> Your research has taken you to a different place
>than I. The green party is nothing but a bunch of
>neo-liberals
In Aust, the Greens are on the far left of the political spectrum. At least in the context of political parties that actually win seats in parliament. I know who they are, because I've known and worked with them for donkey's years, they are my neighbours and acquaintances. Senator Bob Brown, the Australian leader of the Greens, lives about up the road from me, about 10 miles from Bracknell.
There are some sort of rightish Green groups too, such as Liberals for Forests. It is also true of course that the Australian Greens don't claim to be socialists, but they are definitely opposed to neo-liberalism. Unlike the Australian Labor Party, which *is* nominally socialist (it has a socialist objective written into its constitution.) But the ALP is also the party which pioneered neo-liberal social policy in Australia. Deregulation of banking, floating the currency, privatisation of government service, etc.
The greens might be different in Nth America, it wouldn't surprise me that the greens are more right wing there, since everyone else (including most of population) is on what the rest of the world would regard as the loony right. But your assertions are rather vague.
>The green party is like the old medicine man,
In what way? You're being a little vague, in fact you sound almost hysterical. Are you suggesting that preserving the environment from the ravages of the profit motive is snake oil? Are you one of those that doubts the science behind the greenhouse effect for example?
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas