********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.

Yeah, what I proposed, repeatedly, as a course of action for the Greens in
Ohio might well be common sense, but it's certainly NOT what advocates of
independent political action do.   If it had been, we'd be in a much
different place than we are today.

The Greens in all but a few states have repeatedly chosen not to do it.
And the leadership in those few states that have tried to build something
(New York and California, for examples) have been fine with a national
party dominated by paper parties.  That's been the case for a quarter of a

And those who don't like the Greens because they don't label themselves as
a class party have accomplished even less.  Every time you hear someone
say, "why should we put anything into the Greens when we could invest in
building a labor party," you know they're not going to actually do
anything.  Most of them I've heard this from for years are currently
cheering spectators in the Democratic stadium.

And the socialists?  Well, they could have kept their own organizations and
acted together electorally.  They could have done this in 2016  or 2004 or
1992.  But not a one of them has taken any initiative on this over the last
fifty years, what chance is there that they're going to respond any
differently over the next decade or so.

There will be no party without new politics based on actually mobilizing
people--an electoral strategy that reflects the kind of movements we want
to build.  It's not being done.  And the corporate "social justice warrior"
model applied to electoral action will accomplish no more permanent gains
in electoral action than in the wider society.

Mark L.
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 

Reply via email to