A Journal of America's Political Soul Heaven & Earth: Where Politics and Spirituality Meet
March 4, 2024  
Home Receive G&G for free... SPROUTS - Reader comments, discussion, and feedback... Contribute your writings to G&G future issues... More information on the current topic... Previous topics covered... Why Garlic? Why Grass? Why now? Contact G&G...

Issue No. 5 - The Political Spectrum in America
C O N T E N T S :

New » What Makes a Candidate 'Electable'?

Introduction: The Lay of the Land

The Psychology of Conservatism

Left, Right or Center: Who's Conservative Today?

A Lone Voice of Principle Broadens the Debate: G&G Interviews Matt Gonzalez

Signs of Life on the Left

Keeping the Flame Alive: Greens Anchor the Spectrum

Over the Rainbow: Libertarians Offer a Different Spectrum

Taking Back America, From the Radical Middle

Keeping the Flame Alive: Greens Anchor The Spectrum

America was founded on the concept that people are entitled to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Today the Green Party is keeping that flame alive.

Unlike the Democrats and Republicans, the Green Party has a rock solid set of values that don't change based on polls and corporate contributions. Click the links above at right, visit the Democrats and Republicans, and see if you can find the values they stand for. Instead, you'll find vague platitudes that obscure the shifting sands of their ideals. Their platforms change as the demands of their funders change.

The Green Party has 10 Key Values and, remarkably, most Americans agree with them. Greens want everyone to have: a safe sustainable environment; affordable healthcare; and a living wage. Greens are against killing and war. Greens think that when making social decisions, we should come to consensus, which encourages us to work together instead of launching partisan policies (like aggressive wars). It's pretty hard to argue against the Green Party position on moral or ethical grounds, so no one really tries.

Instead, voters are asked to be pragmatic. Greens can't really get elected, we're told. If we really tried to save the environment, we wouldn't have any jobs. If healthcare were affordable, the public sector would go bankrupt. If employers had to pay a living wage, they'd all go out of business.

And the biggest of all: If we weren't willing to kill people in large numbers, how would we protect America?

Many common folks have come to see through this nonsense.

Pragmatism vs. Idealism

If we are truly "pragmatic," it's obvious Greens cannot affect the outcome of the 2004 election. There simply are not enough registered Greens to make a difference. As they did in 2000, more Democrats will vote for George Bush than for the Green candidate; even if every Green voted for the Democrat, it still wouldn't affect the outcome in any state. So, Greens can go about happily and diligently pursuing the 10 Key Values without worrying that any "pragmatic" considerations will get in the way of their idealism -- and without voting for Howard Dean.

Being a Green is not about pragmatism; it's about keeping the flame alive. It's about envisioning and pushing for political progress when no one else is. It's about believing America can be a better place and working diligently to make it happen.

Being a Green is also not just about idealism. The Green Party has an influence far beyond its voter registration and the other parties know it. Green Party candidates regularly draw votes considerably in excess of the number of registered Greens. And the Green Party is constantly expanding its registered voter base. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can make these claims.

If Green candidates generally do not get elected, their principles are nevertheless entering the mainstream. And the more Greens there are, the more quickly this happens. For instance, more and more groups are now using a consensus approach to decision-making, because it makes sense. Consensus is not about "winning," it's about finding the best solution. In San Francisco, Matt Gonzalez was recently elected President of the Board of Supervisors -- even though the Democrats held sufficient votes to elect one of their own. They understood that Matt was there to find solutions, not to "win." Against considerable internal party pressure, the Democrats selected Matt to lead the Board. [Read G&G's interview with Matt Gonzalez - ed.]

The Growing Power of the Green Party

The Republicans look at the Green Party with a sort of benign amusement. Green voters were never likely to vote for Republican candidates anyway, so from their point of view Green candidates divide the "progressive" vote and help Republicans get elected. (We Greens keep secret the fact that some of our best activists were once Republicans.)

Still, Republicans are not entirely enjoying the rise of the Greens. Most Republicans joined in bipartisan support for a "no-fly" list that just happens to include many Green activists. After all, vegetarian tree-hugging peace-lovers can be pretty scary: they focus world opinion on the greedy excesses of the World Trade Organization and NAFTA; they raise uncomfortable questions about genetically modified food; they suggest the poor should not simply keep getting poorer while the wealthy reap ever more financial wealth from supply-side, trickle-down economics; they ask tough questions about troops dying to protect us from weapons of mass disappearance.

