Third Parties (was RE: Fulani's endorsement of Buchanan)

Steve Perry sperry at usinternet.com
Tue Nov 16 02:20:03 PST 1999


am horrified to agree with yoshie, but i do. i think anything that helps to destabilize the duopoly is presumptively a good thing. and i don't see what's so "roundabout" about it. (incidentally, any gesture that serves to show up the money/celebrity burlesque that presidential politics has become is doubly welcome--come back, cybill shepherd! all is forgiven!)

-----Original Message----- From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Yoshie Furuhashi Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 1:56 AM To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Subject: Re: Third Parties (was RE: Fulani's endorsement of Buchanan)

Katha:
>So the left has to support a third party whose major figures are a joke
>(Donald Trump? Pat buchanan? ross Perot?) in order to make space for a
>fourth party that would actually represent its own politics? That seems
>like an awfully roundabout way of doing things.
> The thing about the new Alliance Party is that they're a scam, a
>therapy cult. Elections are the way they recruit new members and (they
>hope) get their hands on public-campaign dollars. The Village Voice,
>much pooh-poohed on this list for being "boring," did a very good expose
>of them a few years ago, if memory serves.

I'm not at all supporting the Buchanan/Fulani combo, neither of whom is a friend of the working class. I'm just wondering if left third party efforts (the Labor Party, the Greens, etc.) have any sort of political strategy to break the two-party system. Nathan seems to think they don't, and I'm inclined to agree with him. In fact, as far as the Labor Party is concerned, I'm not even sure if it wants to be an independent political party or just a pressure group vainly trying to move the Dems to the left.

Yoshie



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list