The US Green Party

[Jason]

They were on the ballot in most states. What is your opinion of them? They seemed more progressive than the two political parties. But of course, obviously a vote for them is a protest vote that makes no difference.

[Ostrinski]

I voted Green

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Bourgeois is bourgeois

[Let's Get Free]

Im going with another user on here and writing in Hugo Chavez.

[Prometeo liberado]

They refuse to call themselves socialist. They wish to manage capital and its effects on the ecology as well as vacillate on the question of Zionism. Any of this strike you as a worthwhile endeavor?

[the Left™]

Bourgeois is bourgeois

i always thought this attitude was completely useless. I mean lets be honest a legitimate multiparty political system would be a HUGE step towards political mobilization of a substantive left alternative.

[Ostrinski]

The Green Party is a bourgeois party but so are most Leninist parties lol

[TheGodlessUtopian]

i always thought this attitude was completely useless. I mean lets be honest a legitimate multiparty political system would be a HUGE step towards political mobilization of a substantive left alternative.

How so? Have other countries where such a system reigns had better modern left movements because of it?

[NGNM85]

Bourgeois is bourgeois

So, then, by your reasoning; we shouldn't worry ourselves with trivialities like gay rights, reproductive rights, or civil rights, in general, or things like labor unions, or the evironment. Brilliant.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

So, then, by your reasoning; we shouldn't worry ourselves with trivialities like gay rights, reproductive rights, or civil rights, in general, or things like labor unions, or the evironment. Brilliant.

The green Party is a bourgeois party, enough said. No one here is talking about anything relating to rights.

[Red Banana]

I don't really care of they openly call themselves Socialists, as long as the platform is left. Let's be honest people, in the US, calling themselves Socialists would amount to political suicide. People just don't like the word.

If you asked the average American worker "How would you like your community owning the factory you work at (or whatever other place you work) and you and your co workers democratically running it?" most would say they would like it, but if you asked "how would you like it if your workplace was socialized?" most would say they'd hate it because over the decades the corporate media has trained the general public to hate certain key words, like "socialism".

The fact is the Green Party is the only widely recognized party that has a clearly left oriented platform. Sure it's not a revolutionary openly socialist party, but it's the best most of us can get.

[Prometeo liberado]

I don't really care of they openly call themselves Socialists, as long as the platform is left. Let's be honest people, in the US, calling themselves Socialists would amount to political suicide. People just don't like the word.

If you asked the average American worker "How would you like your community owning the factory you work at (or whatever other place you work) and you and your co workers democratically running it?" most would say they would like it, but if you asked "how would you like it if your workplace was socialized?" most would say they'd hate it because over the decades the corporate media has trained the general public to hate certain key words, like "socialism".

The fact is the Green Party is the only widely recognized party that has a clearly left oriented platform. Sure it's not a revolutionary openly socialist party, but it's the best most of us can get.

If your standards are always kept low then you deserve to walk hunched over. I for one refuse to live looking like Quasimodo and feeling like Kunta Kinte'. You have a right to expect, no, demand something better and using that old "well this is America" bullshit won't get you anywhere. In fact what the fuck are all of us doing here if that type of thinking is true? I ain't buying it and you shouldn't be selling it.

[NGNM85]

The green Party is a bourgeois party, enough said.

...if the question being asked is; 'Is the Green party a 'Bourgeois party'?" Then; yes. If not, then; no.


No one here is talking about anything relating to rights.

No, you're just too thick to make the connection. There are differences, in some cases minor, in some cases substantial, policy differences, between the 'bourgois' parties. That's just an obvious, empirical fact, which, to be fair, you haven't disputed. What you said was; 'bourgeois is bourgeois.' The point being that there is simply no point in differentiating between bourgois parties, that there is no meaningful qualitative difference that we should care about. Therefore; there's no reason why we should prefer a candidates, or policies that protect gay rights, or reproductive rights, etc., etc., over ones that limit gay rights, or reproductive rights, etc. Provided we accept this proposition; we would also, inevitably, conclude that the Civil Rights movement, etc., was all a colossal waste of time, and energy.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

All bourgeois candidates are essentially the same.They defend the same interests with only minor differences in social-policies. You can prefer whatever candidate you want but the base line result will remain unchanged: capitalism will still function and oppression will still reign. And the civil rights movement didn't abolish racism so it still had a lot of work to do before it concluded; a premature end while still stuck with reformist leadership.

