SocraticGadfly: Search results for AccommoGreen
Showing posts sorted by date for query AccommoGreen. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query AccommoGreen. Sort by relevance Show all posts

September 11, 2026

RIP AccommoGreen David Keith Cobb


 Cobb and Ruthi Engelki, 2021, screengrab off a public Facebook post.

Saw the story via Ballot Access News, then went to his Wiki.

"AccommoGreen" is the Green Party version of "ConservaDem" in my book. Here's a search return, since I never created a tag. Another way of putting it is that they're one step left of DSA Roseys. They exist to push Democrats left, first, to focus on the needs of a third party, only second.

Cobb pledged a "safe states" strategy in 2004. That said. St. Ralph of Nader promised the same in 2000, and lied about it. (People like Jeff St. Clair at Counterpunch, still butthurt over the 2004 Green nomination process, won't tell you that, nor will they tell you that Nader isn't that much of an environmentalist, and that he's not at all pro-labor, being in fact a crappy boss. For a whole shitload of reality on St. Ralph of Nader, go here.)

I briefly referenced Cobb in my "hello world" Blogger post, and not much else. 

Otherwise, as a now-ex Green, yes, it's time for a moment of reflection.

The first part is the "if only," per that link.

If only I had started on Blogger, if not a full year earlier, even six months earlier, to write more fully about the Democratic nomination process for president that year. Maybe, like Josh Marshall getting lucky with his pretending to be a New New Democrat or whatever, then spouting bullshit about third parties in 2004 (link rot at my link), I would have had a small bit of "empire." Not his, of course.

I'm not sure which of the "big three" was the most hypocritical. I was banned by Kos (well, frozen out, to be technical, because that's the way the tech world works) for being too Green. Josh didn't have a contributors' forum, but he has shown his not-totally-liberal Zionist colors in the decades since then. Atrios? Good snark, but how much depth did he ever have?

Meanwhile, in the Green world?

AccommoGreen Cobb. He later became an advisor to Gang Green Sierra Club. In 2009, when they were promoting natural gas as the "bridge fuel" and getting payola to do that promoting. Remember that? "Beyond Coal"? Funded by Aubrey McClendon, the disgusting founder of Chesapeake Energy. It ran from 2007-2012; Cobb joined Sierra's "Corporate Accountability Committee" in 2009 as noted. The Liberty Tree Foundation? DSA Rosey types.

Then Cynthia McKinney, for whom I voted with extreme holding of my nose. And, here she is today, Libertarian, and as antisemitic at times, not just anti-Zionist, in good company with the Mises Mice.

Then Jill Stein three runs in four elections, the last one doubling down on her investments hypocrisy.

In between, one run by the earnest Howie Hawkins, generally good, generally too close to the left hand of the duopoly on Russiagate. 

I dropped everything above on Substack to knock something out. I wanted something longer here, after a bit more marination time. I'm not sure how much more I'll let this marinate before I post. 

I will say I wasn't that familiar with his background at the time. (He ran for Texas AG in 2002, and had been legal general counsel to St. Ralph's 2000 run, per the Wiki about his 2004 run.) 

I already knew that he and Libertarian Michael Bednarik — The Man Who Drove Without a License™ — asked for a recount in Ohio in 2004. That wound up bringing conspiracy theory nutters out of the woodwork. Badnarik died four years ago.

More on the reality of Ohio 2004 from Mark Hertsgaard. (Sadly, he's a duopolist Biden greenwasher.) Anyway, I wrote more about the Bob Fitrakis nuttery in that 2004 recount here. Let's also not forget Brad Friedman of the Brad Blog. (This is what started leading to my separation with Brains.)

It also had a semi-bright line to Stein's recount request in 2016. That was bullshit I refused to co-sign. AND, doubled down on that. In turn, Stein started grifting off that. 

Before that, in that same election cycle, Cobb was jumping into bed with Caity Johnstone and her red-black alliances. Fallout from that is when I first started really looking askance at David Bruce Collins as well. (Collins still loves himself some Caity, or at least he did a year or so ago, per his most recent Shits on Shitter.)

Finally, for one last swift kick? Cobb was a 9/11 Falser, or at least a "just asking questions" Falser Lite. The petition he signed was 3 years after, and distributed by the odious 9/11Truth. Plus, since I am both somewhat skeptical and somewhat cynical about him? That was less than two full weeks before the 2004 election. Politics, anybody? The statement/petition isn't a false flag in the narrow sense of "America did it"; it is in the larger sense of insinuating the US government deliberately let this happen.

Most the actual questions are bullshit. (I refuse to link, even with a "no follow.") For example, Flight 77 turned around unnoticed because hijackers turned off its transponder. The Pentagon did not, "supposedly" or actually, have special missile batteries. Yes, the Counterintelligence center said the terror dashboard was "blinking red," but it did not know in advance about the specifics of 9/11. Bush kept reading "My Pet Goat" to avoid mass panic.

(Oh, the rest of that link shows Cobb not a Green any more, or so it appears, but a DSA Rosey. Shock me.) 

This all gets to my Venn diagram in this piece:

 


Can't we get less nutty leftists? 

The answer is, probably not. Actually, the "better" answer is, almost certainly not.

As an ex-Green, looking ahead to the 2028 prez run? I'll take a non-AccommGreen, non-hypocrite. If not, I'll most likely undervote. Voting for Claudia de la Cruz was itself a bit of nose-holding in 2024. 

(Sidebar: Can we once again get less sucky Firefox? I still can't post pictures by URL on Blogger in Fuckfox; I have to use Google. I'll admit I haven't tried Safari on that in a long time.)

One last thought or two going back to 2004, and moving through 2016.

I still didn't know much about the Green ecosystem then. I learned more since then. I'd say it was two-thirds the party trying to screw Ralph, but one-third Ralph had made his own bed, and even invited the screwing. I don't know if Cobb played any personal part in that or not. After all, he might have been playing nice with Ralph and shivving him at the same time. 

On the Stein recounts, and her claiming they weren't plumping for the left hand of the duopoly, even when they were, I see Cobb's AccommoGreen fingerprints on that. I have long seen Stein as some degree of AccommoGreen herself, anyway. 