Democrats, on the other hand, don't view Greens with amusement at all. They see Greens as wayward Democrats -- though this is often wishful thinking. The Democrats know that Greens have values that the Democrats ought to have -- and maybe used to have. Simply by existing, Greens constantly remind Democrats that they are failing their constituency. And the Greens aren't just existing, they're growing.

So Democrats implore Greens to "join forces" with them. "We are on your side," they suggest. But looking at where Greens, Democrats and Republicans stand on the issues shows this isn't true. Check out www.theRealDifference.org. The truth is, Democrats are usually closer to the Republicans than they are to the Greens.

The latest incarnation of "let's join forces" is the "Anyone But Bush" campaign. Progressives will really be worse off if Bush gets re-elected, the theory goes. We can't afford four more Bush years! So we're all supposed to get on the same page and support, for instance, a non-progressive like Howard Dean, because "he can get elected."

The even stranger plea is the theory that Greens should support Dennis Kucinich. Now, the Democrats are not going to let Kucinich anywhere near center stage on convention day. They'll take Dean if they have to, but Kucinich, never. If Kucinich has no chance for the nomination, why would Greens waste our meager resources backing his efforts? And, if Dennis wants Green Party support, there is something obvious he can do to get it. (Hint: Join the Green Party.)

If Kucinich joined the Green Party, he could get its presidential nomination in a heartbeat. Then again, so could Cynthia McKinney. But crossing the line from pragmatism to idealism is a hard step to take. It's not for the faint of heart.

What The Democrats Are Really After

The Democrats don't need Green Party votes; they need Green Party cover. For Democrats, support from the Green Party is something akin to the "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval." If the Greens, with all those 10 Key Values and everything, support the Democrat, then maybe those picky, unenthusiastic swing voters, who sometimes stay home anyway, will support the Democrat too. And perhaps some of the voters who would vote for Bush because "there's no point voting for BushLite" will also reconsider. If the Greens endorse the Democrat, maybe he isn't merely "BushLite."

If the Greens endorse the Democrat, maybe he isn't merely 'BushLite.'

The thing is, if we are all "progressives," why don't the Democrats support Instant Runoff Voting? Or real campaign finance reform? In California, Democrats proposed public campaign financing that would effectively keep Greens out of office forever. Democrats think it is a good idea for Democrats and Greens to work together, but not if the results might lead to better democracy -- or the possibility more Greens could get elected.

Strange as it may sound, we Greens are over here being pragmatic. Someone's got to keep that flame alive. Someone's got to anchor the spectrum during all this rightward drift. Irrespective of what Greens do, Democrats and Republicans are going to keep getting elected and they are going to keep doing repulsive things like passing the Patriot Act and invading Iraq. But if we continue talking about universal healthcare, real environmental protections, consensus, instant runoff voting, feminism, livable wages, and supporting our troops by bringing them home -- our issues will rush into a vacuum in the public dialogue.

Oh, and did I mention that around the country, Green candidates are getting elected? It's below the radar for the mainstream media, and the elective offices may not yet be of national importance, but in some places idealism and real issues are beating "pragmatism" and the lesser of two evils.

We will see only more Green victories as the "pragmatic" choices look increasingly foolish, as the planet looks increasingly dangerous and unlivable, and as we Greens continue to keep the flame alive.

Barrington Daltrey is a lawyer, community activist and member of the Green Party County Council for Riverside County, California.

comment on this article >
back to top ^

Latest at G&G
03.13 - I have very extensively researched the Twin Tower Collapses
more >
03.06 - Your article makes a hell of a lot of sense, I must say.
more >

Green Party
Democratic Party
Republican Party
Libertarian Party

IPS International

New York Times
Washington Post
   other US dailies

Common Dreams
Democracy Now
Labor Start
Mother Jones
The Nation
Tom Paine.com
The Progressive
Truth Out

9-11 Blogger


Front Page | Contact | Subscribe
most content © 2024 garlic & grass
some fair use content