What I think we all should do regarding Greens/Progressives

[Hippo_Tron]

I realize that Greens/Progressives feel like they are not being heard by the Democrats and thus decide to vote Green or vote Green should so and so not be the Democratic nominee. I can understand the mentality that another four years of Bush and then things getting so bad that the country will elect a liberal president is better than a bush-lite president. However, four more years of Bush is not good for anybody and thus here is what I think every DUer should do. Write to your favorite candidate/candidates and tell them that you think that they should reach out to unite all Americans against Bush, especially Greens/Progressives. Greens you can do the same thing, write to the candidates and tell them how you feel and tell them why you might be inclined to vote Green. I think that if we have a candidate reaching out to EVERYBODY willing or possibly willing to vote against Bush in '04 then we will have a much better shot at winning and we will have a president representing a people with diverse political ideals. With that, I'm writing Clark, Dean, Kerry, and maybe some others first thing tommorow.

[Mairead]

1. Humane idea, but it's not going to work, the reason being that if they

didn't do it on their own (as Kucinich did) then it isn't in their nature and everyone will know they're lying, just as everyone knows that Clinton, Gore, et al. are lying sacks of it for supporting Mr GOP Newsom over Actual Dem Gonzalez.

I certainly wouldn't believe any 'foxhole conversion'. I might be willing to accept actual legal guarantees of performance--the VP slot plus a portfolio or two--but nothing less.

Why not simply go with Kucinich to begin with? Why try to clean the stink off a sow's ear when a silk purse, filled with gold, is lying at your hand?

[Hippo_Tron]

28. Because Kucinich's beliefs...

Do not fall in line as closely with mine as do Kerry's or Clark's although they are much closer to mine than those of Bush's.

[Iverson]

2. a variation on your suggestion

Hippo_Tron, candidates reaching out is nice, but even better is people talking to each other. Mairead makes a good point that candidates who can't figure out that outreach might be a good idea will only have the stink of artifice if they try.

Go on out there and set a good example. Maybe you already are. I'm trying to. Electoral fraud may overwhelm our efforts, but all groups on the left need dialogue in any case.

[Killarney]

3. The best solution is for Nader not to run.

You can email him and beg him not to. I did.

[wanderingbear]

27. The best solution is for the Democrats to accept the Green Platform.

otherwise its not worth it for us..

[TexasSissy]

4. What is the Green platform?

I don't even know what they stand for. Are they far left, centrist, or what? I would think they'd be for environmental concerns, but I looked up Nader's website, and it barely mentions that.

[Iverson]

5. check here

http://www.gpus.org/platform.html

Thanks for asking.

:donut:

[LWolf]

9. 10 Key Values:

I don't see anything here that should not be part of the democratic party platform.

1. GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY
Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives and not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process.

2. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.

3. ECOLOGICAL WISDOM
Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.

4. NON-VIOLENCE
It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society’s current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.

5. DECENTRALIZATION
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.

6. COMMUNITY-BASED ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE
We recognize it is essential to create a vibrant and sustainable economic system, one that can create jobs and provide a decent standard of living for all people while maintaining a healthy ecological balance. A successful economic system will offer meaningful work with dignity, while paying a “living wage” which reflects the real value of a person’s work.

Local communities must look to economic development that assures protection of the environment and workers’ rights; broad citizen participation in planning; and enhancement of our “quality of life.” We support independently owned and operated companies which are socially responsible, as well as co-operatives and public enterprises that distribute resources and control to more people through democratic participation.

7. FEMINISM AND GENDER EQUITY
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.

8. RESPECT FOR DIVERSITY
We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines.

We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of biodiversity.

9. PERSONAL AND GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY
We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well-being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.

10. FUTURE FOCUS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or “unmaking” all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions.

Ten Key Values from other state and local Greens.
There is no authoritative version of the Ten Key Values of the Greens. The Ten Key Values are guiding principles that are adapted and defined to fit each state and local chapter.


http://www.gp.org/tenkey.html

[He loved Big Brother]

12. Shhh

Facts hurt the Green-haters feelings!

I'm a Dem, but a Green at heart. Sad that the Dem party *barely* has room for me.

[LWolf]

102. According to this DUer,

there's no room for me, either:

If he ran and lost, then we could show the Kucinich voters to the door, boot them out on their ear, and get on with repairing the party.

Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=355#3485

[jsw_81]

21. Nice list

I agree with virtually all of it, but you need to understand that the country we live in is quite conservative at the moment. Just the other day, for example, the New York Times released a poll that showed that around fifty percent of the American people want to see homosexuality banned. Yes, BANNED. That's the country we live in today. And any mention of "social justice" or "global responsibility" or "ecological wisdom" (from your list) scares the hell out of tens of millions of clueless swing voters out there and just causes them to vote Republican. So please, abandon your efforts to elect a Green or someone like Kucinich because it just ain't gonna happen next year. Support reasonable, electable candidates like Dean, Clark, Kerry, or perhaps Gephardt. After we win the presidency and help the country move to the left (it may take a while, but be patient), then and only then should you support someone like Kucinich. But until then it's a complete waste of time that only helps the right.

[no name no slogan]

97. This is NOT a conservative country

...and if you're relying on the NYT to tell you that, you need to check a few other sources, too.

Look at the top selling books of 2003, who were the authors? Micheal Moore, Molly Ivins, Al Franken, Joe Conason, etc. Liberals/leftists each and every one of them. If this country is so "conservative", why do 60% of us support a government-run, single-payer universal healthcare system?

This country is economically quite liberal, despite the last 20 years of Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Shrub/Greenspan fiscal monetorism. Most people believe in a strong social safety net, reigning in corporate power and abuses, and a cleaner environment. Are you saying these positions are conservative?

Of the current crop, Kucinich is standing up as an economic liberal in the old FDR sense of the word. The rest are just fiscal conservatives/moderates whose economic policies are right in line with those of Richard Nixon.

The Democrats have repeatedly beat the living crapola out of Republicans on the economic issues, yet today's sorry crop of "candidates" seems to regard Clinton as the master of economic wisdom-- DESPITE the fact that the rich got increasingly richer, the middle class barely hung on, and the poor got noticably poorer during his administration.

As far as us "liberals" supporting a "moderate" in the hopes that the country will "eventually" get "more liberal": your argument was also quite popular twelve years ago, when the liberals were being hoodwinked into supporting Clinton, in the hopes that eventually this country would "drift left" again.

Well, what happened? Did we drift left like you said we would? Hardly! Clinton gave us "welfare reform", NAFTA, and a whole raft of economically regressive policies that could have come from Newt Gingrich's playbook. Of course, Clinton NEVER did win a majority of the vote, and lost both the Senate and the House by the end of his term.

If the Dems want to win again, they need to talk up the pocketbook issues: fairness in taxation, controls on corporate power and abuses, protection for American jobs, and the opportunity to work hard and earn the American Dream.

THIS is how we've won elections before, and THIS is how we can win again this year.

[TexasSissy]

108. Don't forget Hillary's book! Or was that 2002?

[TexasSissy]

107. Could be values of either Dems or Repubs.

Could they be any vaguer? I mean, who wouldn't agree with these platitudes? I would have thought that "green" implies a concern about the environment, and while that is one of the values, it is only one of the values, and it is vague enough to be in the party platforms of either the Dems or Repubs.

I wonder what it really means to be green. I guess I should ask Kermit.

[wanderingbear]

15. The National Green Party Homepage

http://www.gp.org

[The Magistrate]

6. A Better Solution, Mr. Tron

Is for the "Green" wing to exercise some sense and self-discipline.

The old "make it get worse so it will get better" line has been a favorite of left romantics throughout the last century, but it has never resulted in anything but a firmer grip on power by reactionary elements. It must be discarded: nothing justifies actions that will assist to power the most reactionary elements of the polity.

It is the duty of a leftist to support the least reactionary of the viable alternatives in a general election, since to do anything else is to assist the triumph of the most reactionary. Only if the most reactionary politicos are expelled from office will it be possible to achieve any progress whatever in implementing left and progressive ideals. This must be recognized by all on the left, and most particularly by the most radical.

To act, under motives of left idealism, in a way which, as a practical matter, assists the most reactionary rightist elements to maintain power, is beyond foolishness.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Iverson]

8. a clarification, please

Does your advice have a point of expiration? That is: must a slow shift to the right be encoded permanently, since it is not a fast shift to the right, or is there at least theoretically some limit when enough is enough?

Also, do you see motivation other than naive romanticism for having political preferences on the left, or is it possible for lefties to be as rational and analyltical as ... non-lefties?

Thank you in advance.

[The Magistrate]

10. A Fair Question, Sir

What seems to me to be the need of the hour is the defeat and turning out of office of the most reactionary elements of our polity, who are currently in charge and in a position to remain so for some time unless effectively opposed. The country will not rally to a candidate perceived as radically left, and indeed can be easily rallied against such a candidate. It is not my preference that this be so, but it seems pretty well established that is the situation in which we find ourselves. Battle must be fought on the ground available, and tactics adopted to suit it.