==

I have posted this, harder-hitting than my Substack piece, as a comment to the Green Party US Substack's RIP piece. We'll see how much I get flamed there, or blocked, or whatever. I made sure to note the 9/11 Falser issue (and I called it that there) because I posted it on Sept. 11. 

at Friday, September 11, 2026 0 comments Posted by Gadfly

August 17, 2024

So, it's Butch Ware as Jill Stein's Veep? Update: It was Ayoub first, then Noura Erekat

That was the news yesterday, that she had picked Butch Ware, professor at Cal-Santa Barbara, over any of the two Arab-American names she floated two weeks ago via Al Jazeera as three potential Veep picks. The two Arab-Americans were also both from Michigan, the state with the largest Arab-American population and where the "uncommitted" movement in Democratic presidential primaries started.

Per that second link, a previous blog post of mine? Was she afraid of actually costing Kamala is a Zionist Cop the state of Michigan, and in a close presidential race, thus possibly tipping it to Donald Trump? Given that her 2016 recount, based on fake news, started in Michigan, and that Stein is in many ways an AccommoGreen, the Green equivalent of a ConservaDem, none of this would surprise me. Luqman, the third name floated, is from DC and so just wouldn't have been a broader needle-mover. Also, as of 2020, she was affiliated with Sputnik Radio. Given attacks on Stein as a "Russian agent," by #BlueAnon engaging in the worst of #Russiagate's wrongness, that would not have flown. But, was Stein thinking that way? If so, why was Luqman on the list in the first place?

And, why am I assuming Stein actually plays 11-dimensional chess, or thinks that deeply?

==

Big set of updates to the original post, via Green Party candidate Jason Call and people he had retweeted, with a huge amount of backstory to this.

First, Stein had yet other people in mind besides that list from Al Jazeera, apparently. Or she was forced to, rather, after her first choice, from that list, spit the bit. More on that below.

One of them, her first fallback, was Noura Erekat, who, thank doorknob, per this tweet

Pulled out.

The "terms of campaign"? This:

As I noted in quoting

And in responding to someone else who quoted:

The GP doesn't need that shit. Stein should have seen that Erekat's history, including being of legal counsel to a House committee, might have been .... iffy.

Serious, that SCREAMS "duopoly" to me. Did nobody vet her?

Nor does it need the shit of Nathan J. Robinson, socialist pretendian, stanning for the left hand of the duopoly

And, stan he does.:

He'd semi-headfaked earlier this summer, but, now we're seeing the mask back off. 

As I told him?

What else is there to say? Well, other than Robinson wants the Green Party, en masse, to be DSA Roseys.

Per that semi-headfake mentioned above, I had had hopes that he might actually be looking beyond the duopoly this year, mainly over Gaza, but also for other reasons.

Beyond the headfake, the naivete or whatever it is that he's exemplifying?

Nathan, have you been gaslighting the outside world, yourself, or both, about how much you understand about political machinations?

Back to the Erekat pick.

To pick up from near the top of this post? Elsewhere, Jason Call notes that the original call was Abed Ayoub, the top candidate in the Al Jazeera leak (yes, a deliberate leak) but he backed off due to family illness.

Erm, wasn't this known in advance? The family illness? Surely, unless his wife had a near-fatal heart attack less than 24 hours before Stein officially tapped him, this didn't come out of nowhere. In this Aug. 12 story, in which Ayoub is grateful to be under consideration, there's no talk of health issues with himself or family. Per Facebook, his one grandmother died Aug. 15. It's true, that could have been sudden, but given her apparent age and that most her siblings were already dead, it's more likely not that sudden.

And, if he did spit the bit, why not Amer Zahr or Luqman, off that original list of names?

(My original post on this didn't get updated after that Al Jazeera piece, as I was operating off IPR. Still.)

To go back to Luqman? I think Putin would want somebody more organized than Stein as a Russian asset.

And, to offer a new update?

I tweeted this post Saturday night to someone named TurboKitty, who had been retweeted by dyed-in-the-wool Green David Bruce Collins, calling the process a clusterfuck. Turns out said person is co-chair of the Nevada Green Party steering committee.

I'll be here, and was on Twitter, charitable to their first response to me, and assume they were honestly thinking I was talking about the "big reveal," not the process behind it. I told them politely but firmly, no, I meant this process.

I wasn't charitable to their second response:

With my reply:

And, I'll further fight fire with fire as desired. 

I "get" the tribalism behind the response. I don't accept it.

And, I'm going to keep taking receipts. One Pourz11, who's actually a follower of me, but it's not mutual, jumped in. Their second comment was:

To which I said:

Then added that, per the end of that comment, no one that mattered to me cared about their present.

And, setting aside her investments hypocrisy, I haven't even talked about things like her antivaxxer footsies, her 5G nuttery and more. That said, I know shit like 5G conspiracy theories and antivaxxerism (even if it was footsies, not full-blown with her) appeals to a fair chunk of Greens, as I said after in the last run-up to the 2020 race at that link. Whether it's a majority or not, I don't know. OTOH, COVID scared enough Greens that Stein doubled down on pandering there, saying she supported the vaccine but opposed vaccine mandates. Or, to put them in the scare quotes they need? "Vaccine mandates." Gee, a Rethuglican could say that. Like Gov. Strangeabbott. On the third hand, I called Stein Just.Another.Politician.™ years ago, and said Greens were Just.Another.Political.Party™. I stand by that. Sadly, and one thing that has me not locked in on Claudia de la Cruz is her Stein-like stance on vaccines.

(Some of this is notes for when I announce my "slate" in a month or so.) Per that last link above, if Joseph Kishore, the candidate of the Trots of the Socialist Equality Party, is available by write-in, that's an option.

More on the Erekat pick and her demands.

First, Noura, they weren't going to be met. If you're that dumb to think that they were, beyond the AccommoGreen in extremis, I question your political judgement as much as Nathan J. Robinson's. You must have hung out with Dem Congresscritters too much. (I also question your political alignment as much as Robinson's.)

More on that, from my perspective, snarkily?

Actually, considering I'd like to finish pushing the Green Party off the cliff, in some ways, it's too bad in some ways that Stein didn't agree to Erekat's demands.

==

Anyway, to summarize:

1. Stein's first choice for Veep spit the bit in a process that invites questions, to put it politely, is head scratching, to put it a bit more skeptically, or is questionable, to put it more skeptically yet.

2. Her theoretical second and third choices, from her original list of names, were apparently simply ignored.

3. Her fourth choice was poorly vetted, if at all. And, it's not like there wasn't time. She's mentioned in that Aug. 12 story linked above, with Zahr endorsing her. Was the Al Jazeera piece not just a deliberate leak, but a smokescreen to cover Stein's chasing of Erekat? If not, why did she pivot to Erekat? Was it knowing her duopoly ties and seeing this as a "get"?

4. That, of course, fell through and it was on to No. 5 or beyond.

At this point, Stein, if not the national Green Party as a whole, is telling Will Rogers "hold my beer" over his bon mot about Democrats and disorganization. This looks like George McGovern's Veep clusterfuck in 1972.

And, summary side notes?

1. I'm going to do something further about Robinson. Don't think you've gotten off the hook yet.

2. What's this say for the Green Party 2028? Even more than in 2020, most candidates, before Stein entered, couldn't cross the bar for party qualifications to officially run. And, after Cornel West spit the bit, nobody else of note jumped in besides Stein. Her running in 2028 would finish killing off the party. So, where's a Margaret Flowers or someone like that? A Matthew Hoh?

Nutters, flakes, vanity candidates and grifters (and there's definitely Venn diagram overlap) won't cut it.

3. Tagging Mark Lause on Facebook, whom I thought was done with the Green Party on personal support as well as activism, I find out I'm wrong there. I can't say more because I don't post as "public."

4. I also still think a la 2016, that Stein deliberately spit the bit on choosing a Veep nominee from Michigan, and an Arab-American rather than an African American, because of lesser evilism.

Labels: , , , ,
at Saturday, August 17, 2024 0 comments Posted by Gadfly

October 12, 2023

Green Party post-Cornel West

Now that the man is running as an independent (good-bye, good luck, and you're not getting my vote, in all likelihood), what's up for Greens?

At the time of West's announcement, Jill Stein, with full link to long Tweet here, said she and Ajamu Baraka, her 2016 Veep candidate, are beating the bushes for more candidates, presumably seeing the lackluster crop otherwise. (Sorry, but it's true, other Green prez candidates.) Other former candidates would include Howie Hawkins, I'm sure. I doubt she will. Maybe Baraka seeks the top spot? 

Peter Kalmus, this year's national convention speaker, would be interesting. He's hardcore on climate issues, the GP's original core. But, AFAIK, he's a one-note trumpet. Where's he stand on labor? Russia-Ukraine? Palestine?

Given where she was at in becoming a fuller antivaxxer even before the start of COVID, and other issues at that link, I hope she doesn't dive deeper in that tank in the candidate hunt.

It would be nice not to have an AccommoGreen (she was, based on the targets of her 2016 recount and her non-explainer for why she chose those states, contra her defenders) as his advisor, given that he first considered the MPP, not Greens. Ditto on not having someone who believed the #Russiagate claim of a rigged election. Or her blowing money on insider lawyers for the recount. (Maybe, per that link, Cornel wants her donor list.)  Or the lack of transparency on that. 

Riffing on Mark Lause, I thought the party had pretty much cracked up after 2016. In 2020, with "libertarian Greens" trying to run Jesse Ventura through the back door with their stalking horse, Dario Hunter, playing the race card and more, it probably went the rest of the way there. Here in Tex-ass, if my math is correct on the calendar and David Bruce Collins' is not, the Greens have to get signatures if they don't get 2 percent on a statewide race next year and that ain't happening. And, no, Cornel, don't choose Margaret Flowers to replace Stein; per Greg AtLast, we need to get beyond that GP factionalism.

And, indeed, this piece at Salon notes exactly those problems. And more. As far as lack of local-level elected candidates, yes, per Greens, a prez candidate draws people and money. But, a Green-denominated mayor of a California city says he never hears from Green state- or national-level people. (Other than to put his name on a website, I'm sure.) This does become a circular problem. But, as the piece notes, after Stein 2012, the party had a chance to address some of these issues, with bits of momentum it had. And it didn't.

For that matter, contra Jeff St. Clair's buzziness about St. Ralph of Nader, which in 2004 was partially but not entirely true re the national GP convention, where was Ralph doing more heavy lifting on national party organization that might trickle down better? And, also as noted by me, Ralph pledged to run a "safe states" strategy in 2000 — and of course didn't. Maybe some Greens were gun-shy?

And, unmentioned by the Salon author is the issue of TWO Green Party organizations in the US. 

Tough blow for the party.

Update, Oct. 26: With Daou out as West's campaign manager, citing PTSD over Gaza, some people are asking for him to return to the GP, many insinuating Daou was wrecking his campaign.

First, to that nuttery, I replied:

And, that is it.

As for him coming back, or the GP taking him back?

There you are.

Labels: ,
at Thursday, October 12, 2023 0 comments Posted by Gadfly

July 21, 2023

Green Party: Cornel West vs the field (and duopoly media)

Per Ballotpedia, via this very good piece from A Current Affair, "the field" for the Green Party 2024 presidential nomination, at least as of this time, does NOT include 2020 nominee Howie Hawkins or runner-up Dario Hunter.

That Current Affair piece, via managing editor Lily Sanchez, reminds waverers, and calls out #BlueAnon and #BlueMAGA, by saying that if West, or whomever, is not backed, even if he is Naderized, then the options are just RFK Jr. and Marianne Williamson, an antivaxxer palling around with wingnuts or an antivaxxer New Ager.

As to those "whomevers"?

Randy Toler is allegedly a Green Party co-founder, and co-chair of the Florida party. Ballotpedia lists him as running for the US Senate in Florida against Rick Scott. Wiki smears him (shock me) with the "perennial candidate" tag, even though Ballotpedia only lists him as running for two long-ago school board races. That said, whatever GP he founded at age 17, Toler personally, at that time, was an AccommoGreen, per this piece.

Adam Hollick? Pretty sure it's not the actor, who isn't constitutionally eligible anyway.

Anita Belle? Ran for Michigan state senate in 2018 and house in 2020, so some previous campaign experience.

Jackie Tate? Can't find anything.

Mason Cysewski? Like Toler, also running for the Senate, and from here in Tex-ass. New name to me.

Robert Cooke IV? Can't find anything. Scrub that. Also from Tex-ass and in the Metromess. Nothing else.

Tyler Gray. From Tennessee.

Knock yourselves out, and, yes, some of you are vanity candidates by my definition, and not an MSM one. And, what, no William Pounds or other "libertarian Green" conspiracy theorist types?

This one's a no-brainer. Barring a massive screw-up, West has my vote. And support beyond vote.

Update, Oct. 5: Running indy? That's a massive screw-up. Just lost my vote.

