[Sosfbay-discuss] Lorna Salzman on Chris Hedges

[Tian Harter]

Mark Lause wrote:

>One more is all I have time for right now....  Saying that things improved
>after 2006 doesn't make what I said about the impact of 2004 outdated.  The
>impact of 2004 was what it was regardless of what happened afterwards.  And,
>if vote totals measured the state of the party rather than voter discontent,
>we'd have been in great shape in 2001.  But we weren't.
>
>A lot of these state organizations consist of local groups that don't
>actually meet or do anything.  2004 left my entire state with only one or
>two local groups functioning.  Despite the fact that this situation really
>hadn't improved in 2006, we did run some good state campaigns.  Yet, those
>tens of thousands of votes did not leave us an organization with appreciably
>more people.  It never made us better at involving and integrating new
>people into the party.
>  
>
What state is your local state? Here in Santa Clara County there
might only be one or two active Green groups, but in California
there are A LOT more than that.

>These are the things that measure the strength of the party.
>  
>
If I went into a room and saw half a dozen or so normal looking
peace activists and somebody told me they were responsible
for somebody with no name recognition getting "tens of thousands
of votes" I would be impressed. I would think "these people are
shaking the power tree." Wow!

>Whoever is nominated--and whoever's doing the nominating--MUST focus on
>building an alternative to the corporate two-parties.  Historically, not a
>single third party tried to play footsies with the Democrats without ending
>up amputees bleeding to death.....  Every would-be power-broker thinks that
>this rule won't apply to them, but it will.
>  
>
Part of building an alternative is realizing the power of bragging rights.
If you can say "I got ten thousand votes" and you have the ability
to prove it, that amounts to bulletproof bragging rights that nobody
can take away. It's not much by itself, but it's a bite out of the incubents
hide. Keep taking a bit more here and a bit more there, and soon
we're talking about real change!

>WHY we run...and HOW we run...is much more important to me than WHO we run,
>though we can clearly pick someone who's not going to give us what we need.
>
>I'm just a rank-and-filer and I have no illusions that I will have real
>voice in who the party nominates in 2008, and I am open to supporting any
>candidate in 2008.
>
>But I joined the Green Party because I have faced the simple reality that
>the two corporate parties exist to wage war on our interests and our values
>and to garner public support for doing these things.  And, when all's said
>and done, I will NOT support a meaningless going-through-the-motions
>fig-leaf of a campaign aimed at giving backhanded support to the Democrats.
>  
>
In 2004 I put hundreds of hours into Stephanie Schaaf's campaign
for city council because I couldn't get enthused about helping Cobb
much. However, we did arrange two speaking oportunities for him
here in Santa Clara County, and he did do a good job both times.
It was also nice of him that he didn't complain that we only drummed
up a hundred folks or so to hear his message. That seems like as
much as we could have asked from a no name Candidate. On election
day I had no trouble voting for the guy, and I'm still okay with it.

Yeah, Nader was much better for us in many ways when he wanted
to be a Green Candidate, but that was then and this is now...

-- 
Tian
http://tian.greens.org
We had an earthquake during this evening's Green Party meeting.