Greens Tussle in Tulsa

Chris wrote:

I voted for Cobb/LaMarche in 2004, and I thought they were both excellent campaigners. I really hope that they will both run again in 2008 to help us build the Green Party.

Why would there be a split now when the party is growing by leaps and bounds? If Camejo wants to leave the Green Party, then he should. After all, he ran as a candidate for some other party in 2004, didn't he?

Gus replied:

The “safe states” strategy, which was a capitulation to the Democrats, was the creation of the Cobb/LaMarche team. I don’t know if you are familiar with this whole history? I won’t go into it at length here, but the result of “safe states” was to cause a rift in the Green Party between those who wanted to go “all out” for a candidate who supported Green values (Naderites), and those who supported Kerry out of fear of Bush (Cobbites).

This rift continues until today, and has been exacerbated by the fact that the nomination selection process a year ago in Milwaukee was badly flawed. The convention last week in Tulsa seems to have shown that the Cobb minority (estimated at about 12% of registered Greens in 2004) has gained control of the party and is refusing to support the principal of “one-Green-one-vote,” which is essential to our survival as an independent grass-roots democratic organization.

To say that Cobb and LaMarche were excellent campaigners really depends on your definition. At one point in the campaign, LaMarche stated publicly that she wasn’t sure if she would vote for herself in her own state of Maine. Cobb did campaign, but only after a clear majority of Greens let him know that's what they wanted. But, in my opinion, he was really campaigning for control of the Green Party. In 2004, Cobb got barely a third of the votes of registered Greens. He is now working with Democrats, and seems dedicated to taking the Green Party on a course which will make it just another progressive movement that has been co-opted, then slowly destroyed, by the Democratic Party: a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America. Cobb is a compulsive politician, and will certainly run again in 2008, if the electoral process is still functioning by then, but he will be running as a Green Democrat, not as a Green— and “Green Democrat” is an oxymoron or a kind of gypsy curse.

This symbol from the PDA homepage, apparently their official logo, a green donkey, should offend every Green.

I’m not at all sure about the growth rate of the Green Party right now. It should be growing rapidly because of the great number of progressive thinkers who have become completely fed up with the Democrats. The Green Party should be seeing its membership surging. Why, then, is David Cobb partying with Democrats? Does anyone really think that he’ll lead progressive Democrats to the Green Party before the whole Green Party gets sucked up by the Dems?

Neither Camejo nor Nader left the Green Party. Cobb led the Green Party to reject Nader and Camejo. He led the Texas GP in 2003 to change their bylaws to permit only a registered Green from being on the ballot in Texas. This was intended as a direct attack on Nader, since Ralph has always remained an independent, as he was in 2000, when he was supported by the Greens. In fact his candidacy was successful enough to gain minor party status for the Pennsylvania GP, a status which will no doubt be lost in 2006.

Camejo is doing his best to save the Green Party. Check out the GDI (Greens for Democracy and Independence) website

An alarming number of people still believe that the Democrats are a viable alternative to Republicans, that Bill Clinton was a person of the people. The error is in blind party loyalty, in mistaking the past for the present, in mistaking words for actions. Beware of this same thing happening to the Greens. Never place loyalty to the Green Party above loyalty to the ten key values. Growth of Green Party registrations is nothing to cheer about if, at the same time, the party itself is moving away from Green values and merging with the duopoly.

Chris, I hope this explains my concerns of where the GP is headed, and why I don’t trust Cobb. I hope I’m wrong, but the reports from Tulsa don’t sound good for the future of Green Values.

The consensus in Bucks County is to stay focused on local issues and not worry too much about where the national and state parties are headed. If the emerging energy crisis is only half as bad as I believe it will be, very few people will be attending national conventions by 2008, and the political horizon will be unrecognizable from today’s. All politics will become intensely local. Green values will get a real test in interesting times. We’re almost half way to $5 a gallon gasoline and heating oil. If petroleum prices exceed $5 in the next year or two, what will happen to social cohesion in Philly? That’s certainly something to think about.

Best wishes for advancing civilization in your corner of the cosmos,

Gus Linton