And, that's not just within the Green Party, that's in the general election. He's already got the left hand of duopoly political media scared enough to do their usual #FakeNews smears. Richard Winger at Ballot-Access News nails Mark Leibovich of The Atlantic doing it yesterday. Via Winger, Oliver Hall of the Center for Competitive Democracy called out Second Amendment sellout Laurence Tribe for his slimy attacks on West. The PDF has a sidebar piece from the late Bruce Dixon on Democratic sheepdoggers like Bernie Sanders for added effect. Beyond the GP, Winger nailed Mother Jones getting campaign finance law wrong on No Labels earlier in the week.

The bottom line is that Warmonger Joe and handlers, and #BlueAnon and #BlueMAGA in general are running scared. As Matt Walsh at Reason noted, they've got a craptacular candidate, but made their bed for him 3 1/2 years ago. Oh, and per Leibovich, Tribe and others, the DNC is already holding no primaries, so STFU for that reason, too. And, among the sheepdoggers in chief, as Dixon knew he would be for the 2016 election, when he wrote back in 2015, is St. Bernard of Sanders.

Labels: ,
at Friday, July 21, 2023 0 comments Posted by Gadfly

September 25, 2020

Some thoughts on my relationship to the Green Party
and other political issues for 2020 and into the future

I am going to preface this with a couple of observations.

First, about 15 years or so ago, the Dallas Morning News ran a "Where are they now" piece, maybe a series, about local civil rights advocates from the 1960s. If I recall rightly, about a full half of the people interviewed said they had dropped out of electoral politics entirely. That said, about half of that half remained involved with some form of socio-political activism.

I've grown in "member activism" within the GP over the past five years. I've also become more watermelon red on the inside as an ecosocialist, and seen more and more of the anarchist and libertarian green resistance to that. I have little use for anarchism in general, and have made that clear with blog posts here about the Black Bloc, the Occupy movement, etc., for more than a decade. (In summary: Most alleged anarchist groups actually do have leaders — Occupy NYC clearly did, contra myth — and I have no doubt the Black Bloc, various groups all claiming to be "Anonymous" and others do, too. Second, violence-based anarchism, including violence against property as well as persons, often seems to exist for performance art as much as anything. Pass.)

Another problem is the issue that I have long labeled "AccommoGreens" when talking about persons. Howie Hawkins is not as bad as Jill Stein or David Keith Cobb at this, but, he still has some AccommoGreen bones. He had said on many occasions that part of the purpose of previous political runs has been to push Democrats leftward. That's nice. Or, "nice." In New York State, I think he's oversold his degree of success, but that's secondary to the political philosophy issue. I want third-party candidates running because they back their third party's stances, period. If that happens to change other political parties, fine. But, an expressed public desire to change another political party shouldn't be the reason for running.

I can't remember Cynthia McKinney's stance in 2008, but St. Ralph of Nader in 2000 is the only Green I recall who clearly was not an AccommoGreen. That said, for the unaware, he pledged to run a safe states strategy and then broke that promise. Not the only problem he had, either.

Some of these issues tie to the division between the GPUS and GPUSA, which I wrote about a few years ago when I learned more about it. It bears continued reading, especially with my personal thoughts on the "decentralization" issue, of which more below. (That link also has more on some of Nader's issues.)

Then there's the Dario Hunter whining issue. For the record, I think there were small amounts of brushfires behind the smoke Dario saw. I commented on the Twitter PR that Howie selectively got. But cheating? No.

With his independent run (there is no such thing as "Independent Green" in my book) he's burned his bridges with me, as he also has in his alliance with Jesse Ventura backers. I expect him to make a GP run again in 2024. And I expect the Presidential Candidate Support Committee to, at least for public consumption, welcome him back with open arms, even absent any apology.

Next, there's the possible expulsion of the Georgia Green Party. No, it didn't happen at this year's convention, but the Green Party has a national meeting every year. Howie's on record as saying that, while he opposes expulsion, he things the GGP is totally wrong and the Lavender Caucus is all right. He's also gone along with the LC on believing its claims to have science on its side. Even short of expulsion, this stance from the party leader isn't acceptable to me.

I'm not a radical feminist of any sort, though I am a feminist. I'm not a gender-critical feminist, but I am a gender-skeptical one, as there's more than two sides on this issue. There are.

Sex is biology. Gender is culture. Human reproductive development sometimes badly botches sexual development, but sex is still biology and gender is culture. Gender, gender roles and gender ideas are based on biology, yes, but they're ultimately cultural expressions.

Decentralization has long been a GP bugaboo, to pull some links out of the GPUS vs USA issue.

One is that, from a piece on the original drafting of the Ten Key Values, they were never meant to be absolutist; "appropriate centralized regulation in certain matters" is explicitly mentioned. That said, the author of them, Mark Satin, was also a FAN of Nordhaus and Shellenberger, reflecting the still-neoliberal roots of many early Greens. Or radical centrism and New Ageism, both in Satin's history. Both of those two issues still have a fair amount of infusion in the party. That's another reason another wing of the party has resisted an ecosocialism push. In addition, the hyperfocus on "consensus," back to his New Age radical centrism already in the 1970s, had many people talking about a "diddler's cult." PERFECT description of much of what is wrong with today's GP.

Per the Green Pages News account of the split and related issues, the Green movement started in the middle 1980s.  And, the party as party is no further along than it is. Decentralization is not the only reason for that, but it is one reason for sure, IMO.

I mean, boasting that you're a federation of state GPs? That's often interpreted in a "confederation" sense, it seems. Other than that, you see "confederation" once, prominently in American history. And, the Articles of Confederation were a primer on how NOT to have a national government in America. The U.S. Constitution, besides compromises with slavery and other things, and being a conservative second American Revolution, is nonetheless much better, and MUCH much better on the issue of national government as a general concept.

Within this presidential election cycle, other problems with abuse of the idea of decentralization have popped up. The Rhode Island GP refused to send presidential delegates to the national convention, and semi-endorsed Joe Biden for bad measure. Texas GP co-chair Laura Palmer was Yang Ganging then Tulsi-stanning over basic income, then, after the GP nomination, touting indy candidate Mark Charles for the same reason or similar. The Alaska GP went off the board to nominate the loathsome — yes — Jesse Ventura.

Another issue, NOT in the Ten Key Values even (more on that below), consensus-building, is even more of a shibboleth to many long-time as well as shorter-term party members, and even activists and leaders. And, IMO, it's even more of a roadblock to building a better party. And, while the GPUSA did point out the issue of dues-paying as one disagreement with the GPUS, it had zero problems with this. One can applaud making an initial run at consensus, but it's too often pursued too long as a will o'-the  wisp. And, as I noted, made into a shibboleth.

