it to the organization Progressive majority. They helped democrats win in many swing districts.
It seems to me that there is not a bad dem platform, but among the dems there are people who do not follow the principles of the party. Joe Lieberman, when he was a dem, was once such person. Gore could not have picked a worse running mate.
Watchdog Reader,
I know it’s not just me because I read the green party’s 10 key values and they’re part of the dem platform. But I agree strongly with you about doing away with the electoral college. It’s an antiquated system that is unnecessary with the rise of technology which allows people on different sides of the country to communicate instantaneously.
Jody,
The ramifications of not having the right people (or at least the better people) in power at this point in time could mean the end of the world as we know it. Building a political party which could take decades, should take a distant priority to saving the planet from global warming and Bush’s “stay the course” mentality has gravely hurt our environment. Splintering our votes now to play politics means our children will suffer the environmental consequences of our folly.
Jody:
In the last election (assuming you voted with your party) you wasted your vote. It was not the time to try and build the party, it was crucial the Dems remain in control. And, if there is any blame for what’s going on today, beyond the CHEATING by the Republicans, it’s on you Greens.
Jim is right about the platform being close enough - Al Gore is a better choice than Nader (because he is pretty damn Green and Nader didn’t have a shot in hell - he’s a FLAKE).
You don’t go to the track and bet on a horse because you want it to win SOMEDAY.
Jim:
It was just they way you structured your statement regarding them going green (assuming them left from Dem.), simply not true. Greens are not Dems, they started Green (most of them). That’s the entirety of my argument.
I think it is more of a psychological issue than anything else. They just want to cover their eyes and not be associated with anything going on in our world. If you look at the age of most members you’ll see the are young and green in many ways. The Greens VERY actively recruit on the college campuses, telling fairy tales to kids that don’t understand they are being tricked into NOT voting. And then they stop thinking about politics and start being ACTIVE to “SAVE” something instead of considering REAL issues and REAL children STARVING in citiesin AMERICA, being murdered in Sudan and being bombed in their homes in the middle-east.
It would seem that the Republican agenda would wanna financially support them throwing out their votes too, huh??? I would personally dig around for Republican money in the Green pockets to start convincing these kids.
I am glad you posted this it is eminent we start trying to get them to cast a vote (in their best interest) that’ll be counted this time.
Babblemur:
Green, activists are passionate people lacking creative outlets.
Where are the Greens with Foreign Policy? That’s where we’re have problems. And what makes it an UNSOUND decision to vote for plants and animals instead of an OFFICIAL party.
Not without mentioning; the planet is moving closer to the sun, so you cannot “SAVE” it. The damage humans have done by burning fossil fuels is IMMENSE and cannot be corrected. You can PRESERVE the planet and buy more time, but life will end on it.
Green is more of a religion or a responsible way of life (myself included) NOT a political party! GET REAL with your votes!
There will be a whole lotta trouble in River City if you guys vote green this time!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU will SOLELY be to BLAME for our more-rapid-but-inevitable extinction.
There is no such thing as a happy ending to this story!
Great discussion!
Let me offer some differences between the Democrats and Greens:
Authorizing war on Iraq: Dems - For, Greens - Against
Continued support for the War on Iraq: Dems - For, Greens - Against
US PATRIOT ACT: Dems - voted for it, Greens - Against it
Invasion of Afghanistan: Dems - for it, Greens - against it
Increasing the military budget: Dems - for it, Greens - against it
Defense of Marriage Act: Dems - voted for it, Greens - against it
Corporate contributions to candidates: Dems - rely on it, Greens - refuse it
Death Penalty: Dems - Mixed, Greens - oppose it
Corporate Agriculture: Dems - not opposed to it for the most part, Greens - opposed to it
Non-Partisan re-districting of legislative districts with no consideration of partisan population: Dems - against, Greens - for
Universal Health Care: Dems - seem to want it but never do it, Greens - for it for it for it.
Despite these easy differences, there are a number of things that Dems and Greens do agree on - no doubt.
I think one of the most influential differences is the corporate money. It is my opinion that as long as many Democrats continue to accept corporate and lobbyist money they will be beholden to hold back on taking action on so many of the things that they claim to care about.