It seems to me the larger aim at this point must be to induce a leftward drift into the polity. The rightward drift we have been experiencing for some years was not induced by any convulsive leap, and its correction and reversal cannot be induced by some sudden wrench. What is necessary is to gain a space in which more progressive policies can be executed, and the people can see in their own lives the benefit of such policies to them. By consistently supporting the least reactionary viable figures available, it seems to me this might be accomplished, and at some point edge into undeniably progressive ground.

It does seem to me that attachment to the most extreme portions of the left spectrum necessarily contains a degree of naivite and romance about it, for it is an attachment to policies that have never actually been exercised in power, and therefore it is impossible to know what their actual effects would be: all must be speculation and hope, without any check against reality. Hope, certainly, is not my stock in trade, being more of the half-empty school, and having a fairly low estimate of human-kind in general. But very little about political ideals are rational, though the analysis of strategems and tactics aimed to secure their realization must be completely so.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. With all due respect, Sir

it seems to me that Bill Clinton embodied the gradualist approach to undoing the damage wrought by the Reagan revolution, and he not only caved in to the Republicans when he didn't have to (e.g. gays in the military--he could have acted as Truman did in desegregating the military and told the officers that anyone who resisted would be court-martialed for insubordination) but also alienated the progressives by pushing NAFTA and a variety of welfare reform with a much-frayed safety net.

While I don't like anything that the Republicans stand for, I have to applaud their boldness. They don't ask whether the public is ready for them. They make the public ready.

[The Magistrate]

14. Concerning The Military Matter, Ma'am

We are in agreement. Having taken up the matter, he ought to have pushed it ruthlessly through, and even used it as an occassion for purge of reactionary figures opposing it in the highest echelons of the services. Authority cannot allow itself to be trifled with, and must show defiance is futile, and that there are grim consequences for it.

The Republican attitude of which you speak does not so much address the general populace, but aims to ensure their base of support is continually at fever pitch. Since most people do not really care much either way about such matters, that mostly concern personal morals, the mobilization of this sizeable claque is sufficient to carry the day and provide an appearance of wide support.

[Iverson]

22. a rejoinder

"It seems to me the larger aim at this point must be to induce a leftward drift into the polity."

Indeed. How we might accomplish this is one of my deepest concerns. Unfortunately, I read nothing from self-described pragmatic commentators that illuminates the path to the goal. Instead, it is veiled in a vague hope that once a slow drift to the right is substituted for a stampede to the right, there will one day be a kind of naturalistic outburst of left wing sentiment among the polity. Until then, of course, the pragmatic thing to do is to silence all discourse of the left, lest not even the slow drift to the right be realized.

Color me skeptical.

"What is necessary is to gain a space in which more progressive policies can be executed, and the people can see in their own lives the benefit of such policies to them."

You have it exactly right. A minimum, but not sufficient, condition is to have intact a discourse of the left.

"By consistently supporting the least reactionary viable figures available, it seems to me this might be accomplished, and at some point edge into undeniably progressive ground."

I submit to you that that is wishful thinking.

[The Magistrate]

30. Discourse, Sir?

The "talking shop" has always seemed grossly overrated to me. We probably share the same goals, namely that those who work enjoy the full fruits of their labor, and that people everywhere are able to develop to the fullest possible extent their potential as human beings, rather than as a species of tools, forced into odd distortions of themselves by over-work and traditions. Debate on the details of this vision is merely to raise up castles in the air, and to pick quarrels over decorating its rooms, so long as the thing remains unlikely to see practical achievement. What needs to be addressed is how this might be achieved; in other words, not where we are going, but what is the best road to get us there.

The tool available here is electoral politics. It is, potentially, a powerful one, but like any tool, it must be wielded properly to get the best effect possible from its use. It works best by appeal to group identity and shared beliefs, rather than rational argument and calculation of personal interest. It requires the assembly in advance of the broadest possible body of agreement, and the welding of that ground of agreement into a group. What exists already in place must be mined for such grounds; they cannot be conjured into existence from nothing, or forced to flower by mere heat of words and principle.

The greatest proportion of the people are in situations of life in which left and progressive policies would greatly benefit them, while reactionary policies operate to their great detriment. The people are, in their attitude towards many issues, much more to the left than is generally appreciated: it is a commonplace observation that on an issue by issue basis, the positions of the Democratic Party are more popular than those of the Republican Party. And yet a great number of people, who would be benefited by progressive policies, and who even agree with many of them, will react indignantly if called leftist or liberal. It is this which must be addressed by those who hope for the success of the left, and the implementation of progressive policies in our polity.