As for those Ten Key Values? I have had some degree of unease with multiple ones of them for some time, and over the last four-five years, that unease has grown.

3. Ecological wisdom? Too often, some version of New Age bullshit. Flat-out pseudoscience in the party's official opposition to GMOs. Encourages antivaxxerism, anti-5Gism, and COVID denialism among many Greens.
5. Decentralization? Beyond its problems within the GP party structure, from someone who's seen plenty of classism in small towns, decentralization of resources, processes and inputs isn't a problem-solver. Sometimes, it's even a problem-booster.
6. Community-based economics? Per what I said above about decentralization, I'm fine with this when appropriate. Too often, it's not, and it can be used as a wedge against socialist needs.

The New Agey stuff has been an issue for years. And, by the relative paucity of openly self-acknowledged secularists and atheists I've run into in Green dialogue, I don't think that — or the degree to which it contributes to Green pseudoscience, will change.

This said, I have left two email lists related to dialogue over the Georgia GP issue. One person had largely hijacked the group at times. This, and other issues, which I won't discuss for obvious group privacy issues, nonetheless would, for non-Greens, reinforce several stereotypes.

I have not yet left the GP Facebook group. But, another outbreak of censorship will probably make that happen. I am going to do my level best to reduce participation there.

So, 2020? I may, or may not, give money to Howie. (He just asked again on Aug. 13.) I may, or may not, have a high degree of enthusiasm for his campaign.

For 2024? I respectfully suggest the Socialist Party USA wait until 2024, rather than acting in late 2023, to choose its presidential nominee. I think that's part of larger work on growing the party and its credibility. I might lend a bit of help. If you want it and support the idea. After all, I joined the GP in part because it was a party of the left. If we can build a better, better organized party of the left in the SPUSA, forward!

For 2024, part 2? I wouldn't support Dario if he gets the GP nomination, without some contrition.

For 2024, bigger picture? While I am an ecosocialist, I am not a Marxist, and I reject Marxism and anything that calls itself Marxist economics unless it TOTALLY drops anything associated with Marxism itself. Why? It's pseudoscience. No, literally.

Hegalian dialectic was, and still is, crappy philosophy. It's non-scientific, like most philosophical systems-buildings are. Made as the basis for a theory of social science, it then becomes pseudoscience on traditional grounds of judging what science is.

Related to that? I'm not an anticapitalist. I am a post-capitalist of some sort, but not an anticapitalist. And I even invented that new logo.

That said, there's a bigger ticket picture here.

Several years ago, late friend Leo Lincourt talked about, not just in politics, but in a lot of the big-ticket items of life in general, at trying to find the sweet spot in a Venn diagram overlap of some sort of left-liberalism (for him) or become more than that (for me) in political point of view, the best of non-scientism scientific thinking including new ideas, and the best of non-Gnu Atheism, non-Skeptics™ scientific and philosophical (especially for me) skepticism. (I first ran into Leo in the old Skeptics Circle blog circle. Those were the days.)

Unfortunately, the Green Party just doesn't seem close enough to that sweet spot. Jill Stein's footsie on vaccines was something I was a quasi-apologist for. Wouldn't do that again, especially now that we have a prez candidate, David Rolde, and others, going beyond her on smartphones to 5G nuttery. (Howie Hawkins, as nominee, seems sane on these issues.) And, the number of Greens horseshoing on COVID conspiracy theories (in part working off an antivaxxer base in many cases) is just ... too much.

Then, there's Howie getting attacked over alleged "Russiagate," but, while more right than wrong on that, him screwing the pooch on China-stanning for Xi Jinping Thought, or at least getting in bed with them, including his late campaign manager, Zeese. More on Xi Jinping Thought-stanning here.

So, to conclude?

I've said many times in 2016 and now that "Democrats don't own my vote."

Well? "Greens don't own my vote, either."

I'll likely still vote for Howie Hawkins. I doubt a Trot will be available for a protest write-in vote. If I give any money, it will be to Hawkins, not the Green Party, though. And, I may not do even that. I've emailed directly to his campaign finance guy, Travis Christal, asking for a copy of the "letter of interest" submitted on behalf of Jesse. And, if they're not going to cough it up, especially with the Alaska GP now nominating Jesse, then why should I care? (Travis has never emailed me back.)

I didn't get my voter registration changed in time, and didn't bother trying, and didn't really want to bother trying, per the strikethrough above. It wasn't entirely about this year's election, but it was in part. I vote based in part on foreign policy, and although Howie actually did do decently on Russiagate, his Xi Jinping Thought stanning and other things .... were just losing me. A tipping point, along with other things.

As for 2024? None of the 2020 candidates other than Hawkins is acceptable.

Labels: ,
at Friday, September 25, 2020 0 comments Posted by Gadfly

July 31, 2020

Dear Rhode Island Greens: Disband!
Dear GP National: Why haven't you booted them?

Officially asking Howie Hawkins not to run, NOT because you're Howie-haters, but because you don't want ANY GP Prez candidate on the ballot, because, in a state Hillary Clinton won by 15 percentage points in 2016, you want to make sure Trump loses?

Laughable.

Risible even from a state party that, according to the GP national elections database, has run NOBODY for a single office in the past decade. (I've been told via Twitter the party has one downballot candidate this year. Might want to let the national folks know. You could maybe also put a "candidates" link on your website. I clicked "Greens in Action," thinking I'd find something there. Nope.)

BUT! On another webpage? I found out it HAS officially endorsed a Dem before.

It's possible a state like Wyoming hasn't done that either. But, Rhode Island tilts much further left, and second, within the past decade, I believe the Wyoming GP HAS run at least one non-presidential candidate.

This, even more than the Ohio GP for years being the grifting kingdom of Bob Fitrakis, is the problem with many state GPs in a nutshell.

And, it's a problem with the national GP, when a state party openly goes duopoly-stanning. This would never happen in the Libertarian Party, to the degree my eyes and ears are open to its doings.

Sadly, the national convention did nothing about this, even though the tweet was made, and the plan adopted, in May, well before the national convention.

But, it DID have serious background noise before the convention about expelling the Green Party, over a plank in this year's party platform that most people protesting it have likely not even read and that one former party presidential candidate heard adopted without in-person dissent.

But, we can't have the Georgia GP coming even close to a gender-critical feminist take on some issues.

