Green green

John Halle john.halle at
Sun Aug 27 19:36:09 PDT 2000

> ------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:46:58 -0400
> From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at>
> Subject: Green green
> John Halle wrote:
> >Votes for Gore also reduce the chance that the Greens will receive the
> >necessary %5 for federal funding.
> I think we have to take seriously that were the Greens to get federal
> money, the result could be some mix of hilarious and tragic. Look at
> the Reform Party's squabbles. The Daily Show did a report from their
> convention, which appeared to be chock full of middle American
> wackos. There are some very fine people in the Green Party, but there
> are also tons of left wackos, who would multiply before the Treasury
> check even clears. The scent of cash and credibility will bring in
> all the sectarians except the Sparts, who would denounce them as
> dupes of capital. If the party were more substantial, more organized,
> things might be different, but since Nader is running mainly as a
> personality using the Greens as a vehicle and brand name, the money
> might be more chaotizing (in the bad ssense) than energizing.

As a wrote in response a while back to Chuck0 when he was making a similar point, this result is no more preordained than any other political outcome. The serious question for progressives is how to minimize the chance that the wacko contingent will take control of the Greens. How this plays out will be decided by whether individuals capable of rational thought decide to get involved now while there's still a possibility to make a difference. Remaining on the sidelines increases the chance that the most dire predictions-of the sort we have gotten in the habit of making-will materialize.

In other words, your success as a prophet will depend on your failure as an activist.


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list