Alex Briscoe obeynow20001 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 25 21:04:28 MDT 2005

Interesting report from one supporter of Greens For Democracy and Independence.  It will be interesting to hear what other GDIers have to say.

Alex Briscoe <obeynow20001 at yahoo.com> wrote:
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:55:45 -0000
From: "Alex Briscoe" <obeynow20001 at yahoo.com>
To: obeynow20001 at yahoo.com

--- In GDI-FreeSpeech at yahoogroups.com, "John A. Murphy" 

"Ich bin ein Utaher"

- Hugo Chavez

Dear fellow Pennsylvania Greens,

First, please pass this report along to as many of our fellow 
Pennsylvania Greens as possible since the GDI representative is not 
permitted to communicate with the official Pennsylvania discussion 

Let me begin on a positive note. During his address to the National 
Committee (NC) Peter Camejo said that some unkind comments passed 
between himself and David Cobb. Peter apologized to Cobb for any 
offense he had given during the heat of this very contentious 
election. Peter demonstrated the court of a well mannered 
gentleman. Unfortunately when Cobb addressed the NC he did not 
reciprocate for the many nasty comments he made about Nader/Camejo.

I am going to digress from my report for a moment in order to follow 
Peter's lead. I wish to formally present my sincere apology to any 
of my fellow Greens in Pennsylvania who I may have offended in any 
way during and in the aftermath of the 2004 presidential elections.

The most disappointing aspect of the GPUS meeting in Tulsa was the 
complete lack of any clear agenda. Of course, there was a prepared 
agenda submitted to the NC. It was merely a formality. It was the 
empty outline of a leaderless party which clearly lacks any sense of 
purpose or direction. At this point in its development the Green 
Party of the United States is no more than a secretion of the 
mindless bureaucracy which directs its aimless activities.

The only item on the four-day agenda that held any promise for the 
future of the Green Party were the three proposals for democracy and 
independence presented by the GDI (Greens for Democracy and 
Independence). I will report on the proposals themselves later but a 
portentous event occurred immediately at the opening of the Tulsa 
meeting which would foretell the nature and direction of this very 
bizarre spectacle masquerading as a meeting of the delegates of a 
serious political party.


Two delegations from Utah presented their delegate credentials to the 
GPUS. One was formed by a renegade Cobb faction the other, directly 
in the line of dissent from the original Green Party in Utah, was 
formed by the Nader supporters. (Historical note: Cobb received 26 
votes in Utah; Nader received 11,000.) The actual details of what 
took place are much too complicated to describe here. Suffice it to 
say that the GPUS Accreditation Committee decided to recognize 
the "Cobb" Green Party. The Nader Green Party however filed the 
proper papers in the state of Utah, obtained 3000 signatures on its 
petitions and is the legally recognized Green Party by the State of 

With these "two parties" being thus represented and given that the 
Accreditation Committee admitted that it really had no power to 
recognize either one of the two parties on its own, New Jersey 
offered a compromise. New Jersey proposed that during the course of 
the Tulsa meeting both parties would be temporarily recognized, 
splitting their two delegate votes between them. The National 
Committee would decide which of the two parties was the "real" Green 
Party at another time to be specified. The demogreens went wild! No 
way! According to the Cobb supporters in the National Committee the 
Cobb party of Utah was recognized by the Accreditation Committee of 
the GPUS and it was irrelevant what the state of Utah had decided. A 
vote was taken and the first paper victory was scored by the paper 
states. The Green Party which is officially recognized by the State 
of Utah was expelled in favor of a Green Party which has less than 10 
members! Another paper state was created.

Even from the very presentation of the two Green parties it was clear 
where this Tulsa meeting was headed. The Cobb party delegate 
immediately pointed at us -- the GDI members -- as contriving and 
conspiring to have the Nader Green Party recognized in an effort "to 
bring the Democratic Party into the Green Party". Yes, that's what 
he said. The GDI wants to bring the Democratic Party into the Green 
Party by having it recognize the Green Party that is officially 
recognized by the State of Utah!

As a side point I would like to mention that one of our members 
worked with the real Green Party in Utah and finally succeeded in 
convincing them to send a delegate. They were reluctant to do so 
because of the nature of the GPUS leadership; the majority of the 
National Committee. Their argument for remaining outside the GPUS 
was simply, (paraphrasing), "why should we join such a group when we 
are now accredited by the State of Utah? Why should we let people 
like this [GPUS delegates] have access to our ballot line"?

The vote was not at all surprising. 57 delegates voted against the 
New Jersey compromise that would have recognized both Utah parties 
just for the sake of the Tulsa meeting with 35 delegates voting to 
allow both parties. This was Cobb versus Nader all over again and 
was a foreshadowing of what would occur when it came time to vote for 
the three GDI proposals for democracy and independence.


There are nine or ten states which are called "paper states". These 
states have Green parties that were established prior to the 2000 
presidential election as a result of efforts to place Ralph Nader on 
the ballot. Soon after the 2000 election these "parties" 
collapsed. In fact many "members" never actually registered as 
members of the Green Party and where in fact Libertarians, 
Republicans, Democrats and Socialists. They simply signed membership 
forms that would be recognized by the GPUS as an affiliated party. 
One of the web sites from those states actually listed Libertarians 
as contact people for the Green Party!

It is now estimated that there are less than 300 actual Greens in 
these 10 states. Ohio is the most extreme example. It has five 
delegates to the NC yet there are less than 10-12 members in the 
Green Party of Ohio. Nine other states have 18 delegate votes.