BUT, we can have the Rhode Island GP saying "vote Biden" while neither the party steering committee nor Howie Hawkins talks about doing anything.

Bunch of fricking AccommoGreens, and not just at the RI party level. I think Howie himself has an AccommoGreen bone or two too many, and the way he treated the SPUSA nomination as a token or whatever he said about it makes me think that even more.
Labels: ,
at Friday, July 31, 2020 1 comments Posted by Gadfly

July 27, 2020

Third quarter blogroll updates: Bye to Jacobin, among others

I'd kept Down with Tyranny on my blogroll for several years. As a Green for prez, and a Dem for Senate, etc., when no Green alternative was available, it wasn't tremendously further to the right than me. It was, though, further to the right than others in its general neck of the woods, including being a 2020 Senate race Beto-stanner. It's also been somewhat of a sucker for grifting by some organized leftish Democrat pressure groups such as Justice Dems. But it was generally a useful "bookmark" for what mainstream Berners think.

But it crossed a bridge when it ran pieces by Chemtrails Bob Fitrakis two days in a row. He's also known here as Fake Green Party Ohio fiefdom Bob Fitrakis and other things. He's an Ohio 2004 recount conspiracy theorist (another parting of the waters with Brains there), along with being a chemtrails guy; info on both at that link.

Per this link of mine, Mark Lause has laid the lumber on Ohio as having one of the most "papery" of Green Party orgs of any state. And, before he finally quit, quit the Green shell game and the AccommoGreen pose and apparently took up his Dem blue true colors, he ran that shell fiefdom.

So, you're gone. I disconnect from conspiracy theorists in general. As of the time I started this, DWT just went to my links list. But it may be gone, period.

Beyond the above, it's tribalist blather. Take a recent post on the ongoing Libyan Civil War. Ignores that Dear Leader was the prez who ordered the bombing. In its sub-Dem tribalism, it ignores that Bernie was OK with that.

===

Jacobin is getting closer to being there. It's hugely uneven and unfocused editorially, running from Russian Revolution stanning in November 1917 to being conventional Bernie DSA Roses in current domestic politics without ever mentioning third parties. Biggest part of that nuttery is editor Bhaskar Sunkata saying he was going to vote for Howie (which presumed Howie would get the GP nomination) while rejecting any idea of boosting the Green Party.

As I Tweeted back then:
I stand by that. Even as I also stand by saying that the Green Party, and its usefulness as a third party of the left, have probably peaked.

I've also gotten into argument with Jacobin's Branko Marcetic over whether or not Evo Morales committed a semi-coup. He did, you and other non-skeptical lefties. As with others of his ilk on this issue, I said I'm willing to say what happened to him in his semi-coup election was a coup IF you will admit that what he did was a semi-coup. He refused.

And, this past week, Jacobin went too far. At least three encomia to the recently passed Michael Brooks, none of them mentioning he was a Green-disser, and having nothing about the passing a month ago of an actual Socialist, 2016 SPUSA presidential candidate Mimi Soltysik. Per Sunkata, Jacobin can blather about "socialism" all the time elsewhere, but when it turns its focus back to American politics, nothing further left than DSA Roseys is allowed. Bye, Jacobin.

==

Carl Beijer, whom I should have dropped long ago, is now gone. When alleged former Green Party campaigner started not only stanning for the Dems but lecturing Greens about stuff related to the Green New Deal, he should have been gone. Now that "he" has changed platforms, and I realized that's why I hadn't gotten any recent feeds, and that his new site is a group blog, pass. And, he's apparently been doing group writing for some time. Roger Bellin, one of the persons allegedly associated with the account, is a DSA Rosey. The "he" creator is Berner Jacob Fawcett, with a protected Twitter account. I highly doubt he, Fawcett "Beijer," was ever the Green he pretended to be.


========

Added: Wall Street on Parade. A great look at the lunacy and grift of the street itself, the Fed, and duopoly politicians.

Added: Encylopedia of American Loons. It adds entries about twice a week and is on the T's, so will probably be done this year. Maybe it will recycle or start anew after that.

Added: Yale Climate Connections. Good before, and now the home of the former Category 6 commentary from Weather Underground.

Added: Capital and Main. It's "Democratic," but challenges ConservaDems, and in ways, and on specific ConservaDem persons (Cal gov Gavin Newsom on coronavirus) that Down with Tyrrany was suckers about. That said, even at the sub-presidential level, I doubt it would tout a third-party candidate.
Labels:
at Monday, July 27, 2020 0 comments Posted by Gadfly

April 22, 2020

No, Jesse, No! (and apparently, he ain't) —
er, unless his ass is kissed

Not Jesse Jackson, but Jesse Ventura, formerly "The Body," talking about asking to be let inside the Green Party presidential candidate tent now.

Jill Stein was stanning for him last November. She discussed that, Russiagate and Howie Hawkins' take on it and more in this excerpt from an interview by Primo Nutbar, officially known as Primo Nutmeg. (I've briefly mentioned him before here, and run into him in more depth on Twitter. He earns the renaming.)

The "more"?

NOTE: See updates at bottom.

And new update here:

 Jesse claimed "the logistics are not going to happen." He claimed he'd have to give up his job and lose health insurance. I have no idea what this claim means. If he means his RT talk show? The Fairness Doctrine doesn't exist, so no, he wouldn't have to do that, and it's questionable whether RT being registered as a foreign agent means he'd have to quit. If he means that he'd have to not work in order to actively campaign? That was always going to be the case.

This gets more "delicious" with another story from this announcement, where he says he's open to the GP nominating him at a brokered convention. Really, Jesse? But, wouldn't you still have to quit your RT job because it's RT, or else just to have time to actively campaign? In either case, the same limitations apply as if you decided to run now.

What a lying sack of shit. Or box of dicks.

Beyond that, Jesse is over 65 and thus eligible for Medicare.

There's also one other possibility. Maybe Jesse didn't want to have to file an FEC financial disclosure, for whatever reason.

 And an earlier update.

 Now, Cimbrelo is a DSA Rosey who became a Green after St. Bernard of Vermont lost again, then like a good St. Bernard, started sheepdogging. I have no idea what connectedness he has to Ventura, and like Primo Nutbar, he trades in "on background" claims by not naming names.
Also, like Primo Nutbar on April 23, Jesse himself has said nothing.

On Book of Face, Cimbrelo claimed he'd been tapped to be Jesse's Massachusetts chair for Jesse. Why? What makes him special there? And was somebody playing him?

