Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Green Party Window Dressing Undermines Working Class Power
Todd Chrétien is a great activist and has offered much in leading the ISO in their anti-war movement and various solidarity and educational efforts. His foray into Green Party politics is a step backwards.
Electoral politics for socialists has always been tricky. Eugene Debbs, the firebrand organizer and SP candidate for President fought a huge uphill battle based on his forward facing confrontation with capital, while always clearly identifying class lines. Of course, I expect nothing less from Todd. However, the Green Party whose banner he heralds, holds a fundamentally anti-class view of society and is openly a-historical , and barely rooted in the earth sciences in which its name is founded. Today, Democratic Party cast-aways, seeking the means to pressure the Dems (like Medea Benjamin and her ilk), “deep ecologists” better known as misanthropes and basic free-market Greens a la Peter Camejo, dominate an ever more anti-democratic and bourgeois Party.
Can the Green Party offer the space or resources to at least pick-up where Debbs left off? No. The Green Party, unlike the ISO, is solely an electoral presence and is absent from most social movement that have reared their head since the GP founding. Of course small bands of Greens have sprung up around toxic sites and other more local issues. With relatively few exceptions, these Green movements are largely middle or upper class dominated NIMBY efforts with no desire for cross-cultural or working class advancement or focus.
Will Chretien try and create a left current in the Green Party…of course. Such efforts are not new….Howie Hawkins, Walt Sheasby (RIP), Joel Kovel, the “eco-socialist” who endorsed Dean in 2004 and the non-movement “Green Alliance” all tried to carve out a leftist orientation within the Greens. I myself was deeply involved with Howie, Joel and Walt, following the dissolution of the formerly dominant left-leaning Green Party USA into the “Democratic Party renegades” Association of State Green Parties (now Green Party US –you know, today’s GREEN PARTY) which won the factional fight 5 years or so ago.
Basic Marxism, socialism and labor-based social democracy calls for the creation of at LEAST a party opposed to capital rooted in the working class. Even the Labor Party of the United States, founded in 1996, is founded on a class understanding of society. The Green Party Platform opposes such politics by abdicating basic working class independence and power and instead supports “community-based economics” and “Ten Key values”, a fuzzy-liberal conception that supposedly challenges corporate power while maintaining a softer and kinder localized "Green" capitalism.
Of course Todd will speak from a socialist perspective and in all truth; he is likely to challenge such basic flaws in GP politics. However, how useful is such a trajectory? How powerful will be his rallying point when he not only takes on the Democrats and Republicans, but the majority of Green Party members and the tenants of their platform? How wise of a decision, as a socialist, is it to work your politics in a party that fundamentally opposes your own framework while ALSO being blind to the material realties of capital and labor?
For sure, Chreitns sinking into the swamp of Green Party Politics could simply be a first step towards embracing the ever popular social democratic “muddle” handed to him by Camjeo. Running as an independent or as a Peace and Freedom candidate and calling for the creation mass party rooted in class independence, absent of the Green Party’s liberal and myopic stink is the first and most rudimentary step required for the liberation of working people. Such a movement must be started and perhaps will over the coming months. We have witnessed labor acting in its own name more now than has occured in the past 5 years. From the Labor Party's (US) call for ballot status in South Carolina to the Million Worker March on Washington last October 2004 to the current rise in Worker power and parties in South America. Working people are on the move and shall not be sidelined by flase promises from liberals: Democrats or Greens.
-Douglas MacDonald
Former member and co-founder Solano County, Ca Green Party
Former National Secretary Treasurer Green Alliance
Can the Green Party offer the space or resources to at least pick-up where Debbs left off? No. The Green Party, unlike the ISO, is solely an electoral presence and is absent from most social movement that have reared their head since the GP founding. Of course small bands of Greens have sprung up around toxic sites and other more local issues. With relatively few exceptions, these Green movements are largely middle or upper class dominated NIMBY efforts with no desire for cross-cultural or working class advancement or focus.
Will Chretien try and create a left current in the Green Party…of course. Such efforts are not new….Howie Hawkins, Walt Sheasby (RIP), Joel Kovel, the “eco-socialist” who endorsed Dean in 2004 and the non-movement “Green Alliance” all tried to carve out a leftist orientation within the Greens. I myself was deeply involved with Howie, Joel and Walt, following the dissolution of the formerly dominant left-leaning Green Party USA into the “Democratic Party renegades” Association of State Green Parties (now Green Party US –you know, today’s GREEN PARTY) which won the factional fight 5 years or so ago.
