Pretty Good Article That Makes Clear Why The Green Party Are Not Allies.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

This is written as a strategy by a Green party activist in NY. Read through his words and you'll see quite plainly, in my opinion, why I'm not just going to extend my hand out and embrace them politically. They are not allies. They are a rival party trying to steal progressives from OUR party and demonize us more than we've ever demonized them in my opinion. And I understand many side with their view of things. I agree with a lot of what they say, but they are far too rigid, narrow minded and inflexible for my liking. They also aren't democrats. I'm all for progressives and the progressive way, but do it from within our party. We have some tremendous progressive voices within the Democratic party. But to do it from the outside, while trying to tear our party apart, is not exactly something I'm going to embrace.

Ok, enough of my rambling. Read the article and cast your own judgements on friend or foe. Here's a quick two paragraphs, followed by much more at the link:

snip
"The professional liberals demonstrated that they have more interest in their own career advancement through maintaining friendly ties to the Democratic administration than in advancing the issues of concern to their members. Now they are remobilizing against the Republicans in order to bring the Democrats back in. The challenge for the Greens is to go underneath the liberal leadership to the base of these organizations and win the ranks over to independent politics. The Greens will need to join the base in issue- oriented campaigns that build relationships, trust, and the sense that the Greens are fighting on their side. On that foundation, Greens can make the case that more will be gained on these issues from an independent challenge to both corporate parties than from another round of generic corporate government wrapped in the Democratic instead of the Republican brand label.

The Greens will not win over progressive Democratic voters by talking as if what they are trying to do is move the Democrats to the left. That will just encourage those progressives to stay where they are. When Nader said during the campaign that his votes would spill over the ticket, to helping Congressional Democrats win back the House, he was giving credibility to the idea that the Democrats are worth electing. When Nader said that the Green challenge would have a positive collateral impact on the Democratic Party, he was giving progressive Democratic voters another thread on which to hang their vain hopes of reforming the Democratic Party. When the race got close, these kinds of statements gave implicit permission to wavering supporters to go back to Gore in a close election."

http://www.wpunj.edu/newpol/issue31/hawkin31.htm

[Erika]

1. Any decent green

would vote democratic. Idealism is fine, but the Dem's include that platform.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

3. Absolutely.

It bothers me that instead of working with us from within, or being progressive democrats, they instead hold to their own party while trying to destroy our wish division. They just come off as holier than though 'we're perfect and our shit don't stink' typers with no real understand of what it takes to enter the political ring. I'm all behind progessives, and some of them in our party are rock solid heroes to me. But I'll be damned if I'm to be asked by some here to extend my hand out to greens who want to rob us of our most proud new generation of members for their own gain, ya know?

[eridani]

2. And how many Green legislators voted against the war?

59% of Dems did.

[w4rma]

7. Not one single solitary Green in Congress voted *against* the war.

And no Green in Congress voted for the war.

[eridani]

21. Not participating in those decisions at all,then--

--would seem to be a quest for perpetual innocence in which nothing bad happening in the world can possibly be your fault.

[MrBenchley]

4. It's especially funny to hear them natter about "trust"

Remember, their own party doesn't amount to shit, perhaps because they are nothing but a GOP dirty trick.

[tabasco]

8. Great post.

They are nothing but a GOP dirty trick.

Some people don't realize when they are being used.

[MrBenchley]

12. As we see from the forums here

Some people want to deny they're being used, and to rail against the rest of the world because we're not.

[TomClash]

5. Aren't these the morons who . . .

. . . nominated Ralph Nader to run for President instead of Al Gore, the most progressive Presidential candidate on the environment since Teddy Roosevelt?

Yeah, I want them running the country. :sarcasm:

[union_maid]

6. The point is, they never will

All they'll ever run is maybe - maybe - a few town councils in progressive, out of the way, college towns. All they can do in the mainstream is damage to the people and causes they pretend to care about.

[NobleCynic]

9. such a simplistic and ignorant view of the Greens

will never win converts. And one also has to take into account the Green's positions on corporations, whereas Al didn't position himself effectively as opposed to corporate interests.

In a winner take all system, all a third party exists to do is blackmail a majority party into moving more into line with their beliefs.

Not to defend their actions, as I believe they were short sighted in not dropping out of the 2000 election, but if they don't actually make an honest try at spoiling an election for the Democrats, they have no influence whatsoever. Blackmail without the will to actually go through with trashing the blackmailed is useless. The Democrats made no overt concessions to the Green's other than stating the obvious, that the Republican's are worse.

[TomClash]

14. What's interesting

is that you do nothing to counter this "simplistic and ignorant" view. I fact, you tacitly agree with that view by stating that Nader should have dropped out of the 2000 Presidential race.

I voted for a Green in a 2005 local election against a Dem because I know ther Dem and I think he's an incredibly ineffective party hack who favors his ethnic group at the expense of others. It was a protest vote I could just as easily cast for several other parties or not at all. But calling yourself the Green Party and selecting Nader over Gore is absurd.

[Iniquitous Bunny]

10. I support Greens in theory..

Very little in what is in their platform do I disagree with. However, continually accepting funds from the most hard line of Republicans brings their ethics into serious question for me as a party. I'm sorry, it's sleazy.

[wryter2000]

11. When Nader said...

When Nader said during the campaign that his votes would spill over the ticket, to helping Congressional Democrats win back the House, he was giving credibility to the idea that the Democrats are worth electing.

Sorry, when Nader said that he was lying.

[theophilus]

13. The Democratic party needs to undercut the Greens by leading the way

to the elimination of greenhouse gas production and to the saving of our nation and planet from greedy corporations in particular and greedy people in general. If the Democrats lead the way there will be no reason for a Green party. If they don't, whether we voted Democratic, Green, or didn't vote.....we'll just be dead. Change WILL happen.

[aein]

15. I would support the green party...if this was any other country

But here, with the system we have, liberals have to be democrats. We have to play to win. We need change now.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. Absolutely.

[MrBenchley]

17. K&R for the afternoon

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. They're right. Reforming the Dems from the inside hasn't worked.

What has happened is that the Dems have moved to the right in search of money and votes.

Politicians will only respond if votes/money are withheld. Then they will move in one direction or the other to line their pockets or protect their seats.

[Nikki Stone 1]

19. kick

:kick:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. Kick For Education

[cynatnite]

22. Good article

Thanks!