As with so many things, it boils down to questions of marketing and brand loyalty. The left has long marketed itself here as the party of idealism, which to most people connotes impracticality; as the party of pacifism, which to most people connotes weakness; and perhaps worst of all, as the party of superior sensibilities, which to most people connotes that they themselves are being viewed with active contempt. The left here has long ceded openly to the right a monopoly on patriotism and its symbols, though these are perhaps the most potent means of cementing group loyalties available on the political battlefield. The left has lost sight of its own roots in economic redistribution, and devoted far more effort to concerns of the academy rather than of the workplace and the kitchen table.

What is needed, therefore, is a concerted effort at re-branding. The efforts of Mao to sell revolution to the peasantry of old China are worth some examination. Cadre went into the villages and learned what people wanted, and how to describe revolutionary concepts to them in their own terms, using their own language and frames of reference. A species of focus-grouping, if you will. Something similar is going to have to be done here, and persons who fancy themselves radicals are going to have to display the same sort of disciplined perseverance and postponement of gratification that radicals who succeded in the past have displayed in bringing about the changes they seek. It may be necessary to keep quiet about about matters near to the heart, and display passion about matters that seem personally to be trivial. Do you think the reactionaries campaign openly on their desires for increased class-stratification and impoverishment of the workers? You know they do not: they find means to cloak these things, until they are in position to carry them out, when it is too late for the people they have duped.

[Iverson]

43. discourse

I am surprised that the term should be so easily dismissed by one who is so careful with his own rhetoric.

Whether one proceeds by deceiving the polity into acting in its best interest or by rational argument, as some of us are professionally and ethically bound to do, in either case it is a political discourse.

I assume that the enthusiastic denigration of various camps by each other has not escaped your notice. From this arises my objection to telling the left to be silent and settle for a slower rate of decay. I likewise assume that the most influential faction within the Democratic Party has also not escaped your notice. They are the DLC, and from my point of view they advocate winning elections by campaigning against the base. This, too, is discourse.

With an examination of what words are permitted and what words are not, eventually we must return to the claim that somehow, in some wholly unexplained way, a future moment will arise in which our shared desires might be pursued. All we need to do, the argument goes, is abandon those hopes until it's proven that abandonment works. Only then will a discredited idealism be reborn.

Except for the idea that the goals of the left will never, in that permutation, find a ripe time for pursuit, I find your analysis unimpeachable.

[wanderingbear]

16. Duty??

My vote is my Right and my freedom..Never my duty...

[The Magistrate]

20. Why Not Say Simply "Priviledge', Sir, And Have Done With It?

As a citizen of a country claiming its governance derives from the assent of the people, it is indeed your duty to participate in that governance, or you conceed the people cannot rule themselves, and participate in stripping even the fiction of people's rule from the polity.

If you are serious about opposing right reaction, and the detrimental consequences it has for your fellow citizens, and the people of the world, then it is your duty to oppose it, and to oppose it effectively, or else to concede that you do not really care a rap what happens, to anyone else, or even to yourself.

[wanderingbear]

25. Because Priviliage sugjests that it isnt a Right

and can be taken away from me..

[The Magistrate]

33. Whereas, Sir

Your apparent willingness to treat it as a triviality and not a duty constitutes its forfeiture without the bother of confiscation....

[wanderingbear]

36. I do not consider my Rights and Freedoms trivial in the least.

I have no need of the consrpt of Duty.. Duty is for the Millitary Mind and I am A Freeman not a member of the military.

[The Magistrate]

40. Duty, Sir

Is the pride of the citizen of a free land.

So long as you consider the exercise of your rights an option of personal indulgence, you conceive of them as trivialities, whatever your protestations to the contrary, and will find them gone soon enough in consequence.

[wanderingbear]

46. I consider my right and freedoms an inheiratance of birth..

I consider the consept of duty as just another tool for social control.

[The Magistrate]

50. Describe For Me, Sir, An Uncontrolled Society

And explain to me how any "birthright" is secured without a coherent society in agreement it is yours....

[wanderingbear]

53. If nessissary with my own gun..

But I prefer the Co operateive method.

[The Magistrate]

55. A Fine Romanticism, Sir

You will find, unfortunately, that there is always someone badder than you out about the big world.

Skill at that sort of thing requires habits of mind and warps of personality it is abundantly clear a decent fellow like you sadly lacks....

[wanderingbear]

57. A reality..

I grew up in a hard place during Hard times. Im quite capable of defending myself. Even aginst the like of you.
The anarchist cook book is rather informitive dont you think?

[The Magistrate]

60. Takes Damned Steady Fingers To Use, Dear....

"The eagerness of green troops for battle is not to be much relied on."

[wanderingbear]

63. You dont grow up in the Rocky Mountians

of Montana with out knowing how to use a gun.. You life may depend on knowing how..

[Hippo_Tron]

29. Ummm this is already what happens minus Greens showing restraint...

We can't ask Greens to vote democratic just because we want them to. We need to compromise with them and they need to compromise with us if we want all liberal votes to go to one candidate.

