The greens: threat or menace?
Ask any liberal to identify the force in American politics most intent on destroying progressive prospects and causes and you're sure to hear that it's the Bush administration or the Republican right or some such reactionary power. Let me gently suggest, however, that a very different force has wormed its way onto this list, and may indeed be right at the top: the Green Party.
I'm reminded of a Nina Paley cartoon which is [updated] right here. (Thanks, Jym! It's copyright Nina Paley, of course, with appropriate permission granted for its use here.)
unfortunately not on-line so I'm working from memory here. Nina's wearing an anarchy-symbol t-shirt, holding a sign saying "down with capitalism" and shouting "Smash the state! Power to the people!" A well-dressed hippie tells her "You'll never get anywhere with that oppositional attitude, Nina. If you want change, you've got to work within the system." Finally, we see Nina wearing a Garfield t-shirt, holding a sign saying "Maintain the Status Quo" and shouting "Oppress the poor!" The hippie returns, exclaiming "Nina! You've won!"
(American Prospect link via Follow Me Here)
You know, I happen to think that it's deplorable that Green and other progressive third party candidates tend to siphon off votes from Democrats, and therefore throw the victory to right wing Republicans. It's clear that the end result of this is often a candidate that the majority of voters don't want.
But I don't get why everybody seems to think that the solution is for the Greens to shut up and go away. This kind of thing happens because our voting system is broken in a way that allows this to happen. If we went to Australian ballot (or instant runoff voting, as people seem to like to call it now), this kind of thing wouldn't happen. Why are people getting pissed off at Ralph Nader, instead of getting pissed off about our not having made very simple changes to our political system that would result in the election of candidates that more accurately reflect what the people want?
Maybe it's because they'd really just like the Greens to shut up and go away.
Posted by Wendy Shaffer on June 14 2002 10:38
I think there's a strong sporting mentality in this country, and everything is set up to have one winner and one loser, both of whom win or lose absolutely. Most people are Democrats or Republicans the way they're Yankees or Giants fans: their parents were, it seems like a good idea, and there are a couple of heroes from the past they can point at if anyone asks for a rationalization.
And the political spectrum as it's taught to a lot of kids in school encourages them to think that other parties must be like Democrats or like Republicans, only "more so." The libertarian grid does a little better, but it still doesn't account for groups whose commonality is a specific cause, not an approach to that cause. Like Greens, for example.
So it's no surprise when people who think in terms of a straight line and a sports match map everything onto those modes of thinking. If the only tool you have is a hammer etc.
Posted by Mris on June 14 2002 11:50
=v= I'm amazed at the persistence of the "spoiler" meme against all accuracy and reason. Even if one pretends that nothing illegitimate went on in Florida, even if one believes that there really were thousands of Jews for Buchanan, there's still the matter of the exit polls showing that many who voted for Nader would have voted for Bush over Gore. Enough to make the supposed "spoiler" margin a moot point.
Yet the meme lives on. I recently read an article about a Green candidate for governor, and though the article was short, it managed to allege twice that Nader caused Bush to "win" the Presidency.
Posted by Jym on June 15 2002 12:26
I think what gets to me most is the unquestioned sense of entitlement to greens' votes I've heard from some Democrats.
Because they're the good guys, of course, and if we don't support them, then we're the bad guys, except we're even worse than the other bad guys 'cause we ought to be good guys — a moral failing instead of a congential one. Or something. I can't really quite twist my head around it.
Posted by Zed on June 17 2002 11:17