[statecom-discuss] Working with other political parties - open thread

Fri Nov 10 11:38:22 EST 2006

I didn't get any attachment!

-----Original Message-----
>From: Adam Sacks <adam_artist at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Nov 10, 2006 10:46 AM
>To: Discussion List for StateCom members <statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
>Subject: Re: Re: [statecom-discuss] Working with other political parties -	open thread
>
>
>Supporting public education?  Perhaps, because everyone is entitled to tools and knowledge for somehow getting along.  But attached is another view - well worth reading - of what public education in this country is really about.
>
>Cheers!
>
>Adam
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: John Walsh <jvwalshmd at gmail.com>
>To: Discussion List for StateCom members <statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
>Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 7:14:43 AM
>Subject: Re: Re: [statecom-discuss] Working with other political parties - open thread
>
>First, I believe that you should read Antiwar.com - and The American
>Conservative.  I think you will agree at least as often as you
>disagree with the latter.
>Second, one of the main planks of the Libertarian platform is to END
>CORPORATE WELFARE.
>Third, let us draw up the list: No war, no empire, troops home, close
>foreign bases, downsize the military industries, no police state laws,
>no domestic spy agencies, no corporate welfare.  We both agree on
>those but the Dems (and Republicans) do not.
>Finally, I am confident that if we settle those issues, then we can
>argue about things like single-payer health care (which by the way is
>a non-statist solution, the more statist solution being a national
>health service like the NHS in UK or the VA here).  I am confident
>that on these issues Greens will win.  But that does not mean we give
>up a valuable ally in the struggle of the moment.  Valuable in that
>they work from an ideology which appeals at this point to many
>Americans.
>jw
>p.s. The first woman to serve in Congresss was a Republican,
>essentially a Libertarian though.  She voted against entry of the US
>into WWI.  Both genuine Right and genuine Left were antiwar in those
>days.
>
>On 11/9/06, Mike Heichman <mikeheichman at verizon.net> wrote:
>> John,
>>
>> At this stage in history, what would happen if "government would wither
>> away"?
>>
>> The real rulers of the planet are the very wealthy few, especially those
>> who rule our nation.
>>
>> My understanding (admittedly superficial) is that the libertarians are
>> for limited government in the political sense of the word. I am unaware
>> of anyway that they support controls over the corporations and the
>> wealthy elite.
>>
>> My guess is that we both support public education. What would happen to
>> our children if the libertarians got their way and the government would
>> no longer have this function? Where is the common ground?
>>
>> I believe that most people in the GRP oppose the multiple systems of
>> white, male, rich supremacy as well as the war on our ecosystem. Isn't
>> this also the empire that we oppose? Where is the common ground  with
>> the  Libertarians?
>>
>> Yes, there is common ground in important areas where we can better work
>> together. However, there are fundamental differences that I do not
>> believe are secondary to the vision of our party.
>>
>> Mike Heichman
>>
>>
>>
>> John Walsh wrote:
>>
>> > Empire?  You know it when you see it.
>> > At least the Libertarians, the genuine ones, are against war and
>> > empire.  Imagine if we could get that far and then duke it out over
>> > the rest.  Humanity would thank us profusely.
>> > And I like talking to the Libertarians because they constantly
>> > challenge me to defend my views - instead of pretending they agree
>> > with me like the PDA.  As a result I feel that my views are correct -
>> > but I am always looking for flaws.  And the Libertarians are also in
>> > favor of a state free of religious influence and for a state that does
>> > not interfere in sexual preference or speech in any way, shape or
>> > form.  Are not those much more important than the level of taxation or
>> > the size of government?  And anyway I believe in the inherent evil of
>> > the state and hope for its withering away in its present form.  The
>> > Dems do not like that idea at all.
>> > jw
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/9/06, Mike Heichman <mikeheichman at verizon.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi John,
>> >>
>> >> What do you mean by "empire"?
>> >>
>> >> The reason why I ask this is because the Libertarians believe in limited
>> >> government. However, there idea of liberty means that they are OK with a
>> >> "SYSTEM" that may mean allowing a few to be billionaires while billions
>> >> of people live in misery.
>> >>
>> >> I do not believe that there vision is consistent with our values.
>> >>
>> >> For me, opposition to empire means to be opposed to the multiple systems
>> >> of domination and oppression.
>> >>
>> >> At the same time, I do agree that there is a wide area of common ground
>> >> for us to work collaboratively.
>> >>
>> >> Mike Heichman
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> John Walsh wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I think that our main job is to tell the whole truth with lots of
>> >> > documentation.
>> >> > The GRP makes no sense if the Dems are doing a fine job.
>> >> > For example, on the question of single-payer, the Dems have sold out
>> >> > their base and the entire electorate again and again.  Many have
>> >> > pretended to be allies but when push comes to shove, they have sided
>> >> > with the insurers - for example, Travaglini.  Rember Travaligni was
>> >> > the Senate author of the single-payer bill.  But once he got into
>> >> > leadership (partly thru the kind words of the single-payer folks), he
>> >> > turned against the bill that bore his name.
>> >> > Our job right now is to build party and movement, and that is why I
>> >> > emphasized party in that op-ed (NOT a letter to the editor) which by
>> >> > the way was carried in a paper in the TandG with a circulation of
>> >> > 100,000.
>> >> >
>> >> > And many of the "progressive" Dems, like Marzilli and Bonifaz, are
>> >> > far, far, far more loyal to party than principle.
>> >> >
>> >> > Two people mentioned to me that they thought that the GRP had gone
>> >> > easy on the Dems in this last round, and I think we lost one of those
>> >> > votes for that reason.  But of course that is all in one's perception.
>> >> >
>> >> > Actually I would prefer coalitions with Libertarians, were there any,
>> >> > since at the very least they oppose war and empire.
>> >> > jw
>> >> >
>> >> > On 11/9/06, Colby E. Peterson <saphron at verizon.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Topic of discussion:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Let's say we win a seat in the state legislature at some point, which
>> >> >> is bound to happen.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What are everyone's expectations for working with members of other
>> >> >> political parties? Be as general or specific as you'd like. I bring
>> >> >> this up because however unsavory we may find other political parties,
>> >> >> we will have to work with individual legislators in order to govern.
>> >> >> This may also mean compromise, which is getting some things and
>> >> >> sacrificing other things on all sides.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thoughts?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> - Colby
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> statecom-discuss mailing list
>> >> >> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> >> >> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> >> >>
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > statecom-discuss mailing list
>> >> > statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> >> > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> statecom-discuss mailing list
>> >> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> >> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> >>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > statecom-discuss mailing list
>> > statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> statecom-discuss mailing list
>> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>>
>_______________________________________________
>statecom-discuss mailing list
>statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>
>

Bill Cunningham