[The Magistrate]

37. They Cannot Be Made To Exercise Self-restraint And Self-Discipline, Sir

That must come from within.

But if they will not do this, they will bear a heavy onus for having done all in their power to maintain the current reactionary administration in office.

An attempt to cater to them now will mean disaster in the upcoming general election.

[wanderingbear]

44. All were asking is that the Democrats adopt a green/progressive platform.

Its that simple..

[The Magistrate]

48. And That Platform, Mr. Bear

Will put ten million additional votes into the Republican column.

[wanderingbear]

51. Well I guess we'd know where we stand then..

The loss would lead this country to civil war.. Mabe thats just what we need?

[The Magistrate]

56. Those Are A Bloody Damned Business, Sir

Do you really look sanguinely on such a possibility?

It rather chills a cold old reptile like me....

[wanderingbear]

59. Yes it is. A reality Id rather avoid..

But willing to risk..

[The Magistrate]

62. And Yet You Seem To Court It, Dear

Why?

[wanderingbear]

64. For what I beleave..

What else would I be willing to risk it for??

[The Magistrate]

68. Grand Self-Image?

Sheer sport?

The thrill of adrenaline coursing through the veins?

The varied pleasures of cruelty?

Inability to appreciate the likely consequences?

The list, dear, could go on and on and on....

[wanderingbear]

69. It is the consequences

that give us the leverage we need.. By now you should know all politics are baised on this.

[The Magistrate]

71. Do You Seriously Expect Civil War Soon, Dear?

There are limits to my interest in sport....

[wanderingbear]

73. After Bush wins..

unlees the democrats deside to adopt the Green/Progressive platform..

[The Magistrate]

75. So, My Dear

You predict that the Green Party will commence a civil war in the United States should the current administration be returned to office?

Good Lord, the things one learns on a Monday afternoon....

[wanderingbear]

77. No.. I predict that one win start if Bush wins..

And those of us involed in the Green party will likely find another place to be..

[The Magistrate]

80. How Will It Begin, Dear?

This interests me strangely....

[wanderingbear]

83. Some one will likely

Take a shot at Bush.. Wont be us.. But we'll get blaimed.. the left will be labeled a terrorits threat.The arrests will start soon after..Then all hell will breakl loose.

[The Magistrate]

85. Care To Make A Small Wager, Dear?

Baby needs a new pair of shoes....

And, by the way, if the shot does not come from the left, where will it originate?

Will the right be put out much by the continuance of this administration in power?

[wanderingbear]

90. If Bush Wins in 04

he will become an unstopable international Super power.. He will activate the War powers act,Suspending the constitution and declaring martial law. Every citezen shall then be issued the National Identification Card. Those not takeing it shall be put to death.
All Police will be nationalized and co-ordenated under the Office of Homeland security. The Patriot Act will then be put in as replacement for the suspended constitution. And that is how you take over a Democracy.

[The Magistrate]

91. But What About Your Civil War, Dear?

Against what you describe, it should have all the impact of a spit-ball on boiler-plate at thirty paces....

[wanderingbear]

93. Were not planning one.Were expecting one..

I thought you understood that. Were just planning to defend ourselves when it comes..

[The Magistrate]

94. But How Will It Begin, Dear?

You predict an extreme case of rightist repression, following a rightist victory at the polls. Where will the civil war you look for come from. You will be, of course, wholly incapable of defending yourself against the police and military power of the state....

[wanderingbear]

96. It comes from the top..This is how we see it going down..

Bush will have himself shot on live TV at a big national event..The bullet will grase his right temple but not kill him..
The gun will then be place in the possession of a major democratic party leader. The Bush administration will then accuse the Democrats of conspeacy to kill the Presedent.. He will enact the war powers act suspending the constitution and declareing martial law.. Then the Arrest warrents will go out for every liberal in the country...

[The Magistrate]

99. You Have Made Me Laugh Out Loud, Sir!

That is not easily done....

Wife says it is the best laugh she has had in a week.

Thank you very, very much.

Time now to go and seek unspeakable delights....

Happy holidays to you, dear!

[wanderingbear]

100. Oh..In the end he will loose..

Meanwhile he will try,and lives will be lost.

[YNGW]

101. Dang!

I can't believe I missed out on this thread today. Too bad there's not a way to signal others on the board of a particularly imiginitive delusion in Aisle 666.

[Cheswick2.0]

31. I agree it is beyond foolish, it is immoral

It is immoral to force people to suffer so they will join your revolution. It is the kind of crap that was used to justify every failed Marxist movement (is there any other kind?) ever started.

