[Marxism] Clinton open to being Obama's VP

Ruthless Critic of All that Exists ok.president+marxml at gmail.com
Thu Jun 5 00:13:15 MDT 2008


On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Mark Lause <markalause at gmail.com> wrote:

> If the Green Party doesn't deserve support because it blew the
> opportunities it had after 2000, what about the Socialist Party which
> blew opportunity after opportunity over the previous EIGHTY YEARS to
> build and maintain an independent political party of working people?

Well, I will only say that "this is not your father's Socialist
Party". You have to judge the SP by what it is doing *today*, not by
what it did in the 1980s or 1950s. The same goes for any party.

>
> Now, I wouldn't rule out supporting an SP candidate, but there is ONE
> PARAMOUNT DUTY to anyone serious about independence political action
> in the United States: the promotion of the largest possible attempt to
> have an impact.  People are rightly critical of Nader or the Greens
> for failing to do this.

The SP's position is that they won't "promote" Nader or McKinney
because Nader or McKinney does not talk (openly at least) about
socialism. You can hardly blame a party that calls itself the
"Socialist" party to at least want to support a candidate who is
openly socialist.
>
> The Socialist Party never even thought itself under any obligation to
> try...  Not any more than the Peace and Freedom or the Socialist
> Workers or the Socialist Labor or the Vegetarian Labor Parties....
> The lot of them have acted with no regard for building anything other
> than themselves.  At the end of the entire campaign, they'll claim so
> many additional hundred subscribers to their paper or visitors to
> their forums and pat themselves on the back with a hearty claim of a
> "victory."

My understanding is that the SP goal is to try to create awareness
about socialism. That seems an entirely laudable (or is it
"laudatory") goal to me. Not so much building their party. For
instance, the SP presidential candidate Brian Moore wasn't even an SP
member until this year, but had run independent political campaigns
(for Congress, etc). That SP nominated a candidate who wasn't
affiliated with the SP but had a long history of involvement in
non-two-party politics, certainly bespeaks an openness and
nonsectarian spirit about the SP.

> But why would any people who aren't already members of their specific
> club give them any serious consideration?

Presumably because (1) you want people to learn about socialism and
(2) the SP candidate Moore is talking to people about socialism.




More information about the Marxism mailing list