The Green Party

[Howard509]

If I were to vote, it would be for the Green Party, since they are the only social justice, nonviolence, decentralization, anti-corporate and direct democracy party in the country. Of all parties, they are closest to anarchist ideals.

[DecDoom]

Now, I don't know much about the Green Party, but I'm fairly sure they wouldn't abolish the state, which wouldn't put them too close to anarchist ideals.

Also, you mentioned them being "anti-corporate." There's a big difference between "anti-corporate" and "anti-capitalist."

[Lolshevik]

In order to get a feel of just how anti-corporate our Greens are, take a look at the Green parties of Europe that have been in power. Especially Germany.

[Ismail]

Bourgeois parties can never really be "anti-corporate." Doing so would mark the death of capitalism because small petty-bourgeois businesses could never provide for the entire country, hence why said petty-bourgeoisie is stamped out to begin with when it's up against far better/stronger competition from the bourgeoisie. Corporations are pretty much a natural feature of capitalism in the end, because without them there isn't much of a bourgeoisie.

The Green Party is at best a petty-bourgeois party. It supports some progressive reforms but not much else.

I think a good analogy can be found in how Enver Hoxha described the Social-Democratic parties of Europe in 1964, who were actually strong electorally and held power:

Let us dwell even briefly on the activity of the French Socialist Party and its leader Guy Mollet, who has more than once taken part in and even headed the French government, and whom the revisionists consider a left-wing element and conduct hearty talks with. When at the head of the government, the French socialists set the dogs loose on workers on strike, incited the outbreak of the dirty war in Indo-China, undertook police repressions against the people of other colonies, carried on the fighting against the Algerian people with more ferocity, approved the North Atlantic Pact and the re-arming of Western Germany. Guy Mollet's government signed the agreements for "the European Common Market" and "Euratom", it was one of the organizers of the military aggression on Egypt, Guy Mollet's betrayal paved the way for personal rule in France and so on and so forth. Speaking of Guy Mollet's activity even the labourite weekly "Tribune" wrote at the beginning of 1957 that "Mollet is a disgrace to France as well as to socialism".


These are the true features of social-democracy today. Many representatives of the bourgeoisie have not been wrong in stressing the great role of the social-democratic parties in suppressing the revolutionary movement of workers and in defending the capitalist order, they have not been wrong in singing their praises. Thus, for instance, T. Junilla, director of a capitalist bank in Finland, has said: "In the struggle to win over industrial workers spiritually only the social-democrats can serve as a powerful force against the communists. If the social democrats lose this battle, it may very well be the end of democracy in Finland. This is why, being a bourgeois member of the conservative party, I feel obliged to state that we need a united, militant, social-democratic party which firmly upholds northern democracy". The English bourgeois newspaper Financial Times wrote in the same vein on June 28, 1963: ". . . the industrialists are scared less by the Labourites, and some of them cherish the opinion that a Labour government would open up better perspectives for development than the Tories."

[scarletghoul]

social justice
What do you mean by this?

nonviolence,This is just unrealistic liberalism. Any party adhering to a policy of non-violence wouldn't last a second in government, let alone be able to make radical changes to society. Sure everyone would ideally prefer it if we could reach our political goals peacefully and without violence or the threat of violence, but that never happens. So if the Green Party ever did get in power, they would either be got rid of quickly, controlled by other forces (who are willing to use violence), or would have to change their minds about non-violence and would probably become some eco-fascist dictatorship :lol: There are a lot of powerful people in America opposed to greenism, and they're not gonna let it happen without a fight.


anti-corporateAs has been said, this isn't anticapitalist and they would still support the capitalist system. Perhaps they'd try to forge a 'nicer capitalism', but yeah... Anyway in reality, capitalist society couldn't function without large corporations and enterprises. If the whole economy was small petit- bourgeois businesses we wouldn't be able to do any of things we require large corporations for, like building hydro-electric dams, aeroplanes, energy suppliers and stuff. You need either corporate power or the power of state for big tasks like these. Without corporations either the country would go all rubbish or the Greens would have to create state owned corporations to do these things (which I'm assuming you're against as an anarchist)


and direct democracy Hmm, this is interesting and I've never heard of this before. What kind of direct democracy would they bring about? A link would be cool


they are closest to anarchist ideals.Actually I'd say the various American communist parties are closer. But since when did Anarchists just vote for the party closest to their ideals?

[bricolage]

Of all parties, they are closest to anarchist ideals.

How can a political party have anything to do with anarchism?

[Pogue]

this thread is good for the lulz

[Killfacer]

:huh: Don't get me wrong, the green party are slightly better than say New Labour, The BNP, Tories etc but they really have no link to anarchist ideals what so ever.

[Pogue]

:huh: Don't get me wrong, the green party are slightly better than say New Labour, The BNP, Tories etc but they really have no link to anarchist ideals what so ever.

I always knew you were a liberal!

[What Would Durruti Do?]

How can a political party have anything to do with anarchism?

Seriously. Since when do anarchists vote? There's a reason there isn't an Anarchist Party.

[RHIZOMES]

The Green Party of NZ has regular "Green Business conferences". Green parties are more interested in making capitalism environmentally sustainable (Which is impossible), than any real alternative.

Anyway, you seem to have quite a strong obsession with "voting" for a self-proclaimed anarchist.

Also this thread should be moved to Opposing Ideologies.

[OneNamedNameLess]

anti-corporate

Some Conservatives are actually anti-corporate too did you know that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Tory

[Revy]

The Green Party's ideas would never be allowed by the capitalist elite in this country.

But the Green Party is not a socialist or anti-capitalist party and certainly not a proletarian party. But they are to the left of American social democrats, actually, who by and large support the Democrats, most of the Greens actually take the time to criticize the Democratic Party as part of a corporate imperialist duopoly.

but I think even in the Greens you will find many willing to support either passively or even openly the Democrats. They elected someone to the Arkansas state legislature, Richard Carroll, who switched to Democrat.

I have always opposed the idea that we need to move big left parties to a socialist position - I think we need a socialist party from the beginning, and one which is not open to bourgeois members.