[wanderingbear]

39. Its no more than what the Dems have done to us..

Besides..The lesser of two negitives is still negitive.

[The Magistrate]

42. Sloppy Thinking, Sir

The greater evil remains the greater evil.

Life is largely an exercise in doing evil in the hope some good might come of it....

[wanderingbear]

47. If you cosider suppoerting the lesser negitive as your duty..

Then you sir are the problem.

[The Magistrate]

52. If, Sir

It is the only available means of effectively opposing the greater evil, my interest in clean hands is not so great as to refuse what must be done to avoid the greater harm.

If you cannot discern between shades of grey, Mr. Bear, you had better find some other amusement.

"Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disasterous and the unpalatable."

[wanderingbear]

54. Sorry I dont accept that..

[The Magistrate]

58. Whether You Accept It Or Not, Sir, Is Of No Consequence

Reality is that which, when you cease to believe in it, continues to operate....

[wanderingbear]

61. Its not just my oppinion though..

Its the oppinion of the entire Green/Progressive movement..Which makes it of much more consequence.

[The Magistrate]

65. In What Way, Dear?

If you mean that collective refusal to accept political reality might have the consequence of continuing the most reactionary elements of polity in power, then yes, it is of consequence.

If you mean that collective denial of political reality alters the latter in any way, then no, it is a mere piece of tissue before a down-bound train.

[wanderingbear]

67. We understand that..

That is what make this such a powerful leverage for the Greens.. Were not about to give up the only leverage we have..

[The Magistrate]

70. Well Then, Dear

A thorough-going Leninist would have no difficulty describing you as agents in fascist pay....

You have, in fact, no leverage at all. To concede to your blackmail is certain to continue the reactionaries in power, to ignore your petulant holding of your breath till you turn blue if you do not get your way is the course that will, and must, be followed, for it offers at least a chance of success.

[wanderingbear]

72. That politics dear..

Its just how its done.We do have just one leverage.. Our numbers are enough to make sure that the Democrats loose the next election if we dont get our way.

[The Magistrate]

78. Thank You For The Clarification, Dear

From your own mouth, you are a willing agent of reaction, intending to do what you can to return the present administration to office if you do not get your way.

You do understand, dear, that after this, you can never pretend the least real allegiance to the ideals of the left, or ever dare to criticize anyone for willingness to compromise, or even to collaborate, with the Republican Party, or any other reactionary force?

You have demonstrated there is no difference worth mentioning between your radical self and Zell Miller....

[wanderingbear]

79. Oh .You mean Im an Activist.. Thats true..

All Green/Progressives are. We are the Far left. Little bit different of a group than the middle left.

[The Magistrate]

82. But For Whom, Dear?

You have declared your desire for a reactionary victory....

[wanderingbear]

84. For the Far Left ofcourse...

Remeber us from the 60ies..We'll were back.. And weve got a new group of youth with us from the 90ies..

[The Magistrate]

87. Surely, Dear, You Are Not Pretending To Be In Your Fifties?

It would be sad indeed if that were the case in fact....

As you have declared you would rather see the current reactionary Republican administration continued in power than oppose them any terms but those gauranteed to meet defeat at the polls, it is quite questionable where your real allegiance lies, dear, and there is no particular reason to believe you have any interest in success for the left.

[wanderingbear]

88. No Im 40 accually..

I came in second generation during the 70ies.. Grew up in the way Running the Mountians of Montana.

[The Magistrate]

89. That Is Not Much Better, Fellow

The point of the place is to learn, you know, and the longer you have been in it, the more understanding you are expected to have achieved.

[wanderingbear]

92. Advanced age doent not nessisarlly mean

advanced experiance.. Nore does youth nessisarally imply lack of experiance.. Beleave me..Ive been around.. I know alot more than what I want to..

[The Magistrate]

95. Clearly, Dear

It does not necessarily equate to advanced understanding, particularly in political matters....

[wanderingbear]

98. What I understand about Politics is that most of it is B.S.

Excuse me if I bring a shovel.

[LWolf]

7. Here's a different perspective.

A year ago, DU was a progressive place. Now "we" have to do something about the Greens/Progressives. Like they aren't part of "us" anymore. Go figure. :shrug:

The logical choice is right under your nose, and has been all along. If you want the support of greens and other progressives who don't want to vote for bushlite, don't nominate bushlite. Choose the staunch democrat who includes green/progressive issues in his platform. The man greens have been flocking back to the democratic party to support. The candidate who invites progressives back into the party.

Vote for Congressman Dennis Kucinich.

[The Magistrate]

11. Doing So, Mr. Wolf, Will Return The Current Administration To Office

[wanderingbear]

26. Why Bother to Elect a Democrat who wont suppoert our issues??

Tell me that??

