[Marxism] Fwd: A POSTCARD FROM TULSA A PAPER VICTORY FOR A PAPER PARTY
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
Subject: Fwd: A POSTCARD FROM TULSA A PAPER VICTORY FOR A PAPER PARTY
--- 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.
THE UTAH VOTE
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.
A WORD ABOUT THE PAPER STATES
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 VOTE ON THE GDI PROPOSALS
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
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."
--- End forwarded message ---
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
More information about the Marxism