Basic Marxism, socialism and labor-based social democracy calls for the creation of at LEAST a party opposed to capital rooted in the working class. Even the Labor Party of the United States, founded in 1996, is founded on a class understanding of society. The Green Party Platform opposes such politics by abdicating basic working class independence and power and instead supports “community-based economics” and “Ten Key values”, a fuzzy-liberal conception that supposedly challenges corporate power while maintaining a softer and kinder localized "Green" capitalism.
Of course Todd will speak from a socialist perspective and in all truth; he is likely to challenge such basic flaws in GP politics. However, how useful is such a trajectory? How powerful will be his rallying point when he not only takes on the Democrats and Republicans, but the majority of Green Party members and the tenants of their platform? How wise of a decision, as a socialist, is it to work your politics in a party that fundamentally opposes your own framework while ALSO being blind to the material realties of capital and labor?
For sure, Chreitns sinking into the swamp of Green Party Politics could simply be a first step towards embracing the ever popular social democratic “muddle” handed to him by Camjeo. Running as an independent or as a Peace and Freedom candidate and calling for the creation mass party rooted in class independence, absent of the Green Party’s liberal and myopic stink is the first and most rudimentary step required for the liberation of working people. Such a movement must be started and perhaps will over the coming months. We have witnessed labor acting in its own name more now than has occured in the past 5 years. From the Labor Party's (US) call for ballot status in South Carolina to the Million Worker March on Washington last October 2004 to the current rise in Worker power and parties in South America. Working people are on the move and shall not be sidelined by flase promises from liberals: Democrats or Greens.
-Douglas MacDonald
Former member and co-founder Solano County, Ca Green Party
Former National Secretary Treasurer Green Alliance
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Mr. Douglas MacDonald's comments are thought provoking and I am not about to dismiss them. Is Todd Chretien's decision to seek a Green Party nomination to run for Senate against Dianne Feinstein a step backward?
I am more inclined to wait and see. Meantime I will support him best I can.
There is no doubt that there is a major disconnect between the haves and the have-nots in this country and in this world. In the United States, we witnessed the manifestations of that disconnect most starkly in New Orleans this year.
Even as a Green, I have not been a big fan of the Nimbyism you describe-- that coddled perspective that talks about social justice-- but flees it in a 35,000 dollar hybrid. At the same time, I see a political reality that cannot be described, let alone prescribed to by any single doctrine or party.
I really like what Todd Chretien is doing. Whether one admires or dislikes George Galloway who made news by becoming a British Parliament Member by founding the Respect Party-- I think Todd has learned much about cooperative, issue-based politics from him which he is likely to apply well to our own unique American political environment.
Even though a majority of Americans, Greens, and Democrats (!) are agreed that our war in Iraq is wrong and a failure-- most have been rather mute, except for brave souls like Cindy Sheehan. Ralph Nader (in spite of all the disinformation out there about him) and especially Peter Camejo also-- they adamantly made the Iraq War Issue central to their 2004 independent presidential campaign.
I have been rather disturbed by the orthodoxies that impel factions of the progressive left to tear at the limbs of truth as our country meanwhile goes down the drain, likely to take much of the rest of the world with it. The events that we see happening today (propelled by hyperbolic consumerism, corruption, and official lies) are not right, are not fair, are not just.
But who ever said this world is fair or just?
There is an old story from ancient China that describes how a jackal did find justice when even Lao-tse (the world's wisest man) was incapable of finding it-- by using its imagination. There are variations of the same story in almost every culture. Rather than retell the story, I'll suggest that you look for it-- and consider how imagination-- coupled with intelligent risk-taking might well be the answer all political factions need to coalesce around if they are to save the human race-- and our earth-- from the dark consequences we all see looming on the horizon.
I am personally hoping that Todd Chretien's courageous step into the state Senate race is a sign that he understands a new imaginative force that is possible among all the people who are fed up with war, corruption, and injustice. I believe many Californians will notice his campaign and learn more about democracy in action. I especially admire Todd for not waiting for propitious times to run-- but to propel debate and thought by acting.
I am hoping he will not be alone in stirring debate that could unseat the status quo that hurts Californians. I hope progressives, rationalists, and socialists of all stripes will thoughtfully overlook party labels and doctrine to see and hear the authenticity and reasonableness of Chretien's platform. Chretien is smart and has real integrity-- I doubt that his decision to seek a Green Party nomination was taken lightly.