Here's how to think about what this means for the Green Party. There 
are approximately 8.5 million people in New Jersey. It has two 
delegate votes. There are approximately 8.5 million people in nine 
of the paper states. They have 18 delegate votes. Another way to 
think about it is to realize that California has 106,000 registered 
members of the Green Party. It has 13 delegate votes. There are 
less than 300 Greens in the nine paper states. They have 18 delegate 
votes. Three hundred Greens in the paper states are able to overrule 
106,000 Greens in California. If anyone was still not clear as to 
how David Cobb who entered the Milwaukee convention with only 12% of 
the Green vote, ended up with the nomination they should, by this 
time, be getting a very strong clue.

"I didn't join an independent party. I didn't join an anticorporate 

I joined the Green Party."

-a Safe State delegate from Illinois


The three proposals advanced by the GDI for democracy and 
independence in the Green Party were not defeated. In order for them 
to have been defeated someone would have had to offer arguments or at 
least objections as to why they were unacceptable. No such arguments 
were advanced in Tulsa. Although an endless stream of delegates 
proceeded to air what are called "concerns" in the Green Party's 
contrived meeting sessions called "consensus" the only concerns that 
were ever presented were procedural in nature. One delegate came to 
the microphone and said that he had three concerns. The presenters 
showed him that his concerns were in fact answered within the very 
body of the proposal itself. When the delegate recognized this he 
said he was voting against them anyway and stomped away.

The first GDI proposal to institute one-person one-vote is nothing 
more than "institutionalized chaos". 

-David Cobb, in the men's room to his retinue.

One crazed delegate seized the microphone and screamed angrily, "how 
can we possibly vote on these proposals when they have been amended 
only two days ago"? When it was explained that these were "friendly 
amendments" added in order to address some of the concerns of the 
delegates she said she was still voting against them.

One of the most important "friendly amendments" that was added to all 
three proposals contained language that spelled out that these 
proposals were resolutions. The purposes of these resolutions were 
simply to set up working committees that would then make the 
necessary changes in the bylaws to implement the resolutions. It was 
made very clear that none of the changes to the bylaws made by these 
committees could be enacted without a two thirds vote by the National 
Committee. Therefore when these proposals were voted down it was the 
very ideas and concepts that were voted down.

Green Party National Committee in one of its more serious moments

singing "Oklahoma" while the GDI caucused.

I am a 59 year-old MBA. I have forgotten how many vice presidential 
positions I have held and on how many boards of directors I have 
served during my professional career. I do recall vividly having 
served as The Chairman of the Board of a prestigious professional 
association. In my 37 years of professional life I never witnessed 
anything like the meeting of the Green Party held in Tulsa. This was 
not a meeting. This was a carnival.

While members of the GDI would go into caucus in order to change word 
order or make friendly amendments to satisfy some procedural concern, 
the delegates of the Green Party, instead of continuing to discuss 
the proposals among themselves degenerated into a "sing-along" 
highlighting show tunes! One delegate after another seized the 
microphone either to dance, somewhat in the fashion of a circus 
clown, or to imitate a nightclub comedian. The delegates of the 
Green Party surrounding David Cobb finally sent the GDI members a 
very clear message when they began to sing "Take Me out to the 
Ballgame". The message was very clear when they sang in a loud 
voice: "1, 2, 3 strikes you're out". There was never any intention 
to give any serious consideration to the GDI proposals. The GDI and 
its proposals for democracy and independence were treated like a 
freak show in a carnival.

The Blue-Green delegates to the NC singing "one, two, three strikes 
you're out at the old ballgame" sent a very clear message to the GDI 
of both their position and their mentality.


When the three proposals were voted down in pretty much the same 
fashion as the New Jersey compromise for Utah, it was clear to the 
members of the GDI that the majority of GPUS delegates were not the 
kind of Greens with which we wanted any continued association. It is 
clear that these people are not Greens. They may be well intended 
liberal environmentalists but they are no more "Green" than are the 
Progressive Democrats of America (PDA). One of our group decided 
that at this point it might be more descriptive to refer to these 
people as the "Blue-Greens" as in "blue states" but suggestive of 
great deal more.

If there is anyone still unconvinced of the association of these Cobb-
demogreens just go to the PDA web site www.pdamerica.org and enter 
the name "Cobb" in the "search site" in the left-hand column. It 
will make you sick if you are a real Green.

Both the New York and California members of the GDI spoke about the 
possibility of either disaffiliating completely from the Green Party 
or at least dramatically changing their legal relationship in such a 
way that the GPUS would no longer have access to the California or 
New York ballot lines. Vermont, Louisiana, Alabama, New Mexico and 
Florida might also consider similar action. The members of the GDI 
nevertheless agreed, urged on by Peter Camejo, that we should not 
hand our party over to the Democrats like this. We should not hand 
over the Green Party to a small group of people who refuse to even 
entertain the concepts of "one-person one-vote", "proportionate 
representation of delegates" and "complete independence from the 
corporate parties at the national level".

As it stands now there are two currents within the Green Party. The 
GDI is best considered as the revolutionary wing of the party. The 
former Cobb supporters, who were the ringmasters at the carnival in 
Tulsa, have not put together a formal current with a web site and 
discussion group as has the GDI. We are referring to them for the 
time being the "Blue-Greens" which are a group of, no doubt, well 
intended liberal environmentalists who cannot force themselves to 
break completely with the corporate parties and who will desperately 
cling to the right to follow a safe state strategy at any time in the 
future. These people are frightened of the GDI and feel threatened 
by us. Perhaps that is the healthiest thing for those folks to do at 
this time.

John A. Murphy: Spoiler

"We do not believe in lesser evilism and we must not hand over our 
party to people who will not declare their independence from the 
corporate owned parties."

-Peter Camejo
--- End forwarded message ---


 Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 

More information about the Marxism mailing list