Green Party US rejecting capitalism

[oneday]

I guess.
http://ygus.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Green-Party-of-the-United-States-Platform-Amendment-Proposal_IV.EcologicalEconomics.para4_.pdf
Still appears to be moving forward:
http://ygus.org/ygus-steering-committee-endorses-anti-capitalist-amendment/
Greens seek to build an alternative economic system based on ecology and decentralization of power, an alternative system that rejects both the capitalist system that maintains private ownership over almost all production as well as the old narrative of state socialism that assumes control over industries without democratic, local decision making. We believe the old models of capitalism (private ownership of production) and state socialism (state ownership of production) are not ecologically sound, socially just, or democratic and that both contain built-in structures that advance injustices.
Instead Greens will build an economy based on large-scale public works, municipalization, and workplace and community democracy. Some call this small-scale, decentralized system “ecological socialism,” “communalism,” or the “cooperative
commonwealth,” but whatever the terminology, Greens believe it will help end labor exploitation, environmental exploitation, and racial, gender, and wealth inequality and bring about economic and social justice. Production should be democratically owned and operated by those who do the work and those most affected by production decisions. This model of worker and
community control will ensure that decisions that greatly affect our lives are made in the interests of our communities, not at the whim of centralized power structures of state
administrators or of capitalist CEOs and distant boards of directors. Worker-owned production, embedded in and accountable to our communities, provides an incentive for
enterprises to make ecologically sound decisions in materials sourcing, waste disposal, recycling, reuse, and more. Democratic ownership of the means of production would decentralize power in the workplace, which would in turn decentralize economic power more broadly.

Thoughts? I find it a little baffling:

Instead Greens will build an economy based on large-scale public works, municipalization, and workplace and community democracy. Some call this small-scale, decentralized system

[Sewer Socialist]

It seems that capitalism, to whoever wrote this, offs a matter of who owns what - capitalism is private ownership, to them. The implication is that socialism is a matter of ensuring the correct ownership, rather than the abolition of ownership. This later quote confirms it:


Worker-owned production, embedded in and accountable to our communities, provides an incentive for
enterprises to make ecologically sound decisions in materials sourcing, waste disposal, recycling, reuse, and more.

An economy of worker-owned enterprises implies a market, private property, commodity production, and production for profit. So this is socialist in name only, and an idealistic socialism which will result in the accumulation of wealth, and the reproduction of class society.

It's nice they're starting to question capitalism, but they're going to need some nudging further left than this.

[oneday]

Let's also think about the subtext of "accountable to our communities". What does it imply? Production is global today, and the problems of ecology are global problems which can not be solved by decentralized local cooperatives each pursuing their own local ends. How will they be accountable to the global community? What is the incentive that helps them make ecologically sound decisions?

By disguising the solution with "decentralized local" in order to avoid sounding "state socialist", they brush aside the contradiction. We should be focusing on the opposite, how to make large scale organizations that operate globally, which will be accountable and won't devolve into a despotism operating for its own ends.

[Armchair Partisan]

A lot of social democratic, left-liberal and left-populist parties rail against "capitalism", but when pressed, it turns out that they only reject some kind of radically free-market capitalism and absolutely do not have any interest in campaigning for workers' control over the means of production, not even in a confused, nominal sort of way. Not much to be excited about.

[oneday]

A lot of social democratic, left-liberal and left-populist parties rail against "capitalism", but when pressed, it turns out that they only reject some kind of radically free-market capitalism and absolutely do not have any interest in campaigning for workers' control over the means of production, not even in a confused, nominal sort of way. Not much to be excited about.

It's the fourth largest political party in the United States, considering a rejection of capitalism. Maybe not something to be excited about in itself, but it's an opportunity.

[Homo Songun]

Thoughts? I find it a little baffling:

Instead Greens will build an economy based on large-scale public works, municipalization, and workplace and community democracy. Some call this small-scale, decentralized system


Its almost as if the politicians are using nonspecific appeals and glittering generalities to get our votes! Those bastards! :laugh:

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

It's the fourth largest political party in the United States
Fourth largest party in the US = generally irrelevant, and smaller than the ancap Libertarian Party.

[oneday]

Fourth largest party in the US = generally irrelevant, and smaller than the ancap Libertarian Party.

