Green Parties
Until this year I have identified my political affiliation with the Greens as being a “California Green”; that is, registered with the Green Party of California. The national coordinating body was previously called the Association of State Green Parties, and in 2001 it voted to become a formal and unified national party organization, maintaining the structure of the established state Green parties. This is the party that ran the 2000 Nader/LaDuke ticket. On 8 November (less than one month ago, as of this writing), the U.S. Federal Election Commission (FEC) issued a unanimous opinion recognizing this group as the National Committee of the Green Party.
Phew!
You see, there are actually two parties claiming the title of “The Green Party” in the United States. The oldest, far more radical, and (in my opinion) far less judicious group is called “Greens / Green Party USA”. Yes, that is their official title, but they frequently refer to themselves with the almost-as-unwieldy abbreviation “G/GPUSA”. G/GPUSA calls GPUS “right wing”; a GPUS strategist has described G/GPUSA as being “on the fringes” and having “all sorts of damned-near-communistic ideas.” Some in G/GPUSA protest that accusation, but a look at their 2000 Platform might suggest otherwise. This platform promotes, among other things, a 30-hour workweek and the elimination of the U.S. Senate.
Confused yet? Here is a summary. The Green Party of the United States has federal recognition, ran Ralph Nader in the campaign, believes that electoral politics is the best route for political change, and is allied with every state Green Party. The Greens / Green Party USA are self-described radicals, are much smaller, and generate impossible political platforms. That of course is just my description; a member of the latter party might disagree with me, but would almost certainly call him/herself a radical.
This separation is frustrating. Greens have enough of a difficult time getting people to take us seriously that we cannot afford to present a fractured front, and the radicals of G/GPUSA just serve to make Greens seem crazy in the popular mindset. Fortunately most people do not realize this split due to the fringe-ness of G/GPUSA, and I believe (and hope) that the group will fade to effective silence and invisibility in the following years. (Note: If you are an annoyed G/GPUSA member and decide to email me, that’s fine. However, in contrast to my normal privacy policies, I explicitly reserve the right to publish any portion of your message on this site.)
The political issue is not the entirety, though. As an intellectual person I am bothered by people who do not have a grasp of basic logic or composition, and G/GPUSA missives seem naïve, poorly written, insufficiently considered, and factually erroneous. I will end this post with a passage comparison, juxtaposing excerpts of the two groups’ responses to the 11 September attacks.
From the press release of the Greens / Green Party USA (the group with whom I am not affiliated):
All good people abhor the death and destruction of this past week. People of the world want peace. But they also want justice … Clearly, the way countries now deal with one another isn’t working. The world needs leaders who will set good examples for Earth’s peoples. Can we not be grown-ups and use this latest Disaster as a starting point for working together towards peace? … Bring all American troops home from all over the world [presumably this means a cessation of cooperation with NATO peacekeeping campaigns] …
[T]he Green Party has been active in helping to counter the racist anti-Moslem and anti-Arab hysteria that has led to mindless attacks against Arab and dark-skinned Asian people in New York City and across the country. We are asking our members to be vigilant, to protect our brothers and sisters from other countries and to speak out against racism and anti-Semitism [sic] wherever it stirs.
Compare this to the Green Party of the United States’ release:
Greens fully support the right and obligation of the U.S. to seek justice. The complete disregard for the sanctity of human life displayed by the perpetrators of these atrocities must be countered by a just and lawful response … While there is never any justification for acts of terror against innocent civilians — indeed it is the quintessential act of dehumanization — the events of September 11th bring Americans the unique occasion to reconsider our government’s role on the world stage … The Green Party asserts that a significant aspect of preventing future terrorist attacks on the United States is to insure that our foreign policy is firmly based on economic and social justice … [T]he Green Party of the United States urges our fellow citizens and people everywhere to view September 11th as an opportunity to call for an end to all violence towards civilians. As our platform states, the Green Party seeks strength through peace and asserts that security and liberty prosper together. While we recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations, we trust that non-violence provides the surest road to peace.
Email subscription