[NGNM85]

I don't really care of they openly call themselves Socialists, as long as the platform is left. Let's be honest people, in the US, calling themselves Socialists would amount to political suicide. People just don't like the word.

If you asked the average American worker "How would you like your community owning the factory you work at (or whatever other place you work) and you and your co workers democratically running it?" most would say they would like it, but if you asked "how would you like it if your workplace was socialized?" most would say they'd hate it because over the decades the corporate media has trained the general public to hate certain key words, like "socialism".

The fact is the Green Party is the only widely recognized party that has a clearly left oriented platform. Sure it's not a revolutionary openly socialist party, but it's the best most of us can get.

Half credit. The Green party is one of the furthest Left, or most Left parties in American politics. (Although, to be fair, you aren't the only one who struggles with this concept.)

No; it isn't the best we can presently get, because the Green Party hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning anything. They don't have any seats in congress, they haven't a single governorship, and they have zero seats in any of the state legislatures. None.

[NGNM85]

All bourgeois candidates are essentially the same.They defend the same interests with only minor differences in social-policies. You can prefer whatever candidate you want but the base line result will remain unchanged: capitalism will still function and oppression will still reign. And the civil rights movement didn't abolish racism so it still had a lot of work to do before it concluded; a premature end while still stuck with reformist leadership.

Alright; so my characterization of your position is completely correct. Fuck abortion, fuck gay rights, fuck the welfare state, fuck the unions; it's all irrelevent. That's exactly what I thought you were saying; and I reiterate my contention that that is total bullshit, for reasons that should be (but probably aren't) painfully obvious.

I never claimed the Civil Rights movement abolished racism. I implied that the Civil Rights movement has acheieved many great things, and that any Radical worth their salt should recognize that, and support that.

[the Left™]

How so? Have other countries where such a system reigns had better modern left movements because of it?

Yes actually. Indian democracy uses a multiparty plurality system. They also have one of the largest communist parties in the world, and other 3rd parties with some vitality because the INC is seen as very corrupt(also Indira Gandhi's political legacy didnt help). Once Indian politics became more open and the INC wasnt viewed as the "one major party", which dominated much of indian political history, coalition parties were made the like the BJP coalition(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayaprakash_Narayan)

[TheGodlessUtopian]

The concepts you are coming at are completely irrelevant to the conversation at hand.Never have I said anything about labor, woman rights and queer rights and so on.I make a comment about how the Green Party is bourgeois and you go ape-shit and drag in this whole tirade about rights.Weird. :lol:

Have fun barking in the dark.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Yes actually. Indian democracy uses a multiparty plurality system. They also have one of the largest communist parties in the world, and other 3rd parties with some vitality because the INC is seen as very corrupt(also Indira Gandhi's political legacy didnt help). Once Indian politics became more open and the INC wasnt viewed as the "one major party", which dominated much of indian political history, coalition parties were made the like the BJP coalition(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayaprakash_Narayan)

This is still talking in electoral politics, however; reformism and social-democracy. Has this system enhanced peoples grassroots movements or the Naxalite movement?

[Red Banana]

If your standards are always kept low then you deserve to walk hunched over. I for one refuse to live looking like Quasimodo and feeling like Kunta Kinte'. You have a right to expect, no, demand something better and using that old "well this is America" bullshit won't get you anywhere. In fact what the fuck are all of us doing here if that type of thinking is true? I ain't buying it and you shouldn't be selling it.

Look, I don't know what the ballot looks like in your state, but in mine Jill Stein and the Green Party are the only left of center option I've seen yet. Now I don't expect her or any other third party candidate to win, but it doesn't matter, it's just a protest vote.

Besides, I don't care who you vote for, they can be the most revolutionary leftie in the world, voting and elections won't bring about socialism so there's no reason to get all frustrated about who's the best candidate to lose an election for the executive position of the worlds leading capitalist imperialist state.

What it boils down to is this: of the options presented before me, Jill Stein and the Green Party are the best I've got. If there are better parties and better candidates on the ballot where you live, by all means vote for them, I probably would too, but unfortunately that's just not what my situation is now.

But I will also let this be known, the Green Party has gained more ground nationally than any other left of center party in recent years. And if it's success continues it could prove to be a useful tool for those of us on the left, at least when it comes to electoral politics. There are a lot of Socialists out there who just don't know it yet.