[Hippo_Tron]

32. LOOK At the difference between Dean, Kerry, Clark vs. Bush

They will bring back diplomacy and bring back a plan to get us out of Iraq.

They will provide healthcare for everybody and all seem to have great education and higher education plans.

They won't nominate right wing extremeist judges.

They will balance the budget and not dump so much money into failed foreign policy initiatives.

They will win the war on terror.

And so much more...

[LWolf]

103. That's Ms. Wolf, thank you.

I don't agree with your assertion.

I hear too many people here in my own community, a staunch republican stronghold, talking wistfully about the very things that Dennis Kucinich will deliver. They've never heard of Dennis. I don't proselytize my friends and neighbors, but I do matter-of-factly mention that there is a candidate out there supporting their needs. And if they had the choice in the general election, many would choose him.

Of course, it wouldn't be the first election he won against better funded republican opponents:


http://www.kucinich.us/electable.php

[wanderingbear]

17. Really?I always thought it was Dean..

Course I thought the Pacific Greens were still the National Voice of the Green until yesterday.. I dont know whats going on any more.
Form what I understand the Newly formed National Green Party has voted to reject any compromise..

[JohnKleeb]

18. Many Greens are leaning Kucinich I hear

I am a democrat personally.

[wanderingbear]

23. In The Pacific Northwest its a Dean vote..

THe Pacific Green party was considering a deal with Dean. But sence weve found out about the formation of a National Green Party We dont know whats going on.

[LWolf]

104. I can't answer that for you,

not being a green. All I can give you is anecdotal evidence. I have met many greens here in CA campaigning for Dennis. Coming back to the democratic party for the specific purpose of electing Dennis Kucinich. In discussion with several Kucinich groups around southern california, I can tell you that Dennis has strong support from green voters and green leaners here in California.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Because Kucinich's ideological beliefs...

Aren't the same as those of many people on this board, have you ever considered that?

[no name no slogan]

66. NOW I remember why I left the Democrats before!!!

Thanks for swatting this one out of the park LWolf. It's exactly this kind of reactionary "blame the progressives" blather that made me and a number of "old school" liberals ditch the Democrats last time around.

If the "New Democrats" are so determined to alienate yet another one of their old standby coalition partners, it is truly a sad day for the Democratic party. NOBODY wins elections by being "not quite as bad" as the alternative-- you win elections by standing up for the people and standing up for your convictions. This is what Paul Wellstone did-- he even had staunch Repubs voting for him because they knew he was honest and stood up for those least able to stand up for themselves.

If the Dems use 2004 as yet another year to run yet another "moderate" who appeals to the marginal, finicky, undependable and indecisive "swing voters", they'll further succeed in spurring on yet more 3rd party candidacies much to their detriment.

[LWolf]

105. You're welcome.

I'm sticking with the democratic nominee no matter what in '04; I don't want to deal with another 4 years of *. But if the democratic party is interested in keeping my support, they won't be working to marginalize me.

[wanderingbear]

110. The Dems wont stand up for my convictions

So Im voting Green.

[jsw_81]

19. Greens/Progressives

Anyone who thinks we should just let Bush win so that the country will fall apart and elect a "true" liberal (e.g. Nader or Kucinich) in 2008 is absolutely insane. If Bush gets another term, he will only solidify the Republican grip on the levers of power, making it even harder for us to fix things later on. The young, right-wing judges he's putting on the bench will be thorns in our side for DECADES to come. And if Bush gets to make a few Supreme Court appointments, you can say goodbye to Roe v. Wade, gay rights, environmental protection laws, workplace safety laws, church/state separation and a whole host of other things that you probably take for granted. And if you think that we're ever going to elect a Green president, you're clueless about how our political system works.

A sane, reasonable person wouldn't even THINK about voting for Greens next year. If you care about this country and its future, you'll vote Democratic.

[wanderingbear]

24. And if the Democrats care..

They will consider adopting A Green/Progressive Philosopy.

[The Magistrate]

35. Care About What, Sir?

About your personal sensibilities, or about expelling the reactionaries fom the offices they currently hold?

Or is that a thing of no importance to you?

A determined affort to cater to the Green fringe will cost three votes for every vote it gains under current political conditions in the upcoming general election.

[Hippo_Tron]

38. That's questionable...

It depends on how bad chimpy does in the next year.

[wanderingbear]

41. Then that is what will happen..

If the democrats want to be that stuborn..

[The Magistrate]

45. So, Sir

Let us be blunt and clear: you would prefer to see the triumph of the reactionaries than compromise yourself in a Popular Front against them?

That seems to me, regretably, the clearest meaning of your comment.