It is time for people to look beyond orthodoxies to uniting and acting to meet our shared challenges. A better future for our world resides in all of us-- high, low, rich, poor, young, old, socialist, artisan (and even persons of trade and commerce): ALL of us, as we are and as we desire to be-- to do our part as best we can: to imagine and create that more humane world.
Here is an article written by someone who says much of what I am trying to explain, but says it much better:
I am more inclined to wait and see. Meantime I will support him best I can.
There is no doubt that there is a major disconnect between the haves and the have-nots in this country and in this world. In the United States, we witnessed the manifestations of that disconnect most starkly in New Orleans this year.
Even as a Green, I have not been a big fan of the Nimbyism you describe-- that coddled perspective that talks about social justice-- but flees it in a 35,000 dollar hybrid. At the same time, I see a political reality that cannot be described, let alone prescribed to by any single doctrine or party.
I really like what Todd Chretien is doing. Whether one admires or dislikes George Galloway who made news by becoming a British Parliament Member by founding the Respect Party-- I think Todd has learned much about cooperative, issue-based politics from him which he is likely to apply well to our own unique American political environment.
Even though a majority of Americans, Greens, and Democrats (!) are agreed that our war in Iraq is wrong and a failure-- most have been rather mute, except for brave souls like Cindy Sheehan. Ralph Nader (in spite of all the disinformation out there about him) and especially Peter Camejo also-- they adamantly made the Iraq War Issue central to their 2004 independent presidential campaign.
I have been rather disturbed by the orthodoxies that impel factions of the progressive left to tear at the limbs of truth as our country meanwhile goes down the drain, likely to take much of the rest of the world with it. The events that we see happening today (propelled by hyperbolic consumerism, corruption, and official lies) are not right, are not fair, are not just.
But who ever said this world is fair or just?
There is an old story from ancient China that describes how a jackal did find justice when even Lao-tse (the world's wisest man) was incapable of finding it-- by using its imagination. There are variations of the same story in almost every culture. Rather than retell the story, I'll suggest that you look for it-- and consider how imagination-- coupled with intelligent risk-taking might well be the answer all political factions need to coalesce around if they are to save the human race-- and our earth-- from the dark consequences we all see looming on the horizon.
I am personally hoping that Todd Chretien's courageous step into the state Senate race is a sign that he understands a new imaginative force that is possible among all the people who are fed up with war, corruption, and injustice. I believe many Californians will notice his campaign and learn more about democracy in action. I especially admire Todd for not waiting for propitious times to run-- but to propel debate and thought by acting.
I am hoping he will not be alone in stirring debate that could unseat the status quo that hurts Californians. I hope progressives, rationalists, and socialists of all stripes will thoughtfully overlook party labels and doctrine to see and hear the authenticity and reasonableness of Chretien's platform. Chretien is smart and has real integrity-- I doubt that his decision to seek a Green Party nomination was taken lightly.
It is time for people to look beyond orthodoxies to uniting and acting to meet our shared challenges. A better future for our world resides in all of us-- high, low, rich, poor, young, old, socialist, artisan (and even persons of trade and commerce): ALL of us, as we are and as we desire to be-- to do our part as best we can: to imagine and create that more humane world.
Here is an article written by someone who says much of what I am trying to explain, but says it much better:
For more information:
http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/featu...
The Peace and Freedom Party's Marsha Feinland is also a strong anti-war candidate with some statewide name recognition as a candidate against Barbara Boxer.
It seems a shame that P&F and GP can't challlenge the electoral system by backing each other's candidates or pick and choose races where one party might field a candidate and the other doesn't. This is something the late Walt Sheasby and other activists in L.A. in P&F and GP talked about and tried to work on back in 1992 after the GP gained ballot status. There was discussion about running Ron Daniels for President as a Green and PFP, but the Greens decided not to run a candidate for President that year. (Either the GP feared spoiling things for the right wing corporate Democrat Clinton, or wasn't ready to run a statewdie campaign.)
And, of course many Greens are ex-P&F members who left the party after the factional, sectarian infighting of the 1980s. And many Greens are explicitly anti-socialist, anti-leftist, pro-capitalist, anti-radical.
While the GP has gone the 'build locally' route and elected some good people to city council's and school boards, that hasn't translated into a position of power in state politics. Will Chretien's candidacy change that? It's doubtful.
