« The Loony Left in Denver | Main | Nutsy School Administrators »

August 17, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I agree.

Antonio D'Lallo says no to McKinney and Clemente!! They both lost my dedication and vote! I requested my donation back from their campaign and will give it to our local campaigns here in Colorado. What a mean spirited group of people that surround that campaign!? The vicious attacks on the hard work of Claire Ryder and the Metro Denver Greens. Our national party sucks too!!

As a Green, I am very disappointed in the way you folks have handled this situation. Your public attacks on the McKinney campaign are very inappropriate, unprofessional and frankly petty. To suggest that the McKinney campaign is becoming an advocate of violence is ridiculous.

A former DEMOCRATIC DISTRICT LEADER George Martinez supports Rosa Clemente
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SCw0DPKDpU

MC NYOil known for his scathing attacks on materialism, sexism, violence in Hip Hop who was invited to be on Obama's mix tape for the Hip Hop community switches support to McKinney/Clemente
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz_C1aOMa0U

A former Democratic Party official, an MC invited to be on Obama's mix tape . . . supporting McKinney/Clemente. These ARE mainstream people of color. These have been part of the mainstream Democratic Party. Regardless of whatever slight may have occurred you are out of touch with where the support is coming from.

You miscast Rosa's comments which shows that Revolution, which people had thought as violent, can come through thought provoking activism.

I think a superb bridge is being built when one can see Workers World and a Democratic District Leader supporting the same ticket. It's the common ground that moves the Green Party into the mainstream.

Wow. McCarthyite redbaiting in the Green Party?
I think you forgot one more recommendation.
http://www.solidarity-us.org/obama

The lack of critical thinking in the post from 'Paul Robeson's Ghost' is always disappointing to see. I appreciate insightful discussion.

There is nothing 'McCarthyite' in my critique of the McKinney campaign. I was not stating that there is anything hidden about McKinney's agenda, nor did I imply anything 'un-American' -- I merely pointed out her public acceptance of the endorsements of two radical Marxist organizations. Greens and other folks can decide for themselves whether or not the philosophy and aims of these groups is their cup of tea.

My question asks -- is this the direction in which we want to see the Green Party of the United States headed? Should we let McKinney-Clemente turn the GPUS into an inconsequential, fringe, nutty-left reactionary political bloc?

In my opinion, 'no'.

Oh my! The Green Party will drift in the direction of black radicalism and socialism instead of catering to white middle class Starbucks customers. Oh, the horror, I say!

So if a former Democratic District Leader and an MC who was under consideration for a Grammy nomination and who was going to support Obama come over, you see Workers World and rebuke the candidates. It's seems George Martinez and NYOil didn't run away. Roseanne Barr has endorsed Cynthia too. Maybe Workers World has come around to coalition politics. Even some Ron Paul supporters are coming over.

Maybe they understand the importance of working together in fighting for common issues instead of fighting people and labels. Maybe it means something important is happening when a former 6 term Democratic Congressperson is endorsed by organizations and people coming from such a wide spectrum.

Sounds very mainstream rather than sectarian. Maybe McKinney/Clemente are creating a new variant of Populism where people who had worked under many labels can work together.

This is an act of betrayal to the Green Party by these two self-appointed "leaders."

I had forgotten what white flight looked like...

BTW Dave I really do understand your concerns. I just don't think you're handling this the best way it can be. Certainly others may not have either but in politics there are ways to gracefully handle such differences.

I see first hand people from disparate backgrounds and political tendencies coming together for McKinney/Clemente that this can be a breakthrough campaign. Once doesn't get to 6 terms in Congress without some ability to pull people together and motivate them. In fact being as outspoken as McKinney has been it's truly an accomplishment that she got to that point. Rosa has been at the forefront at developing Hip Hop as a sound organized political movement. Former Democratic District Leader is an example of one person who's been with her on that for some time.

Red-baiting and anti-immigrant demagogery and all this and Mr. Chandler says Ms. Clemente doesn't know the difference between radical and reactionary?

Kolorado has a long history of red-baiting and anti-immigrant demagogery.

"A FIGHT FOR THE HEART AND SOUL OF COLORADO
by Jim Hick and bobbolink, copyright 2008

In the 1920s, Colorado was one of the most racist states in the union, certainly in the west. As a black man coming into this state, I was told about the miners, cowboys and the pioneer spirit.

We don't hear about the Ku Klux Klan and the way their racist beliefs dominated this state.
This omission is understandable because the picture of a mile-long line of torch-bearing, robed and hooded Klan members winding up Lookout Mountain for a cross burning is embarrassing.