Back to the original.

When Stein heard about the idea of libertarian Jesse Ventura (noted as such in my review of potential GP candidates), and conspiracy theorist Jesse Ventura (he is), running for the Green Presidential nomination, and that antivaxxer RFK Jr. would be his wingman if Jesse had his druthers, she was all for it. He's also a HAARP conspiracy theorist.

And finally, he's an antivaxxer. He will of course claim "I just want people to be informed." Well, dude, no you don't. You'd have a person like Paul Offit on the show if you did and NOT RFK Jr. This is the RFK Jr who says we only had to get a few shots in 1954. Yeah, dude, and things like the polio shot WEREN'T AVAILABLE. We also had no vaccine against the highly contagious measles, or German measles, or mumps, when you were a kid.

Finally, for Bobby Kennedy Jr. to pounce on Offit's saying it was like he'd won the lottery with the money he got for the rotavirus vaccine? Wow, I guess a megamillionaire heir to the Kennedy family fame and FORTUNE is begrudging the son of a shirtmaker some money.

Beyond the outright conspiracy theories, just in his time as governor of Minnesota, he seemed to be as much a political weathervane as Trump.

As for Primo Nutbar, who started this?
Jesse was blathering about running last November, which is why Stein was stanning for him then.

Of course, back then, it was as an independent.

See, Jesse's also got an ego almost as big as Trump's. He wants to be courted, maybe?

Or, Primo Nutbar was just making shit up. Not surprising.
There you are. And so, I tweeted back to Primo asking him to name names on these sources.

And, I've since retweeted this tweet by Ventura and tagged Nutbar in it.
BOOM.

After that, noticing that Nutbar had retweeted other Ventura tweets since I first called him out? I Tweeted to him again, asking him to retweet the Tweet above, which of course he won't. (The next morning, 12 hours later, he hadn't. Bernie→ Green Congress candidate Kenneth Mejia had retweeted Primo's claim, so I did a Tweet-all on that.)

And, since I'm in that kind of mood? I reported his original tweet and one other to Twitter.

Another option is that we have a Mike Gravel in reverse. Some Ventura aide is trying to push him to run, and that's Primo's "sources."

Or there's a third option.

Essentially, Primo played telephone with his friends, perhaps including assistants to / entourage of Ventura, and now is his own source, and is OK with that because he wants Ventura to run and birds of a conspiracy theory flock together.

Or, there's a fourth reason. (This, and the reasons above, are not mutually exclusive.)

Nutbar is pretty well known for not liking Howie Hawkins among Green candidates. With Hawkins off to a strong lead over Dario Hunter, maybe Nutbar is looking for a last-ditch attempt to block Howie. (I don't totally agree with Howie on Russia, but he's far from all wet. Meanwhile, Nutbar is one of those allegedly outside-the-box America is always wrong on foreign policy stenos. And, stenos they are.)

(Update, June 26: Primo broke the news two weeks earlier that Jesse was crapping in the bed of the Green Party and would write in his own name for prez. Here's my take on not only that basic fact, but related, and ongoing, censorship by the Green Party, since their official Facebook group IS official that makes the censorship official.)

==

Meanwhile, Kenneth Mejia is (perhaps willingly) being led around by the nose on this.

I say the perhaps willingly because the 2018 Green congressional candidate claims he was a Biden supporter. Really? Yes, really per his Twitter profile. And his currently pinned post makes things only worse.
Re his profile, and related indirectly to this, I subtweeted:
And even that may be generous.

Mejia's also either an idiot or lying about something else, namely the claim that Ventura's not a Libertarian. He voted for Libertarian Gary Johnson in 2012 and 2016 and publicly said so. A month later, he said so again, as late as August 2016. FYI, Johnson is a lifetime member, by purchased membership, of the Libertarian Party. I was told since my original post that Jesse actually voted for Stein in 2016, and apparently so. ("Apparently so" means this is his claim; who knows whether it's true or not. Note that in neither the first or second link, does he even mention Stein.)

"Congrats." He was still a Libertarian in 2012, a professed Libertarian in 2016, and became a flip-flopper some time between then and November 2016. Does that really make you feel that much better about him? Especially, per that link that he reportedly interviewed Johnson ON ELECTION NIGHT. Let that hypocrisy sink in. (The Reddit piece is based on an Alex Jones video; dunno if it's archived elsewhere, since Alex is not on YouTube any more!)

But wait, wait! It gets even better!

Here's Jesse and his campaign guru in his Minnesota gov run, Dean Barkley, giving The Donald himself two hours of advice about how they ran Ventura's gov race and what Trump might learn!



And, like Ron Popeil? That's not all, folks!

Go to just before the end of the piece. The announcer notes that Ventura said in 2015 he'd be OK being selected as Trump's Veep.

(More ass-kissing here. Jesse thinks that Trump's money is proof he's smart. No, it's proof he inherited his dad's money and his dad's mob ties.)

So, got that clear? Having voted for Johnson in 2012, and claiming in the summer of 2016 he would do so again, before flip-flopping to Stein, in between all that, Jesse gave Trump campaign advice after saying he'd be good running with him.

And speaking of Trump? I caught Ventura in a Trumpian lie In this 2018 interview, he says he doesn't Tweet. Funny, his Twitter account was started in 2013, and at least recently, he tweets or retweets several times a day.

Meanwhile, Mejia keeps trying to split hairs, to juice Green interest for all the wrong reasons, to let himself be led by the nose by Primo Nutbar, or else to willingly lead others by the nose.

He keeps talking and talking and talking and talking  ... about this alleged letter of interest. I've asked him to show me a PDF.
And, with that, I decided to start reporting Tweets of his. Category: Misleading about an election.

And, a good old word from when I was a kid? "Twerp" would be a quick one-word summary of my take on Mejia.


==

Someone else on the GP Facebook group mentioned Ron Placone. (I assume they meant him, not Ron Pacone.)

Placone is a comic who has appeared on Jimmy Dore (nuff ced) and who I'd never heard of before. But, teh Google and his Twitter feed showed he had a speculative YouTube video a few days ago that asked the rhetorical question "WILL Jesse run?" Note the diff?

Primo Nutbar either misheard the video, or else decided what the hell. And signal-boosted and further distorted.

This is otherwise a circle-jerk by people wanting to circle-jerk and be circle-jerked.

