[candidate-development] more wisdom from Chuck Turner

[Merelice]

Greetings,

As you know, the Rainbow vote regarding the presidential campaign has
stirred up some active discussion -- including speculation that it was
motivated by support for Obama. In a discussion on a limited list,
Chuck shared some more thinking about the party, the Rainbow decision,
and Obama.

I leave for vacation on this note, and will next see you or
communicate at the July 29 Statecom meeting. Except to participate in
a possible online StateCom vote next week, I will not be reading Party
emails while I'm away.

Merelice

>From Chuck:

I can appreciate cynicism about the Rainbow vote—its timing and
purpose.  While each of us who voted for it have our own perspective
on why we voted for it, let me share mine.

As I think you know, my general objective (which continues to evolve)
is to contribute to building a planetary perspective and practice
rooted in the principles of justice and a respect for the divine
nature of each and every being on the earth.  Since the goal is to
develop a set of standards that move us to planetary harmony based on
the concept of oneness, the nature of our process for achieving our
goals is as important as the goals themselves. I think that is a
particularly important perspective for a "third party" trying to
expand its base.  That is, why would anyone want to join an
organization that espouses the principles of respect for all but in
fact engages in the same kind of entitled, ego focused behavior
exhibited by those in the other parties. In other words, I think we
have a responsibility to challenge ourselves to strive to model the
type of society we are trying to create.

Let me approach the issue from another direction.  Given the
disrespect shown by party members toward each other and what often
seems to be a focus on bending process to fit personal goals, I am
very reluctant to encourage people from my district to become involved
in the party at this point. I don't want to encourage them to get
involved in a process that won't help their positive growth and
development. At this stage of development, I don't think the
psychology and culture of the party should be viewed as healthy.  I
also believe that unless it can develop a healthy culture, it will not
contribute to the kind of change that we need in this country.

I understand the cries of fowl (heard and unheard) regarding the
Rainbow vote.  To me, the question is do we want to continue to use
our political activity to hide from the reality of our internal
dysfunction.

Chuck

PS regarding the Obama factor. Again, I can't speak for all, but my
vote has nothing to do with the Obama candidacy. I publicly supported
Grace Ross in her race against Patrick Duvall. In terms of the Green
Party candidates, I know more about Cynthia McKinney and would be glad
to advocate for her particularly given her progressive perspectives on
issues whether Obama can appropriately viewed as liberal.  So for me,
while there are Green Party candidates for President that I could be
proud to support, I can't support the Party in its present internal
practice.

PSPS: I am not sure where you saw me say I was happy with the
candidacy. But, as I think about the statement, it's reasonable. That
is, as a member of a people who have been disrespected throughout our
400 year experience in this country, I believe that there is a
psychological significance and value in his candidacy for us,
particularly our children.  Even though his policies are not
significantly better than the other candidates, the reality is that
the psychological release of energy that is created by his candidacy
and possible election is significant. The question is what do we do at
the community level to enable this energy to continue to flow in a
constructive direction.