[Tim Cornelis]

Yes actually. Indian democracy uses a multiparty plurality system. They also have one of the largest communist parties in the world, and other 3rd parties with some vitality because the INC is seen as very corrupt(also Indira Gandhi's political legacy didnt help). Once Indian politics became more open and the INC wasnt viewed as the "one major party", which dominated much of indian political history, coalition parties were made the like the BJP coalition(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayaprakash_Narayan)

Was the rise of the Communist Party of India due to the multi-party tendency or was it a mere irrelevant correlation? I'd say it is the latter. Introducing a multi-tendency electoral system does in no way create class consciousness, and neither is voting for the Green Party.

[Red Banana]

Half credit. The Green party is one of the furthest Left, or most Left parties in American politics. (Although, to be fair, you aren't the only one who struggles with this concept.)

No; it isn't the best we can presently get, because the Green Party hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning anything. They don't have any seats in congress, they haven't a single governorship, and they have zero seats in any of the state legislatures. None.

Of course it won't win in most elections, but neither will any other third party candidate, it's a protest vote. In certain local elections though it has a better chance, better than any other left oriented third party from what I've seen.

[Prometeo liberado]

Look, I don't know what the ballot looks like in your state, but in mine Jill Stein and the Green Party are the only left of center option I've seen yet. Now I don't expect her or any other third party candidate to win, but it doesn't matter, it's just a protest vote.

If this is your reasoning then why this:

the Green Party has gained more ground nationally than any other left of center party in recent years. And if it's success continues it could prove to be a useful tool for those of us on the left, at least when it comes to electoral politics

Make up your mind. Do you want a protest vote or a "left of center" vehicle by which socialist can engage in the electoral process? And as far as being a useful tool for those on the left you either have never engaged with them or read their platform. A quick look at any youtube vid of Stein at a campaign debate and you'd be crying.


What it boils down to is this: of the options presented before me, Jill Stein and the Green Party are the best I've got.

Maybe this is where we differ. I refuse to settle for the crumbs "presented before me" and instead choose to go after the meal denied me.
Bottom line is the Greens are not, nor do they claim to be, Socialist. So why all the applause for these people? Standards son, standards. If you ain't got 'em, get some.


There are a lot of Socialists out there who just don't know it yet.

This is my day to work on being nice so I'll let this one go. Had this been a Monday though.....damn, you'd be crying for mum.

[NGNM85]

The concepts you are coming at are completely irrelevant to the conversation at hand.Never have I said anything about labor, woman rights and queer rights and so on.I make a comment about how the Green Party is bourgeois and you go ape-shit and drag in this whole tirade about rights.Weird. :lol:

Have fun barking in the dark.

You shouldn't interpret my use of obscenities as an indication of animosity, or anger, I'm more incredulous, if anything, and maybe a little dismayed. It is one of the limitations of web forums as a medium that they do not easily accomodate such subtleties.

No; it's completely relevent because it goes directly to the OP's post. Second; no-one has questioned the fact that the green party is a 'bourgeois party', although I personally dislike using that kind of terminology. The bone of contention is whether or not there is any reason to prefer more-, or less-, Left-leaning establishment parties, or, more broadly; if there is any value in political struggle, or political change that does not change the underlying structure of society, specifically; that does not abolish capitalism? The answer should be obvious.

Again; You responded to the OP's statement about the Green Party being more Left-oriented than the two ruling parties by saying;



Bourgeois is bourgeois

...very clearly indicating that, in your estimation, these policy differences, were totally irrelevent, that, in fact; not only are the policy variences between these historical bourgeois parties irrelevent, that any varience between any form of bourgeois rule, historical, or hypothetical, is meaningless, from a Radical perspective.

When I challenged this, you doubled down on this assertion, saying;


The green Party is a bourgeois party, enough said.

Then, finally, you restated this contention, in even more explicit terms, here;


All bourgeois candidates are essentially the same.They defend the same interests with only minor differences in social-policies. You can prefer whatever candidate you want but the base line result will remain unchanged: capitalism will still function and oppression will still reign.

