[Marxism] Green Party statement
deeseekyou at comcast.net
Fri Dec 15 03:59:42 MST 2006
Two things Mark.
1) I'm all for impeachment of Bush and Cheney. I'd like nothing more
than to see them and Rumsfeld and a whole host of other rotting in
prison. (Please don't make me out to be some ultra-leftist.) My
criticisms of McKinney are that this is seen--at least here in Georgia
for the most part--as a useless gesture, something she just wanted to
do to have in the list of accomplishments. If she actually wanted to
push this, she could have done so at any time in the last two years.
But then she would have had to do several things: argue for and defend
her position, make a sincere effort to push the position and get others
to support it, and have an open debate with her own party. She was
willing to do none of this. Instead, she introduces this after losing
the primary to a pathetic no-name Republican stooge posing as a
Democrat. But not only that, she waits until literally the last few
days before the end of the Congress. McKinney is not stupid. She is an
accomplished politician who knows very well how to play the political
game, and appease liberals on the ground without angering her
Democratic paymasters. Failing to recognize this, we come across as, at
best, political neophytes, and, at worst, tools.
2) Again, I'm fine with the GP supporting the impeachment articles.
Woohoo! I was criticizing their approach, which is to do little other
than tail McKinney. One of the Georgia Green Party's stated goal is to
get McKinney to become a green. (It often seems like their only goals.)
That's not a totally outlandish position, even if I'd like to raise
some thorny political points and clarify some issues and principles.
But even if that's the goal, then the GGP's tactic, which is
enthusiastic and uncritical support (to the point of toadying), is
problematic not only because it is questionable in terms of principles,
but because it's a bone-headed tactic. Why would she leave the
Democrats is her left-oppposition never criticizes her? There's
electoral politics. And then there's electoral cretinism.
On Dec 15, 2006, at 1:13 AM, Mark Lause wrote:
> I passed on the press release for informational purposes. Certainly,
> Green Party is very different in different places. I would never
> anyone seeking a clear-cut pure party to involve themselves in it.
> I also realize that some people believe that because all CEOs may
> engage in
> criminal acts, we are misleading people by supporting the prosecution
> of the
> ones who engage in the most egregious conduct and get caught.
> One of my biggest criticisms of the SWP, when I was a member, was what
> called at the time a lunkheaded failure to appreciate the impeachment
> movement against Nixon. I felt the same way when Rep. Henry Gonzales
> introduced articles of impeachment against Reagan over the Iran-Contra
> abominations. If calling the administration to account for its
> illegal and
> unconstitutional use of power entails "meaningless political
> maneuverings in
> the halls of congress," I'd really like to see a lot more of it.
> Rep. McKinney may be unsupportable in the electoral arena as a
> but supportable in her raising the reality of the numerous impeachable
> offenses of the Bush administration. Indeed, her conduct is not a
> a mechanism for people to be drawn back into the Democratic orbit, but
> throws into stark relief the opportunism and cowardice of the
> The difference seems very obvious to me, but I can understand if it
> Mark L.
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
More information about the Marxism