>This isn't going to be productive, Luke. You Dema pologists think that we
>advocates of independent political action are deluded, self-defeating
fools,
>we IPA advocates think that you have tied your wagon to a backwards moving
>train.
People can just be wrong on strategy -- that's what large political debates are about. What bothers me about third party advocates is that they present so little evidence to support their position, just ad hominen attacks on Democratic actions they don't like, while ignoring anything that goes counter to their beliefs. (Such as the 80%+ of House Dems who voted against Fast Track).
The problem is that I have heard all the third party arguments, voted for Greens, been appointed to government office by an elected Green official, campaigned for Green candidates, and so on. And after all that experience, with the Green advocates I respect most, I just ended up unconvinced that they had any viable strategy. There are plenty of good arguments for why the Democrats are not always great; the question is whether a third party strategy is viable under the present electoral system where no third party has been able to get a serious toehold since the Republicans emrged during the apocolypse leading up to the Civil War.
And the answer is that it is not. And the Greens have failed to show otherwise. The one state legislator they got elected immediately sold them out and left the party to get more political power, then turned around and attacked Barbara Lee in Oakland from the pro-war position. They've elected marginal candidates with little serious strategy-- the Minnesota Senate race being an obvious example. And the Nader campaign was a failure on its own limited goals of getting 5% of the vote to get matching funds-- and then Nader turns around and uses the mailing list of financial supporters to his campaign not to build the Greens but to build his own individual organization, Democracy Rising.
How pathetic is it for the Greens to mobilize for a Presidential election and not even negotiate to keep the mailing list of financial contributions?
I cite that not as an individual tactical error but as emblematic of the lack of strategy of the whole movement. Whether they were just strong-armed in negotiations by Nader or more likely, they just didn't think of it until it was too late, it shows that nothing being done by the Greens is part of a real long-term strategy.
On the other hand, I can outline the detailed multi-year plans being developed by unions, the NAACP, Emily's List and other progressive Dem groups to expand progressive influence within the Democratic Party.
At least if the Greens had such plans, we could compare strategies and have a debate. But the Greens have no plans-- just ad hominen attacks on other activists as a substitute.
-- Nathan Newman