Clearly, by your lights; there would never be any justifiable reason to prefer any bourgeois party, over another, or, implicitly, any social change, or reform that does not change the underlying social structure; that does not abolish capitalism. By this line of thinking; there's no difference between a party that supports reproductive rights, over one that seeks to abolish them, there's no meaningful distinction between a political system that accords homosexuals equal rights, or less rights, etc., etc. Again; the gross, fundamental flaws in this thinking should be obvious.

[Drosophila]

Holy cow, NGN is shilling for liberals. I never would have suspected...

[Ele'ill]

Oh revleft election threads. I wouldn't take bubonic plague to spare me typhoid, all temporarily, so that it can all happen again later on. In fact isn't that pretty much a mechanism of social control and not some loop hole to be taken advantage of as some allegedly revolutionary leftists would make it be? Isn't this just the big public display of faux democracy and struggle that we see every day in our work place, on the streets, family life, school where ever?

[NGNM85]

Holy cow, NGN is shilling for liberals. I never would have suspected...

That's a gross distortion that has virtually nothing at all to do with my preceding comments.

[Skyhilist]

Well, voting based on environmental leftism it seems like they would be the best choice, despite being a bourgeoisie party like all of the other ones.

[Red Banana]

Jbeard, in your quoting of me you forgot to highlight a big if and a big could in regard to the possibility of Green Party being a useful tool for the left in the future. For right now they're only useful as a protest vote. The people who are in the Green Party however, are obviously dissatisfied with the way things currently are and left of the Democrats, these are aspects that can be seized upon and if we engage these people we could raise their class consciousness and radicalize them, the voters that is, not the party itself. I'm not applauding the Green Party but I do recognize their potential usefulness.

As for the crumbs presented before me, I can take them, or not eat. I'm sorry but as of November 6th 2012 "taking the whole meal" (by which I assume you mean revolution) is just not going to happen here in the near future and will never show up as an option on a ballot. Some people choose not to vote, I understand where they come from and sometimes feel the same way. But if I am going to vote, the Greens are the biggest crumb.

As I said before, there's no reason to get frustrated, it's just electoral politics. No party will bring about revolution through an election.

[Prometeo liberado]

No party will bring about revolution through an election.

And malaise or the Greens will never get you closer to building a revolutionary Party. Shit begets shit. And you son are not a socialist.:sleep:

[Red Banana]

And malaise or the Greens will never get you closer to building a revolutionary Party. Shit begets shit. And you son are not a socialist.:sleep:

I never said the greens would get anyone closer to a revolutionary party. And yeah, that makes sense, my tactics as to voting disqualify me as a socialist. I guess if you can't prove your point, name calling will do. I'm tired of your shitty attitude, sorry for trying to have a dignified conversation "son".

[Prometeo liberado]

With Colorado reporting the Greens(who have a large organization there) have only out polled the PF(with only 1 activist working the state) by 300 votes. If you wanna be a socialist and toss in a protest vote then there is no excuse for doing it in favor of a non-socialist party. Just sayin.

[The Jay]

If I can't have cake at the moment, I would rather be hit with a feather duster than a mallet while looking for a gun to stop myself from being hit and have that person give me my damn cake.


I voted green.

[Red Banana]

With Colorado reporting the Greens(who have a large organization there) have only out polled the PF(with only 1 activist working the state) by 300 votes. If you wanna be a socialist and toss in a protest vote there is no excuse for doing in favor of a non-socialist party. Just sayin.

Yes, but as I've said before, there are no Socialists on the ballot in my state. The closest thing I can get are the Greens. Trust me, if my state recognized any socialist parties and if they had someone on the ballot I'd vote for them but there aren't any, so I take the biggest crumb I can get.

[Prometeo liberado]

Yes, but as I've said before, there are no Socialists on the ballot in my state. The closest thing I can get are the Greens. Trust me, if my state recognized any socialist parties and if they had someone on the ballot I'd vote for them but there aren't any, so I take the biggest crumb I can get.

Maryland had on it's ballot the PSL, SP, SEP, SWP and PF. You wanna keep this up? Because I have all night.
http://www.politics1.com/md.htm

Edit: So in the process of casting your "protest vote" you either didn't look at your ballot or for some reason never showed up. Either way you seemed to not know that not one but FOUR parties were on your ballot with the name SOCIALIST in it. The fifth just sounds socialist. Feeling uneasy now aren't you? I'll say it again, son you are not a socialist(maybe a story teller though).

