[statecom-discuss] Re: [ComCom] Here's an idea - For tuesday

[BillCunningham]

I agree that we must get "inside." It's our responsibility. It's how we get there that's at issue. I am sorry if I gave a different impression.

Media attention is not always and everywhere a good thing, whether for the party or for the people we're trying to serve. The party is just now beginning the process of developing its strategy and platform. What do we have to communicate to the public at this point?

We're talking about a minute or two of images and sound bytes here, shared with a Dem leader. At best, an event that will say: "Look, Green-Rainbow aren't just spoilers, they can be quite reasonable and normal." Perhaps that is what is meant by behaving in ways that convince the public that we can lead.

My trouble is that I am not convinced that we are ready to lead. No doubt we have many members who could fill elected positions with honor and even distinction. But that is not the same thing as our party leading the political change, the social and ecological revolution that is called for. That's what I'm here for. As we go through the strategy process we should all ask ourselves what we expect of this party.

I would frankly feel better if the media were saying, "God, those Greens (Green-Rainbow) are irresponsible! What they're asking for just can't be done—but they are getting stronger all the time. What can be done about them?"

As for the Dems, they will love us only as long as we don't threaten them, and will respect us on when we do.

That doesn't mean we never ever cooperate with them. This is politics, not religion.


-----Original Message-----
>From: gracegrnrnbw at aol.com
>Sent: Feb 12, 2007 2:54 PM
>To: statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Re: [ComCom] Here's an idea - For tuesday
>
> Hi folks - So I am inserting here what bill wrote so this is still one thread.
>
>
>
>Bill - you actually stated exactly what I think we as a group are struggling with.
>
>
>
>I am pretty certain this will get press coverage - so that is not an issue actually.
>
>
>
>As for clarity about who we are - the more they see us the clearer they will presumably 
>
>get; I experience much more clarity from the folks I talk to than some others in the Party 
>
>clearly do.
>
>
>
>But what I am struck by in your remarks is the idea that a threat can only come from the outside 
>
>and that we should not claim our right to be inside.
>
>
>
>Are we really only comfortable on the outside?  Are we committed to and intrenched in being outsiders?
>
>If so, I don't think we should ever run candidates or consider ourselves a political party.  Why run candidates 
>
>if we don't ever want to get elected?
>
>
>
>Part of being able to get elected is behaving in ways that convince the public that we can lead, that we can 
>
>be inside without giving up our values, vision and integrity.
>
>
>
>One of the most critical lessons Mel King ever taught me was "we must be at home wherever we are".  He did 
>
>not mean we have a right to put our feet up on any coffe table.  We meant that if a human being has a right to
>
>stand in a partcular place, then we have just as much a right to stand there


Bill Cunningham