What's the RevLeft's view of the Peace and Freedom Party?

[Habash]

I'm pretty new to this site, so I'm not sure what the general consensus is. I ran across the party platform in my poli sci class, and I must say I agree with a lot of what they stand for.

I can't post links yet but you can simply google "peace and freedom platform" to take a look at the platform.

Discuss?

[Kléber]

They are largely an election vehicle for other left-wing groups, who compete in their open caucuses every voting season.

[Die Neue Zeit]

They are a California-only party that has politics similar to the SP-USA nationally, but themselves have considered expanding (either by themselves or by merging with the latter by asking them to be the California affiliate or something).

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

There is no general consensus on RevLeft. Which is probably a good thing, you get presented with authoritarian/libertarian schools of thought and it encourages you to critically analyse them for their own relative merits.

[Habash]

There is no general consensus on RevLeft. Which is probably a good thing, you get presented with authoritarian/libertarian schools of thought and it encourages you to critically analyse them for their own relative merits.

Good point. I just wanted to know if there was something I should be aware of that is not obvious to me right away. Like I said, I read through their platform and info they have online, and I like a lot of what they say.

[Revy]

They are a good party in California. Any decision to expand nationally will be nothing short of disastrous, though. There is really no need for it to, but of course such a party feels like it can ignore the presence of a party like the SP-USA already existing nationally. Given the fact that the PFP endorsed Nader in 2008, they do not have the right perspective to be a uniting party of socialists.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Why wasn't I told about the Nader endorsement before? :(