On the other hand P&F has no elected officials at the local level (except maybe Rent Control Board) and is less of a force in statewide politics. Therefore a GP or PF candidacy is an educational tool or alternative for folks like me who will not vote for a Death Penalty Capitalist like Feinstein (or Angelides, Westly, Bustamante, Lockyer).
In the interest of true democracy, and multi-party democracy, the P&F and GP should cooperate to push for inclusion of all ballot-qualified candidates in debates (something Camejo failed to do as a candidate in 2003, when he should have advocated that the P&F candidate be in the debate.)
If only Feinstein would drop out and we could have a debate between the best candidates - Feinland and Chretien - over the real issues facing Cali and the US. (Not to mention an interesting discussion of differing views of socialism and its relevance in the 21st Century)
It seems a shame that P&F and GP can't challlenge the electoral system by backing each other's candidates or pick and choose races where one party might field a candidate and the other doesn't. This is something the late Walt Sheasby and other activists in L.A. in P&F and GP talked about and tried to work on back in 1992 after the GP gained ballot status. There was discussion about running Ron Daniels for President as a Green and PFP, but the Greens decided not to run a candidate for President that year. (Either the GP feared spoiling things for the right wing corporate Democrat Clinton, or wasn't ready to run a statewdie campaign.)
And, of course many Greens are ex-P&F members who left the party after the factional, sectarian infighting of the 1980s. And many Greens are explicitly anti-socialist, anti-leftist, pro-capitalist, anti-radical.
While the GP has gone the 'build locally' route and elected some good people to city council's and school boards, that hasn't translated into a position of power in state politics. Will Chretien's candidacy change that? It's doubtful.
On the other hand P&F has no elected officials at the local level (except maybe Rent Control Board) and is less of a force in statewide politics. Therefore a GP or PF candidacy is an educational tool or alternative for folks like me who will not vote for a Death Penalty Capitalist like Feinstein (or Angelides, Westly, Bustamante, Lockyer).
In the interest of true democracy, and multi-party democracy, the P&F and GP should cooperate to push for inclusion of all ballot-qualified candidates in debates (something Camejo failed to do as a candidate in 2003, when he should have advocated that the P&F candidate be in the debate.)
If only Feinstein would drop out and we could have a debate between the best candidates - Feinland and Chretien - over the real issues facing Cali and the US. (Not to mention an interesting discussion of differing views of socialism and its relevance in the 21st Century)
Whenever somebody solemny declares "The Green Party is like this" and "The Green Party is like that" with intellectual abstractions about a "party opposed to capital rooted in the working class" or "a class understanding of society" I throw up my hands and cry out to heaven -- How long, O Lord, how long must my country be cursed by "lefty" overintellectualism!
I say the same thing to my brother here that I say to my fellow African-Americans when they complain the Green Party is "too white."
THE GREEN PARTY IS WHATEVER YOU WANT IT TO BE.
That is precisely what is so beautiful about being part of the historic formation of a new party.
We are all progressive friends here so let's be honest. There is not a damn thing any one of us can do to alter the course of the Democratic Party or the Republican Party one bit. By contrast, all you have to do is register Green, show up at county Green Party meetings and, believe me, you can make a real difference.
The Peace and Freedom Party had their chance. I'm sorry. With all due respectm P&F is not a real political party. The Labor Party -- in theory -- is a working class party. There is just one little problem -- the Labor Party refuses to function as a political party.
The California Green Party is a real political party.
We have many thousands of registered Greens. We have nationally famous Greens Peter Camejo (who, by the way, calls himself a "watermelon" -- Green on the outside and Red on the inside), Media Benjamin, and Matt Gonzalez. We have about a hundred elected Greens in local offices around the state.
C'mon we all know perfectly well these "Lefty" cults always talk about "the masses" and the "working people" when, in fact, these "Lefty' cults cannot mobilize enough real live "masses" of "working people" to caucus in a telephone booth on Telegraph Avenue.
Diane Feinstein will likely be reelected. The whole purpose of the exercise is to run a serious campaign for a serious candidate of a serious political party to raise some important issues and maybe push Feinstein a little bit to the Left on the war and issues like single-payer health care. For her, that would be no small thing.
As if we Greens don't catch enough shit for allegedly putting "Dubya" in the White House in 2000, we don't need this silly shit from "lefties" saying Greens are "mushy."
Let me conclude by simply saying you're either part of the solution or part of the problem.
I say the same thing to my brother here that I say to my fellow African-Americans when they complain the Green Party is "too white."
THE GREEN PARTY IS WHATEVER YOU WANT IT TO BE.