Of course, without that corporate money, Greens will always have an extremely difficult time competing in elections that are increasingly costing beaucoup bucks. Even in the Wisconsin State Assembly, in District 54 (Oshkosh) over $250,000 was spent by the two candidates, and an additional $125,000 was spent by special interest groups attempting to influence the election in favor of the Republican. If Democrats can pass some real campaign finance reform (Greens would be happy to advise) and get all of this greed out of our election process, Democrats will be less beholden to donors and in a better position to act on their convictions. And who knows? Maybe then the Greens will wither away… but I doubt it.
I believe that there is room in American Politics for the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, and other third parties, without the world coming to an end. (And yes, I know that the Earth will eventually spin into the sun.)
Yeah, yeah, all that —
BUT, in a critical election (the last two and next) the choices ARE; Donkey or Elephant!!
DON’T CHOOSE “Monkey” THIS TIME!!!!
What election isn’t critical?
You get your Democrats to vote Democrat, I’ll get my Greens to vote Green. My votes don’t belong to you, and your votes don’t belong to me. That’s why we have elections - people make choices.
Monkey…I’d take that mascot! Symbolic of those Greens behind bars laughing and throwing poo at the spectators, eh?
First, if you had read, I am a Libertarian - I vote Democrat in Presidential Elections.
THERE ARE ONLY TWO CHOICES!
Also, some elections haven’t been as critical as others, that’s not what we’re discussing.
Just like; you cannot get a Big Mac at Burger King, you cannot get a Green President (at this time) - it’s not on the menu. GREEN is NOT a choice - it’s wasting your vote! DEMOCRAT or REPUBLICAN, those are the choices.
(I don’t particularly like them either, but that’s the shakes. And if Hillary is the choice, I will; chew quickly, squint, gag and have a big glass of something to wash down the taste of having to vote for her, but I’d do it to get the Family Matters/Christian Right folks out of every office and cabinet.)
Sometime you gotta take the dark alleys to get where you wanna go …
And, no not in reference to the poo slingers - hairy women.
: )
I belong to no party. I said I am an Independent. I am not a Green although I do support them philosophically and I do support individual candidates as I see fit. Each single increase in votes for Greens is a louder and louder statement. Which you obviously are hearing or you wouldn’t have your panties in a knot right now.
And I do not waste my votes.
I do not vote for liars or law-breakers or cheats. Which unfortunately too many of the Democrats are. I have seen too many back-stabbing amoral ethics violations for one life-time and I mean I have seen them first hand. And I mean within the Democratic party itself. Given that I am insignificant, it must be the tip of a very formidable iceburg. God knows what goes on at the higher levels.
I will not vote for such persons, ever. They are NOT better than the neo-cons. Corruption is corruption. They may have a different name, but they are not better. And THEY are a waste of a vote. People do not act like turds BEFORE election and then miraculously get religion after they are “in”. No, it only gets worse.
I cannot get enthusiastic about creeps - “red” OR “blue”.
You can issue all the feel-good talking points you want.
And you can fool the casual newspaper reader and your donors who are all cozy at your coffees, snuggling up to “important” people, geting excited about “change” and then going home feeling like they Have A Life. But you cannot re-write my own personal experiences, so save your time.
Jody:
“Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end…liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition…The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to to govern. Every class is unfit to govern…Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Lord Acton, Brittish Historian (1834-1902)
Take off the rose-colored glasses and try to THINK BIG PICTURE. Learn to accept the things you cannot change! Politicians for all parties are “liars or law-breakers or cheats” - good god stop with the fairy tales! Politics are CORRUPT! Period! Being angry about it seems a bit instable. And, casting a vote for NO ONE makes your personal life experiences worse, as the rich get richer and the middle class is swallowed whole (ineligible for gov. aid) with shrinking income, sky-rocketing taxes and health care costs they cannot cover.
Your one statement about how you FEEL about voting is of concern. No one wants you to feel “enthusiastic” about voting (hinting toward the ‘recruited on a college campus theory’), we want you to cast a vote that counts. Voting isn’t a god damn party??? Substantial thought should go into it.
In some cases, there’s nothing to think about at all, like the next Presidential Election! VOTE THE BASTARDS OUT! DEMS are the lesser of two evils.
NO THIRD PARTY IS QUALIFIED OR PREPARED TO LEAD THIS COUNTRY out of the mess we’re in! And that’s a fact!
