COLUMN 101, JANUARY 1, 2004
(Copyright 2004 The Blacklisted Journalist)

Portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a
news, discussion and debate service of the Committees
of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It
says it aims to provide varied material of interest to people
on the Left and characterizes itself as an Internet voice of the Left.  THE BLACKLISTED JOURNALIST sometimes includes Portside dispatches on our Email Pages.

* * *


[The crack of dawn has come for a brave bunch of Green Party members, who now see that because the Commies and Socialists of the Weimar Republic hated each other more than they hated the Nazis, they both ended up in the gas chambers with the Jews. That there IS a difference between the lesser and greater evils. A tremendous difference. This brave bunch of Green Party members have opened their eyes to reality that it would be in the better interests of everybody to unite in opposition to the fascists, who took control of America with the help of the 97,488 votes Ralph Nader diverted from the Democrats in Florida during the 2000 presidential election. The Green Party, of course, remains in a state of denial about this, preferring to blame the fascist victory in Florida solely on Jeb Bush's ballot thievery. Of course, with all of Jeb Bush's ballot thievery his brother George W. only sneaked by with 537 plurality.

Obviously, The Greens hate the Democrats more than they hate the fascists. Who are the fascists? Obviously, those  attempting to disguise themselves as the party of Lincoln. But hasn't deception always been a fascist tool? War Is Peace. Freedom Is Slavery. Ignorance Is Strength. Black is white.

The Greens believe the Democrats have betrayed the Left---a fact that becomes all too obvious when the Senate Democratic  Leader himself votes on the side of our Boy Emperor on crucial questions. But then, aren't ALL politicians---like the governments they comprise---usually nothing but collections of buffoons and fools?

Are the Greens also a collection of buffoons and fools? Is the struggle to speak for the entire Left more important than the struggle against fascism? Are your leaders more concerned with personal power than the battle against the Devil? Are they leading  you into the gas chambers of the future?]

Subject: Statement on Green Strategy in 2004
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 01:17:24 -0500

from: Ted Glick 

Below is a statement being circulated by a number of individuals active in the national Green Party of the
United States. For more information contact John Rensenbrink, .

Statement on Green Strategy 2004 and Call for Dialogue and Action

As we move closer to 2004, Greens are debating strategy. Both from within and outside of the Green Party, there is enormous pressure on us. Greens and non-Greens alike are strongly opposed to the policies of the Bush administration. But Greens do not agree whether defeating George Bush, or at least not assisting in his
reelection, should be a factor in our strategy. 

The signers of this letter definitely agree that the Green Party needs to develop a strategy for next year's
presidential campaign. We have different ideas at this point on what particular strategy is best, though we are
in full agreement that any strategy which is likely to assist in the reelection of George Bush should be avoided.

We are not signing this letter in support of the Democratic Party, or of any of its candidates, though some individual signers may be supporting one of those candidates. We are not signing this letter because we regret past Green election efforts.

We are signing this letter for several important reasons.

First, the Bush administration has demonstrated a determined will and ability to manipulate the people of this country following the tragic events of September 11, 2001. They have done this to a degree worse than other political parties could have done. They have seriously undermined the democratic foundations of our country, done immense harm to the ecosystem, and alienated scores of nations, big and small, who were once our friends.

Second, the beliefs and opinions of many people and organizations who share our views and struggles for justice and the environment are important to us. They have pleaded that we take the defeat of Bush into
serious consideration. We cannot totally turn our backs on their opinions solely because they have not chosen to be active in the Green Party or join our electoral campaigns.

Third, the corrupted election system in the United States creates a dynamic that harms our interest in the short and long term. It permitted the corporate party candidate with fewer votes in 2000 to take over the White House. While all Greens hold sacred the right to participate in the democratic process -- what is left of it in the United States -- the signers of this letter believe that we neither can nor should ignore the gross faults in the system which assist the greater evil in elections. The harm that can come both to this country and to the Green Party by ignoring the corrupted system that is used to count votes cannot be ignored.

Lastly, the continued growth and strength of the Green Party depends upon how we address this issue. Contrary to what some claim, we believe that to ignore the vast numbers of progressives, many of whom are independent of any political party, bodes poorly for the future vitality of the Green Party. There are no easy choices for the Green Party in 2004, and the growth of any political party requires that it listen to its natural
constituencies, including those who have not yet fully joined.

The use of the term "lesser evil" or "greater evil" in describing major party candidates is instructive. The great majority of the members of the Democratic Party power structure have repeatedly demonstrated that they are not prepared, willing, or able to offer solutions to most of the problems the United States faces. But that party is, nonetheless, and in general, the lesser of evils. Looking at the greater of evils which we also face, we do not believe we can ignore this difference. While it is small enough to demand the presence of an alternative political party, it is not small enough to completely ignore. The history of the failures and harmful actions of many Democrats are not so relevant to voters in 2004 -- the choices we face in this election are.

As already noted, we do not all favor a single strategy, and some of us strongly disagree with each other's strategy at this point. The strategies we severally favor range from not running at all, to running in ways that will focus our campaign energies in certain states, to calls to possibly drop out of the race near election day if it is very close.

But we all agree that the Green Party should not ignore the damage to the country and to the Green Party that
could result by ignoring the reality around us and pretending that there is no difference or that the difference is insignificant. The forthcoming issue of Green Horizon Quarterly features four articles that detail different strategies. Publication date is November 21. Copies can be obtained by writing Green Horizon Quarterly, P.O. Box 476, Topsham, Maine 04086. Sometime after hard copy publication, they will also be available on the web at .

We call for:

1. Candidates seeking the Green Party Presidential nomination to describe the strategy they would follow.

2. The Green Party to debate all strategies with respect -- and for the national Green Party to take a stance on
its preferred strategy. All state parties are encouraged to hold special meetings to discuss and democratically
decide, using Instant Runoff Voting, which strategy they prefer, followed by a similar decision-process from the
national party's Coordinating Committee. We are a grassroots party and must make decisions of our grassroots known and not leave a void for our candidates to fill.

3. All Greens to declare their solidarity with our brothers and sisters in progressive organizations across the country in calling for the defeat of the illegitimate Bush administration, while at the same time demanding that the electoral system be reformed to include Instant Runoff Voting, fair ballot access and public financing.

Agreed to, in alphabetical order:

Medea Benjamin CA
Dee Berry, MO
Jenefer Ellingston, DC
Tom Fusco, ME
Holly Hart, IA
Ted Glick, NJ
Pat LaMarche, ME
Rick Lass, NM
Linda Martin, CA
Dean Myerson, DC
John Rensenbrink, ME
Anita Rios, OH
Steve Schmidt, FL
Tom Sevigny, CT
Charlene Spretnak, CA
Ron Stanchfield, NY
Penny Teal, CT
Rhoda Vanderhart, KS  ##

* * *



The Blacklisted Journalist can be contacted at P.O.Box 964, Elizabeth, NJ 07208-0964
The Blacklisted Journalist's E-Mail Address: