[Marxism] Greens, Dems and Building Working Class Independence,
Carlos A. Rivera
cerejota at optonline.net
Sat Mar 26 23:39:50 MST 2005
----- Original Message -----
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>
> Carlos, for somebody who writes with such venom about the Green Party, you
> seem singularly uninformed.
C'mon! Hyperbole to the max!
If what I am trying to spouse is venom, then what you try to expouse is pure
And despite your effort to the contrary, I still thing your position to be a
valid, honest one, instead of robotic line mongering. The least I would
expect from you, which is exactly what David tried to put accross, is that
some of us who are critical of the Greens are not doing so for the sake of
throwing sectarian venom around. I have no sectarian connection to the
political space of the USA, hence spewing venom serves no purpose.(Hell, I
am a born US citizen, late twenties, and the first time I will be able to
vote for my representatives in the electoral college will be in 2008).
Now, I might be wrong in this assesment, but you are definetely wrong in
thinking I am spousing venom. I am honestly interested in seeing if a left
alternative to the Democrats emerge. I have no problem if the Greens are
such an alternative, in the abstract. Mainstream militant liberalism is
better for socialist ideas and actions.
But I am skeptical of them. I just think that the Green Party tried and
failed, and that efforts trying to resurrect it are doomed to failure,
because ti shares the same base as the left of the Democratic Party, without
the benefit of a well-oiled funding structure and historical roots in the
communities it serves.
> As it turns out, we have a number of Green Party leaders on this list who
> tend to lurk but occasionally have a thing or two to say--as Howie Hawkins
> did the other day. If you do a google search on "Howie Hawkins", you can
> find many articles that have little connection to the grotesque caricature
> you have sucked out of your thumb.
You might include him in the number of individuals I mentioned.
> I would strongly urge you to get into the habit of quoting people in the
> future since generally speaking you strike me as somebody who might lack
> the commitment to serious Marxist polemics despite your tendency to
> quarrel with people here at the drop of a hat.
Oh, I do that from time to time, as my discussion of the Holy Family and
Marcuse shows. The rest of the time, I feel conversation is less clutered by
quotes, as they tend to be crutches to hide the lack of imagination and
capability of expressing thoughts. Or a cheap sophism appealing to a higher
force as a way of gaining the upper hand in a debate.
Of course, you quote Howie, he is of the few individuals in the Green.
Interestingly, you quote him in an article that partially supports my
assertion of Marxists being closer to Lincoln Republicanism than to 19th
Democraticism or Clintonist
stuff, even if I learned this a long time ago.
But what about David Cobb et al? Is he suddenly excomulgated from the Green
faith because he went ABB? What about the millions of votes the Green Party
and Nader lost? Are they all the fault of the ABB backstabbers?
Now, I do would like to see a response to the question on the SP-USA that
doesn't sound like Leo Casey, or Junaid's Marcusian-cum-sectarian "retort".
And of course, you managed to divert attention from the core question, which
is how Nader and Camejo ran out of the Party when it was obvious that they
wouldn't get the nomination. To again use the example of the SP-USA (of
which I do have my criticism, but they are not useful in this contrast) they
had their own internal crisis
A candidacy doesn't a Party make, and the inability of Nader, as the most
visible leader of the Greens, to concentrate on Party building instead of
his campaing, and the trailing behind that strategy If I would have been a
Green, I would have ran David Cobb's campaing as if it were Nader's, and
would have subjected him to party discipline on the questions of program.
This would have been a creative, politicaly cunning, and long term strategy.
Nader speaks of party building, but his *actions* shows them to be idle talk
for the sake of his constituency.
Not even the Democrats, who suck at Party building, let their "left" doctor
cum death metal singer darling leave the building.
Parties are always coalitions and always exist in a state of tension between
factions and personalities. Correct Party building requires political
cunning. We all know this, being all children of unsucessful Party building
Nader didn't throw himself into party building basically because he is a
narcisist self-promoter, more concerned with living the life of a minor
figure in an election campaing followed by millions than with building the
He might say otherwise, but again his *actions* speak for himself.
As you can see, time and again, I am less preocupied with ideological purity
(althought I admit that a more class-against-class approach to politics
appeals to me, hence the SPUSA as a contrast) with regards to the Green,
than with how the ideology of its base has become a liquidationist program,
and how people who have something good to say, such as Howie and yourself,
haven't seen the writing on the wall.
More information about the Marxism