The governor of the state, Clarence Morley, was a KKK member, as was one of Colorado's U.S. Senators. Denver's mayor, Ben Stapleton, was member number 1128 of the state Klan.

We Coloradans don't like to think of how the Klan swept through so many towns leaving animosity and division in it's wake. Images of a secret society focused on the eradication of immigrants, especially Italians, and any religion other than Protestant doesn't fit in with the image we wish to project of this state. Their rants were heard all over Colorado, creating a state of fear and intimidation for over 12 years..."

more at: http://tinyurl.com/6bqslz

Sounds like the whinings of some old white guy who has a hard time accepting diversity within the Green Party. This is the exact sort of attitude that needs to be eliminated from the Green Party. This type of attitude is elitist and will do nothing to build the Green Party. If you are into navel gazing and preaching to the choir, then go somewhere else. We are trying to build a political party here, not an echo chamber.

Yes! Let's pull the race card when all reason and logic fail.

Both Dave and Claire have not forced their opinion or vote on anyone. Greens in Colorado are free to vote their conscience and support whom they like; if you disagree fine.

I think we've been "bamboozled" by McKinney and Clemente.

Well folks! It's a wash. McKinney/Clemente posted 145,725 unofficial votes at the national level, about 0% once the numbers are rounded evenly. What a waste of time! Cynthia McKinney and her ilk have sucked valuable time and resources from the national Green Party and from the campaigns of some excellent Greens in Colorado. All of this aside, we should have endorsed Nader/Gonzales and saved ourselves the headache here in Colorado. The 2012 General Election will be run differently in Colorado; you can count on it!!!!!

No more egoists and prima donnas, just good ol' fashion, dedicated Greens who've worked hard for the party and with the party for some time. Colorado Greens will vet our presidential candidates much better next time and not get caught up in all the hype over one individual.

As far as all the accusations and juvenile name calling against the Colorado Greens, let's say that you will see us at the national level conferences again and will have an opportunity to get to know us a little better. Basically, neither the Greens at the center of this contraversy from Colorado nor I am going away. We will continue to work for a better and "greener" Colorado.

See you all soon,
Tony D'Lallo

P.S. By the way, I posted/received 979 votes as of last count (11/05/08, 8:00 pm) and got 4.04% of the vote for Colorado State House District 34, so I did not "lose miserably" as hoped by some of McKinney's followers! I actually gave a voice and a vote to LGBT voters in my district.

Thank you Claire Ryder and Dave Chandler for your courage and strength during this time! You supported local Colorado Greens and helped grow our party here in the Rocky Mountains. I wish I could say as much for the 2008 Presidential candidate.

If her 'ilk' had spent more time on her campaign than writing shitty posts to Colorado Greens, then she may have posted some more votes in her election. As it was, you guys spent most of your time ridiculing and attacking the Colorado Green leadership rather than running her campaign properly and helping us here toward organizing her campaign in Colorado. McKinney was set to have volunteers work for her campaign in Adams, Jefferson, Denver, and Arapahoe counties. We were ready to get signatures in Wyoming during August but her campaign didn't get the paperwork to us; they were busy fucking aroung with Ward Churchill and the Recreate '68 crew. So, I do wish we had worked with Nader/Gonzales. In the future, we will look very closely at the background of the next Green presidential candidate; it won't be a disgruntled Democrat looking to have his/her ego prodded!!

Thank goodness Nader/Gonzales didn't combine their campaign to McKinney or promise her anything like a cabinet post! McKinney was too busy with the Recreate '68 crew and Ward Churchill to work with local Greens. The Adams, Jefferson, Denver, and Arapahoe Green Party locals were poised to volunteer steadily during her campaign. Also, we sent in paperwork to her campaign so that we could get her on the Wyoming ballot. We heard nothing back and did not receive anything back! The national asked some of our members to help out in Nebraska to get names for the ballot there and we had some people in Denver ready to go! Her campaign did not connect with our people. You keep on emailing this blog and expecting us to break and say we were wrong, but we did everything to help her campaign prior to the DNC and she turned around and did exactly the opposite of what we had asked her not to do; don't work with Recreate '68. Simple respect for local candidates and volunteers working for her here in Denver. We had candidates whose major value and plank was and still is Non-Violence and we could not be expected to stand along side Rosa and Cynthia while with Ward Churchill and other anarchists. Anarchists do not share Green Party values! Saab, you seem committed to Cynthia and Rosa. I do hope you start a political party of your own and have them run on your ticket.

So, this is probably moot at this point, but...