That is precisely what is so beautiful about being part of the historic formation of a new party.
We are all progressive friends here so let's be honest. There is not a damn thing any one of us can do to alter the course of the Democratic Party or the Republican Party one bit. By contrast, all you have to do is register Green, show up at county Green Party meetings and, believe me, you can make a real difference.
The Peace and Freedom Party had their chance. I'm sorry. With all due respectm P&F is not a real political party. The Labor Party -- in theory -- is a working class party. There is just one little problem -- the Labor Party refuses to function as a political party.
The California Green Party is a real political party.
We have many thousands of registered Greens. We have nationally famous Greens Peter Camejo (who, by the way, calls himself a "watermelon" -- Green on the outside and Red on the inside), Media Benjamin, and Matt Gonzalez. We have about a hundred elected Greens in local offices around the state.
C'mon we all know perfectly well these "Lefty" cults always talk about "the masses" and the "working people" when, in fact, these "Lefty' cults cannot mobilize enough real live "masses" of "working people" to caucus in a telephone booth on Telegraph Avenue.
Diane Feinstein will likely be reelected. The whole purpose of the exercise is to run a serious campaign for a serious candidate of a serious political party to raise some important issues and maybe push Feinstein a little bit to the Left on the war and issues like single-payer health care. For her, that would be no small thing.
As if we Greens don't catch enough shit for allegedly putting "Dubya" in the White House in 2000, we don't need this silly shit from "lefties" saying Greens are "mushy."
Let me conclude by simply saying you're either part of the solution or part of the problem.
Discussing our differences, if the discussion is friendly, can help us all understand things better. Sometimes we find that we actually agree, whatever someone told us back in '94. and sometimes we find that despite disagreeing on specific issues, there is a lot of room to work together.
While this is an interesting discussion, I see a lapse into sectarian "the-other-guy-is-no-good" ism. There are a lot of positive things about Left activists in both the Peace and Freedom Party and the Green Party. I am the State Chair of the Peace and Freedom Party, and of course this indicates that I find it more productive to work in the Peace and Freedom Party, but I think it is essential that we cooperate, and when possible, be mutually supportive and focus on working together to defeat our real enemies - who are certainly not to be found in either party!
There is a reason why they call this sort of divisive talk "sectarianism." Religious sects are the model for this kind of behavior. (Yes, I am a member of a religion, too, but I work with members of other religions in the community.) Generally speaking, the Christians said that their religion superceded Judaism, then the Muslims said that their religion superceded Christianity and Judaism, and the Bahai Faith claims that their religion has superceded Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.... and no doubt someone else has taken the next logical step. In each case, religious sectarianism can range from mild criticism of the other faiths on up to war and executions for heresy.
Similarly, we have comments here that Peace and Freedom had its chance, and has been superceded by the Greens, etc. Well, that is not the way the real world works. And sectarian wishes do not make something so. The Peace and Freedom Party is alive and well, and growing!
The sectarianism some recall about the Peace and Freedom Party back some 15 to 20 years ago has been outgrown. One particular stubborn group ("NAP") that (with apparent secret government support) spent literally millions of dollars trying to take over the Peace and Freedom Party was defeated, and quit to join the Reform Party. Since the early 1990s, the Peace and Freedom Party has been a united non-sectarian Left group that has become bigger and more active over the past several years, and we are running a big slate of candidates in the coming election. We have over 100 hard-working petitioners around the state, a number that grows every day, circulating the in-lieu and nominating papers for (at last count) over 40 candidates for partisan office in 2006. All are "Peace Candidates" who will call for immediate withdrawal, and they will have a big effect, including in many areas where there will be no Green candidate. All are opposed to the death penalty, which the Democrats and Republicans treat as though it were the 11th Commandment. All will be speaking out courageously on issue after issue that will make people say, "I wish those other candidates were willing to say that."
On the other hand, I understand that there will be several Green candidates in some areas where we have no Peace and Freedom Party candidates. I hope we can get together to endorse each other's candidates in districts without a candidate from both parties, and work together on those campaigns as we work together on other issues. For example, I understand that activists in both parties will be circulating petitions to increase the minimum wage to $8.75, with indexing for cost-of-living. (We want to double the minimum wage, but we will take what we can get.) Activists in both parties will be active in anti-war work. I hope some Greens will be active in some of the labor support work that is a staple of Peace and Freedom Party activity. (Most of the Peace and Freedom Party candidates are experienced labor activists.)