Right, but there is no workers movement and socialist parties are far more irrelevant. 500,000 explicitly rejecting the private ownership of the means of production is not something to ignore, there is a shift happening in the landscape.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Their platform amendment is not surprising if you have followed the Green Party (US) politics over the last few years. The rejection of capitalism and "state" socialism is called Third Positionism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position#United_States), and it's not a new idea; it's actually more of a far right meme than having anything to do with leftism, although it paints itself a left-seeming veneer. Colonel Muammar Gaddafi also articulated a form of Third Positionist Ideology called the "Third International Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_International_Theory)". Green leader Cynthia McKinney praised Gaddafi's Green Book as "a form of direct democracy" and appeared on Jamahiriya state television (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rx2bFTLRHRc) in the last months before the NATO assault succeeded in toppling "the state of the masses". Former Green leader Ralph Nader, like Bernie Sanders, is also a border control freak who paints defenders of freedom of movement as shills for Wall Street exploitation, blaming immigrant workers for driving down wages and arguing that the ones who receive the wage are the ones responsible for it being low rather than the ones who pay it (link (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/11/17/nader-in-08-a-lot-of-liberals-abandoned-securing-border-to-protect-americans-from-wage-loss-disease-smuggling/)).

[ckaihatsu]

Former Green leader Ralph Nader, like Bernie Sanders, is also a border control freak who paints defenders of freedom of movement as shills for Wall Street exploitation, blaming immigrant workers for driving down wages and arguing that the ones who receive the wage are the ones responsible for it being low rather than the ones who pay it (link (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/11/17/nader-in-08-a-lot-of-liberals-abandoned-securing-border-to-protect-americans-from-wage-loss-disease-smuggling/)).


This part, assuming it's true, is *damning*, because it shows Sanders to be more of an *economic nationalist* than a 'democratic socialist' -- surely, in the inherent contradiction between capital and labor, if capital has virtual free-rein in traipsing the globe, then so should *workers*, as across any national borders, to find better economic environments for better wages, and for life and living.

The 'correction' to low wages is to *fucking raise wages*, meaning to portion-out a greater share of the revenue or profits to those who are doing the actual work that enables the commerce or government to function.


[11] Labor & Capital, Wages & Dividends



http://s6.postimg.org/nzhxfqy9d/11_Labor_Capital_Wages_Dividends.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/f4h3589gt/full/)

[ckaihatsu]

Btw, I've recently been getting *these* political emails that call for some kind of weird consumer-based actions, for the sake of economic nationalism, purportedly for 'jobs'....


---


VIDEO: Check The NABISCO Label!

http://can2-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/email_templates/logos/000/003/668/original/EmailBanner_SolidarityAlert.jpg

Today, the BCTGM released a video in support of our recently-announced Check the Label Campaign. The Check the Label campaign was launched after Nabisco/Mondelēz closed numerous U.S. production facilities costing many hundreds of American jobs, while at the same time expanding production in its facilities in Monterrey and Salinas, Mexico, where low wages and minimal regulatory standards and oversight persist.

Today’s Check the Label Video illustrates the steps consumers need to take to support American jobs by ensuring their favorite Nabisco products are produced in America before purchasing.



https://can2-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/data/000/029/957/original/checkthelabelVideo_Screenshot.png

Through a simple label check, together we can send a powerful message: We support American jobs and the American middle class, and REJECT outsourcing to poverty-level wages and unregulated work conditions. We will no longer buy Nabisco products made in Mexico, we will buy ONLY AMERICAN MADE!

LIKE and SHARE this video in support of Nabisco/Mondelēz workers and American jobs!

Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address or to stop receiving emails from BCTGM International Union E-Activists, please click here.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

This part, assuming it's true, is *damning*, because it shows Sanders to be more of an *economic nationalist* than a 'democratic socialist' -- surely, in the inherent contradiction between capital and labor, if capital has virtual free-rein in traipsing the globe, then so should *workers*, as across any national borders, to find better economic environments for better wages, and for life and living.

Do the words, "Open borders? That's a Koch brothers' proposal! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0)" ring a bell?

That's why his and Hillary Clinton's promise in the last debate in Miami to not deport "children or adults without criminal records" is pretty ridiculous. Unlawful presence (visa overstay) is a civil offense, but illegal entry to the United States is a criminal one, and it's a crime that will undoubtedly continue to be committed en masse as long as the border is controlled (i.e., closed) to certain groups of people (particularly the poor and the "unskilled" who both Nader and Sanders blame for stealing American workers' wages, and those without American family members).

Nader and Sanders are both economic nationalists who uphold nationality-based supremacism in matters of freedom of movement and access to wealth.

[ckaihatsu]

Do the words, "Open borders? That's a Koch brothers' proposal! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0)" ring a bell?

That's why his and Hillary Clinton's promise in the last debate in Miami to not deport "children or adults without criminal records" is pretty ridiculous. Unlawful presence (visa overstay) is a civil offense, but illegal entry to the United States is a criminal one, and it's a crime that will undoubtedly continue to be committed en masse as long as the border is controlled (i.e., closed) to certain groups of people (particularly the poor and the "unskilled" who both Nader and Sanders blame for stealing American workers' wages, and those without American family members).




Nader and Sanders are both economic nationalists who uphold nationality-based supremacism in matters of freedom of movement and access to wealth.


...And in use of the U.S. military, for imperialist hegemony -- for an uninterrupted continuation of U.S. exceptionalism in all matters of foreign policy.