This whole conversation smacks of Euro-centric, white male values. Its awfully pious to assert that any person, particularly the indigenous or people of color, do not have a right to deal with oppression the best way they see fit. With all the damage that the white male "leadership" has done in this country (and the Green Party) and the rest of the world, how DARE anyone that self-identifies as a "green" or a "radical" defend this system against those trying to militantly oppose it?

While on this subject, there is nothing counter to the Ten Key Values in being militant. Gandhi's "non-violent" movement was militant and fairly radical. The Key Value is non-violence -- not passivism.

Indeed, the "non-violence" Key Value clearly states:

"We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations."

What does non-violence mean? The white, spineless, "politically correct" left needs to overcome their aversion to more realistic interpretations of non-violence, and come off their self-righteous high horse. Logically, non-violence should mean that no harm comes to life in the tactics used to bring about change. Property destruction doesn't count as "violence." Militant direct action where no one is harmed does not constitute violence. The fact that some in the Green Party are willing to give into (not only that, but DEFEND) the definition of non-violence given by the establishment -- the same establishment that each day commits numerous, unspeakably violent acts against a large part of the population of the world -- is truly incredible.

I don't think there's anything that Cynthia McKinney or Rosa Clemente said that fall outside of that, or are/were not in line with the politics of the Green Party.

What is wrong with Ward Churchill? What is wrong with indigenous people continuing to fight for the land that is still occupying by a colonizing force? What is wrong with people siding with them in their struggle? This is called solidarity.

It's just another form of white dominance to say, "You have a right to oppose what we do, but only on our terms, through the means that we sanction." Someone that is at the receiving end of colonial domination is not going to think too highly of that.

And what about the other key values? Certainly, respect for a diversity of tactics needs to happen, as well as standing in solidarity with all people, through all oppressions.

The inability of Greens to understand oppression is one of the fundamental roadblocks to becoming a mainstream party. Undoubtedly, the Green Party is overwhelmingly white and of privilege. Instead of understanding this, and trying to reach out in meaningful ways to the struggles of others -- through race traitor politics, building a white movement that will have some resources to be able to meaningfully stand in solidarity and work hand in hand with people of color and other minorities in their struggles, or any number of other ways -- they force their privileged analysis on communities in struggle and act puzzled when no one jumps on board.

To sit in your suburban house, with your comfortable income, not knowing anything about worrying where your next meal comes from, or being exploited on the job, or being deported, etc., etc., and saying to people that live that struggle every day, "Now, now, I stand with you, but we can't go about this too radically..." is just a smack in the face to those communities.

This chasm of understanding must be overcome before the Green Party can hope to find any relevance anywhere.

I am well aware of the Green Party's internal dysfunctions, personality conflicts, and infighting. Only when this is overcome will the Green Party stand any chance of being relevant on the political scene. That will necessitate respect for a diversity of tactics and an inclusive atmosphere.

I think the McKinney/Clemente ticket deserves our praise. To my recollection this was the first all female, all "of color" ticket in US history. It was a historic race.

The problems you cite with paperwork and disorganization is a systemic problem with the national Green Party. It has always been there. It was especially there in 2004 and it's no surprise that it was there again this year. I don't think the campaign can be blamed for this. They took on the task of running on a party ticket that has resources that are next to nothing, in an atmosphere of vitriol at the national level. They did what they could with it.

The point of the Green Party is to build a radical presence outside of the two-party structure. It's not an attempt to build another Democratic Party named the Green Party of the United States.

Lastly, I will only say briefly that your state-sponsored views on anarchism and revolution are totally off-base. Revolution can come about through non-violent means. Also, anarchism in not inherently violent. Tolstoy was an anarchist, and there is a rich tradition of "christian anarchism," as well as other religious anarchists. These traditions are not just non-violent, but passive.

In addition, anarchism is simply the advocation of the elimination of the state, authority, and hierarchy in all its forms. Most often, it also calls for the elimination of capitalism. Violence need not be inherent in any of this, though most anarchists do not rule out violent struggle. Again, however, this would be in line with self-defense, which the "non-violence" Key Value supports the right to. If you're not part of the ruling elite, you are oppressed under this system and any act to overcome that constitutes an act of self-defense.

Saab brings up many good points that are well worth listening to.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo

Contact Dave Chandler

Become a Fan

CONTRIBUTE!

  • Dave Chandler accepts contributions -- not tax deductible.

    Mail to:
    Dave Chandler
    7930 Kendall Street
    Arvada, CO 80003

Notices

  • Legal Disclaimer
    The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES. The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.
  • Copyright
    Original commentary and photographs:
    Copyright 2006-2016 Dave Chandler.
  • Fair Use
    This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.