So both as an individual, and as the current elected chair of one of the parties involved, I say "LET'S WORK TOGETHER." While both parties are pretty unlikely to win power in this election, we have the luxury of saying nice things about each other and cooperating without fearing that a vote for the other guy will lose us the election. Who cares whether Todd Chretien or Marsha Feinland gets more votes? The important thing is that with vigorous campaigning the two peace candidates take away a lot of votes that would otherwise go to the obedient servant of imperialism, Feinstein, and educate a lot of voters to the need to reject the twin parties of war and oppression. This will strengthen the movement, our broad movement that must become broader so that we can end this misbegotten bloody war of aggression, and go on to do other great things for the working people of our country.
-Kevin Akin
While this is an interesting discussion, I see a lapse into sectarian "the-other-guy-is-no-good" ism. There are a lot of positive things about Left activists in both the Peace and Freedom Party and the Green Party. I am the State Chair of the Peace and Freedom Party, and of course this indicates that I find it more productive to work in the Peace and Freedom Party, but I think it is essential that we cooperate, and when possible, be mutually supportive and focus on working together to defeat our real enemies - who are certainly not to be found in either party!
There is a reason why they call this sort of divisive talk "sectarianism." Religious sects are the model for this kind of behavior. (Yes, I am a member of a religion, too, but I work with members of other religions in the community.) Generally speaking, the Christians said that their religion superceded Judaism, then the Muslims said that their religion superceded Christianity and Judaism, and the Bahai Faith claims that their religion has superceded Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.... and no doubt someone else has taken the next logical step. In each case, religious sectarianism can range from mild criticism of the other faiths on up to war and executions for heresy.
Similarly, we have comments here that Peace and Freedom had its chance, and has been superceded by the Greens, etc. Well, that is not the way the real world works. And sectarian wishes do not make something so. The Peace and Freedom Party is alive and well, and growing!
The sectarianism some recall about the Peace and Freedom Party back some 15 to 20 years ago has been outgrown. One particular stubborn group ("NAP") that (with apparent secret government support) spent literally millions of dollars trying to take over the Peace and Freedom Party was defeated, and quit to join the Reform Party. Since the early 1990s, the Peace and Freedom Party has been a united non-sectarian Left group that has become bigger and more active over the past several years, and we are running a big slate of candidates in the coming election. We have over 100 hard-working petitioners around the state, a number that grows every day, circulating the in-lieu and nominating papers for (at last count) over 40 candidates for partisan office in 2006. All are "Peace Candidates" who will call for immediate withdrawal, and they will have a big effect, including in many areas where there will be no Green candidate. All are opposed to the death penalty, which the Democrats and Republicans treat as though it were the 11th Commandment. All will be speaking out courageously on issue after issue that will make people say, "I wish those other candidates were willing to say that."
On the other hand, I understand that there will be several Green candidates in some areas where we have no Peace and Freedom Party candidates. I hope we can get together to endorse each other's candidates in districts without a candidate from both parties, and work together on those campaigns as we work together on other issues. For example, I understand that activists in both parties will be circulating petitions to increase the minimum wage to $8.75, with indexing for cost-of-living. (We want to double the minimum wage, but we will take what we can get.) Activists in both parties will be active in anti-war work. I hope some Greens will be active in some of the labor support work that is a staple of Peace and Freedom Party activity. (Most of the Peace and Freedom Party candidates are experienced labor activists.)
So both as an individual, and as the current elected chair of one of the parties involved, I say "LET'S WORK TOGETHER." While both parties are pretty unlikely to win power in this election, we have the luxury of saying nice things about each other and cooperating without fearing that a vote for the other guy will lose us the election. Who cares whether Todd Chretien or Marsha Feinland gets more votes? The important thing is that with vigorous campaigning the two peace candidates take away a lot of votes that would otherwise go to the obedient servant of imperialism, Feinstein, and educate a lot of voters to the need to reject the twin parties of war and oppression. This will strengthen the movement, our broad movement that must become broader so that we can end this misbegotten bloody war of aggression, and go on to do other great things for the working people of our country.
-Kevin Akin
The Green Party is allowing an ISO member to run on it's ticket. Isn't that enough for you? In order to make serious reform, liberals need to join together and demand true representation. When groups like the Peace and Freedom Party keep on being stubborn, sticking to their Marxist ideals while not getting anything done, we split the progressive cause. I urge those supporters of Peace and Freedom to register and vote Green.
...that it's not just Israel you whore for
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$230.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network