[Red Banana]

Go to Maryland.gov and look at the actual ballot. They decide the candidates not politics1. By the way, I'd rather vote for Jill Stein than anyone the PSL is running, I'm a socialist, not a Stalinist.Might want to use the correct sources before you keep up this childish name calling shit. Feeling uneasy now aren't you?

[Red Banana]

The only one that was actually on the ballot was Rosanne Barr, who was competing for the Green Party ticket anyway. And given the choice between her and Stein, I'd still pick Stein just to retain some seriousness.

[Prometeo liberado]

if my state recognized any socialist parties and if they had someone on the ballot I'd vote for them but

The PF is a socialist party. All the other socialist parties are qualified as write-ins. And no you can not just write in whoever you want. I suppose doing research before you cast your vote would be unsocialist? Seeing as you are one and all those Parties went through the trouble of trying to give their comrades a choice I can't understand why you would say that you would vote socialist if your state gave you the chance. Change won't be handed to you. You have to to take it, or at least go out of your way and write a name as, at the very least, tacit approval(protest vote).
So now your criteria has changed from your initial statement? Just say you back the Greens and quit playing around with contradictory statements. Your state does recognize a socialist party but the problem is that you don't recognize them. That I can understand. Anything else is an excuse.

[Red Banana]

Maryland does not recognize the PF, Rosanne was put as unaffiliated. The only recognized parties are the Reps, Dems, Libs, and Greens, what do you know? I know my own state better than you. Yes the PF is a socialist party, but to the best of my knowledge Rosanne is not a socialist, correct me if I'm wrong. So now you've changed from "there were Socialists on the ballot" to "you should have wrote one in". Well, at least we're not dealing with fabrications anymore. You're right though maybe I should've wrote someone in, but I didn't. It doesn't matter now, my vote has been counted and they got the message.

[Red Banana]

Maryland does not recognize the PF, Rosanne was put as unaffiliated. The only recognized parties are the Reps, Dems, Libs, and Greens, what do you know? I know my own state better than you. Yes the PF is a socialist party, but to the best of my knowledge Rosanne is not a socialist, correct me if I'm wrong. So now you've changed from "there were Socialists on the ballot" to "you should have wrote one in". Well, at least we're not dealing with fabrications anymore. You're right though, maybe I should've wrote someone in, but I didn't. It doesn't matter now, my vote has been counted and they got the message.

[Red Banana]

Maryland does not recognize the PF, Rosanne was put as unaffiliated. The only recognized parties are the Reps, Dems, Libs, and Greens, what do you know? I know my own state better than you. Yes the PF is a socialist party, but to the best of my knowledge Rosanne is not a socialist, correct me if I'm wrong. Not to mention her campaign is a joke that only gives ammunition to her opponents. So now you've changed from "there were Socialists on the ballot" to "you should have wrote one in". Well, at least we're not dealing with fabrications anymore. You're right though, maybe I should've wrote someone in, but I didn't. It doesn't matter now, my vote has been counted and they got the message.

[Red Banana]

Maryland does not recognize the PF, Rosanne was put as unaffiliated. The only recognized parties are the Reps, Dems, Libs, and Greens, what do you know? I know my own state better than you. Yes the PF is a socialist party, but to the best of my knowledge Rosanne is not a socialist, correct me if I'm wrong. Not to mention her campaign is a joke that only gives ammunition to her opponents. So now you've changed from "there were Socialists on the ballot" to "you should have wrote one in". Well, at least we're not dealing with fabrications anymore. You're right though, maybe I should've wrote someone in, but I didn't. It doesn't matter now, my vote has been counted and they got the message.

[Red Banana]

Woah sorry about that something screwed up, I didn't mean to do that. Can someone delete the extra ones?

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Well, voting based on environmental leftism it seems like they would be the best choice, despite being a bourgeoisie party like all of the other ones.
.......Except that 'Eco-Capitalism' is incredibly illogical, hypocritical and, in all meanings of the word, systematically impossible.

You cannot have a produce-conservative economy when the economy's produce motive revolves around profit for a rich man in a luxury mansion. Green Bourgeois are some of the craziest people to have walked this earth due to their incredibly contradictory politics. Not to say that studies on environmental damage are incorrect (far from it - many radical leftists have this weird phobia of science for some reason), but it is absolutely ludicrous to think that you can stop such obviously integral side-effects of capitalism without throwing capitalism out full-stop.