If you throw out YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE again you just see how much further away from Utopia you’ll get … Our country is in grave financial danger (look at the war ticker to the left in the blue nav panel!!), our military is weak and we are killing people left and right.
The DEMS WILL PULL OUT SLOWLY and RATIONALLY (Keyword, why Greens haven’t got a shot in hell.)!
LIVE GREEN/LIB/ETC … - VOTE DEM - IT’S BETTER THAN NOTHING! Donkey or Elephant, those are the only choices and that cannot be changed right NOW …
Just a thought on electibility…
It is popular knowledge that roughly 40% of Americans consider themselves Dems, and another 40% consider themselves Repubs.
The theotrtical fight is for the 20% in the middle, or the keeping the fringe self-identified ‘third party’ vote on the edges.
It still does not deny the fact that 80% of the electorate is pretty well settled as Dem or Repub…
If Greens stick with the rhetoric that the Dems are the ‘party of the lesser evil’ - in other words, Dems and Repubs are both evil, but Repubs are a little worse.
How do you ever expect to win an election running on a base platform declaring 80% of the voters evil?
Jef,
I disagree with your assessment that 40% are dems. Look at the last 20 years and you’ll see that the dem base is actually closer to 35% where the GOP base is 40%.
Either way, saying 75% of the electorate is evil will still get you nowhere.
Jef, I think that’s a pretty weak argument.
Most polls of political party identification do not give the option for third parties and ask people to rate themselves on a continuum of Strong Democrat - Independent - Strong Republican. Even for someone that identifies as a Green, it would be intuitive in this set up to rate oneself as a Strong Democrat if it is the left-leaning aspects of the Democratic party that appeals to them. Identifying as an independent in this scenario looks like identifying one’s self as a centrist.
A poll on April 25, 2006 found that 53% of respondents wanted a third major political party. http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/04/25/poll-result-majority-want-third-major-party/
Very, very few people identify so strongly as a member of a political party (although that number is certainly inflated on blogs like this) that calling the platform and actions of a Party “evil” would alienate them.
Jody, kudos to you. Good luck avoiding the snarkery.
Jesse:
#1. Polls are bullshit, we all know this one fact.
Read the entire strand or don’t comment, stop trying to twist original ownership of statements.
Let me correct you, perhaps you’ll feel inclined to retract your statement. Jody referred to all (other than Green) being “liars, law-breakers and cheats” (essentially painting them “evil”). Dems being referred to the “lesser of two evils” (TO HER) was my reference. I don’t believe any of that ..
IMO, Jody’s comments are naive and full of bitterness. Needing to feel “enthusiastic” about whom she’s voting for??? Kudos for what?
The sheer fact you are still arguing (off-topic)is proof that you have doubts about not voting for a legitimate Party. Letting the Republicans take away all the social programs, lead us to war and pilfer all SURPLUS funds has been for WHAT???
Also, GREENS in power are unfit to lead our highest offices (good ideas - not enough experience)! Start SMALLER.
My problems with Greens I know are; they are all FLAKES and live in BUBBLES hyper-focussed on “saving” one thing our another and they never come to realize they throw out their vote (essentially voting against their own agenda).
If those animals and plants could talk they’d tell you to vote the bastards out (current administration - not the PARTY as a whole)! You’re NOT voting them out by voting GREEN!!! DO THE MATH! YIKES! It’s never too late to do the RIGHT THING (and you don’t have to tell your crunchy friends).
Vote The Bastards Out - be realistic with what can be accomplished! Think survivalist mode!
WDR: Unless you are the same poster as jef, I didn’t reply to you at all. I read the entire strand before and after posting and still think it’s pointless trying to argue with someone that conducts themselves with such uncivil attitude.
My comments to jody were to encourage her in what has been a trend where she’s tried to avoid the kind of arrogant and snide browbeating your comments and many, many other political blog posts and comments have exemplified.
Jesse:
Please correct me if I am wrong; your sole (off-topic) argument is: it is your OPINION Jody’s statements WERE NOT alienating and I should be nicer while being alienated by Jody’s naive, “snide and arrogant” reference to all but Green as “liars, law-breakers and cheatsâ€.
It is UNCIVIL to senselessly interject YOUR arrogant “snarkery” by-way-of; your redirecting (off-topic) interference and projecting YOUR attitude onto others because: Jody couldn’t justify her position and neither could you.
We are here to learn from each other, I thought.