==

As for Greens who stan for Jesse in general? I didn't need new psychological research to tell me that celebrity worshipers have mental health problems on social media. Besides, you're about as bad as Libertarians waiting for the next ex-Republican to save them.

And, I suspect Mejia is flacking the Jesse untruth because he's been the benefit of celebrity worship himself within Green Party circles.

==

Update, April 29: I was asked on Twitter, if Jesse DID enter the race AND got the GP nomination, what my vote option would be?

Simple. Howie Hawkins already has the SPUSA nomination, and SPUSA's Mimi Soltysik was available by write-in here in Tex-ass in 2016. That said, between COVID and the possibility of Howie getting both nods, I'm not sure what, if anything, SPUSA has done, not only in Texas but other states, for ballot access this year.

Oh? For a variety of reasons, I almost pulled the SPUSA lever in 2016. In hindsight, as a "marker" if nothing else, I wish I would have.

==

Update May 1: Because I don't have any plans on voting for him, I didn't think (even with all the above information) that Jesse would be Just.Another.Politician.™, but he is!

Because, as it turns out, on April 27, he said:
So, parsing this?

I tweeted back tonight:
There you go. Mr. Johnson→ Trump→ claiming Johnson again→ allegedly Stein voter, you wanna prove that just maybe you're NOT Just.Another.Politician.™? Now's your chance.

In reality, this is as likely as Primo Nutbar naming his sources for his original leak 10 days ago. (Said leak now stands in a new light, though.)

I also have to "love" at least one Green Jesse-stanner who tried to explain away all the flip-flopping WITHIN that one, election, year, as Jesse just changing his mind. Out of curiosity, I double-checked the date on Jesse's 2016 comment about voting for Johnson again, and it was AFTER the Libertarian convention, so he couldn't have been angling for the Veep spot (like he DID say he wanted to run with Trump). Add to all of this that Stein, like Johnson, had run in 2012 as well as 2016.

Finally, one more shot at Jesse the conspiracy theorist. WHOSE show was he on when he announced he had voted for Stein after all?

Update, May 16: I webmailed the GP a request for that letter two weeks ago. Earlier this letter, at that account, I got a "welcome to the Green Party" form letter email back. I immediately responded with this: "Hey, thanks for sending me a form letter. Now, send me a copy of the letter of interest that Jesse Ventura's minions sent the Party. I asked for it a full week ago or more."

(Update, June 26: A week ago, I asked the party's Presidential Campaign Support Committee, by email not webmail, to cough up the letter. Hasn't happened.)

==

Jesse Ventura wasn't "progressive" as Minnesota governor, either. He repeatedly attacked the state teachers union, for example.

There's an issue behind that, too.

Jesse claimed property taxes were regressive. Maybe that's because he has a 32-acre horse farm.

Sadly, I forgot that these rumors aren't true. As David Bruce Collins reported in 2018, they were flying then. Also sadly, DBC didn't look the reality of Gift Horse Jesse in the mouth more, as I commented back then on lesser info than I have now.
Labels: , ,
at Wednesday, April 22, 2020 4 comments Posted by Gadfly

March 19, 2020

Elbow-throwing Berniecrat doesn't get why Greens
aren't more welcoming to his blessed self

Via the not-worthy-of-snarky-names for this piece Brains, a 2016 Berniecrat, Carl Peterson, decided to re-identify as Green to run for the LA School Board.

His take is interesting. And, I'd half-agree. But not fully. And maybe not even half-agree.  Probably more one-quarter agree.

A number of Greens do see Dems as "equally evilism" rather than "lesser evilism." And aren't very accommodating. But others mean it when they say "lesser evilism." So, no

OTOH, many 2016 Berniecrats, as I know from experience in both multiple unofficial and one official GP Facebook groups, come in thinking that Bernie Sanders is god's greatest gift to American electoral politics since sliced bread.

He ain't, and he ain't even close.

Many Greens, like me, are Green in part due to foreign policy issues, and while 2020 Bernie is better than 2016 Bernie, he ain't that good. He still opposes BDS. Until very recently, he wouldn't call out Netanyahu, and he still won't call out Zionist-apartheid politicians and parties in Israel in general.


While he voted against the Iraq War, he voted in favor of bombing Libya. While he's voted to end us supporting the war in Yemen, he still believes the bipartisan foreign policy establishment in claiming that Assad is behind all chemical weapons attacks in Syria.

And I haven't even talked about him lusting after F35s. To go with that old screengrab, more here from this post which sparked Brains' ire or whatever, about Bernie largely being part and parcel of the foreign policy establishment and the national security establishment.

And, even domestically, the Democrats' Green New Deal is both a pale imitation of and ripoff of the Green Party's original version, crafted in large part by presidential candidate Howie Hawkins.

Which makes this comment:
As the California primary approached, I carefully eyed the candidacies of Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, especially as the Greens neglected to put anyone forward that I viewed as capable to assume the presidency.

Laughable.

Presuming an attitude to accompany that comment has been on display, is it any wonder that many Greens would be unwelcoming? I may have tangled with Peterson myself AFAIK.

Frankly, if he DID stay inside the GP, he'd probably be an AccommoGreen who would want to make the party into a new version of overrated DSA Roses.

As for Brains' take on Howie preaching "New McCarthyism"? I don't know if he's been sniffing the Seth Rich conspiracy theory glue too much or what on Hillary's emails. Howie's position is closer to the ... speaking of ... bipartisan foreign party establishment than mine, and he knows about it via Twitter and FB.

That said, it's not exactly the same as the foreign policy establishment's.

My stance? Russia DID meddle, and the Mueller report et al shows that. It just didn't meddle exclusively in favor of Trump. Calling Russia out for that doesn't ignore U.S. meddling in Russia and elsewhere, and I know Howie agrees with that.

Otherwise, as far as "New McCarthyism"? No, I see that as a certain group of new activists inside the GP and have a blog post upcoming about that.

 That said, in light of that, Brains is right, in my lesser experience, about some Green Party people being a problem.

 I think it's kind of a vicious circle. The GP's decentralization has let many state parties become little fiefdoms (even more than happens in state duopoly parties). Once they get hold, if they're bad leaders, that anti-cream (scum?) will rise to the top. That personal dysfunctionality then affects the state parties involved. A fair degree of disorganization also comes into play.

 Side note: For either new(ish) Greens or old time AccommoGreens who don't like this piece? Maybe you're part of the problem, not the solution.
Labels: ,
at Thursday, March 19, 2020 0 comments Posted by Gadfly
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)