[wanderingbear]

49. I would prefer to have a presedent that I agree with..

Rather than support someone whom I will just turn around and attack after the election is over.. Dosnt do me a damed bit of good to vote for someone that I disagree with as much a I disagree with Bush.

[The Magistrate]

74. And Yet, Fellow

It might do many other people a great deal of good, if the policies implemented even did not do as much harm to them as those of the current administration.

Your private gratifications, dear, are of no consequence to anyone, not even to yourself....

[wanderingbear]

76. Theres where your wrong..

The Green party is large enough to ensure that The democrats dont get elected ever again.Unless we get what we want. http://www.gp.org

[Iverson]

81. Excuse me.

I feel compelled to interrupt the exercise in mutual bear-baiting to point out that the argument you're putting forward is not the one that I usually encounter among Greens.

Most Greens I know dislike being bullied by Democrats and so do not attempt to react in kind. The whole model is off.

Perhaps things are different in your neck of the woods. Thanks for your attention.

[wanderingbear]

86. That would be Eugene Oregon

where the Green Party began..I dont know what its like in your area but in the Heart of Hippieland is pertty radical.

[YNGW]

106. The Debate Continues: A Solution??

I think the debate will continue until we can set a date to which we can reference and say, "This is the day we determined that this will/will not work."

Having said that, maybe what we need to do is to nominate a Nader or Kucinich-type candidate. If he wins, fine. If he loses, we know we can't win national elections with a Nader/Kucinich type candidate and we disregard that option in any future considerations. For those who won't follow, who insist that they will only vote for a Nader/Kucinich type candidate and not what they consider to be a "Republican-lite" Democrat, we part ways and get on with building our own seperate political structures.

That may be an impossible scenario, but at some point both sides need to either compromise, or cut and run. The picture I painted could be the defining moment on which to choose. From the Greens I know, cut and run may be it for them. They use the word "Republocrats" to describe both parties, so trying to mend fences seems to be out of the question from my own observations.

:hangover:

dai

[wanderingbear]

109. See the Greens for Dean?? No thread.

For further comment see the Greens for Dean???No. thread..

[quaker bill]

111. What I think we all should do regarding Greens/Progressives

Ignore them. Gore paid them far too much attention. While we need every vote we can get, I don't believe we can get these votes.

More votes would be lost in the effort to obtain Green party allegiance to the Democratic candidate that we would obtain if successful. Further, the effort would likely not be successful anyway. The Green Party types posting here don't seem to find any of the likely democratic nominees particularly trustworthy.

If Democrats will just focus on building their own party and putting forward a pro-evironment, pro-humanity message, the rest will tend for itself.

[no name no slogan]

112. Far from it, Bill-- progressives WANT to vote for Democrats

I voted for the Green Party (and Nader, by default) in both 1996 and 2000 for a couple reasons: first, I live in a solidly Dem state (MN) which Clinton/Gore won handily, and I wanted a third voice that did not belong to Jesse Ventura to have a platform in this state, and get major party status, along with the DFL, Republican and Independence parties. Second, neither Clinton nor Gore stood up for the "bread and butter" issues which made the Democrats the party of common people: both favored NAFTA and "welfare reform", as did their respective Republican opponents.

So, if you're a voter motivated by economic concerns, there really wasn't much "choice" with either major-party candidate. The Democratic Party I had been active in (even going TWICE to the state convention) had mutated into some weird Rockefeller Wing of the Republican Party that even made Richard Nixon look like a liberal.

However, I'm supporting Kucinich this time around. He is one of two candidates who's raising the tough issues that none of the "major candidates" even address, let alone take positions on. He's not afraid to stand up for what's right, no matter what the consequences to himself personally.

Even during this campaign, when others were making speechies about the evils of computerized voting, Kucinich posted Diebold's memos to his congressional web site, defying Diebold to sue him under the badly flawed DMCA. While Dean, Kerry, Clark and the rest pontificated and denounced Diebold, Kucinich actually stood up and did something.

As far as losing more votes by ignoring the Greens and/or Progressives: how can we possibly lose more? Right now, self-identified Democrats make up 32% of the electorate-- an all-time low. Our catering toward this imaginary "center" has led this party to electoral disaster after electoral disaster.

Since 1992, we've lost both the US Senate AND US House, a majority of governorships, and more state houses to the Repubs. Electoral participation has dropped to historic lows. Clinton's two plurality "victories" owed more to Ross Perot peeling the "angry white guy" vote from Bush & Dole than to any great message of Clinton's. Flirting with the "fiscally conservative" libertarian fringe of the Republican Party has done little to increase our numbers and current prospects. And it's doubtful another four years of following this same program will yield different results, either.