[statecom] Proposal #1: Concerns, not standing aside

[Eli Beckerman]

BALLOT: PROPOSAL #1: Seat all 22 members who have asked to join the
State Committee
DELEGATE NAME: Eli Beckerman
DELEGATE EMAIL ADDRESS: elibeck at gmail.com
DELEGATE CHOICE: Yes Concerns, Do not stand aside.

Concerns are:

a) Packing the virtual court: at least have the decency to recruit
new "faces" in a face-to-face meeting, where people can meet, discuss, and
learn from each other. A minimal commitment to attend a "reality" StateCom
meeting should be required of those who truly plan to participate in the
2008-2010
State Committee session to build the Green-Rainbow Party into a stronger
force
for justice in the Commonwealth.

b) Stoking the flames of virtual battle: since the 2007 State Convention,
party members dissatisfied with the decision to open up the GRP primary
ballot
to those outside our Party have helped create a fractious battle within the
Party.
This divisive pursuit has forced every functioning committee and nearly
every
active member to engage in mind-numbing navel-gazing and squabbling over
arcane details of plans and actions, ignoring good-faith volunteer efforts
to abide
by the rules and desires of GRP membership, and serving neither to build the
party
nor to benefit people's lives or the planet itself in any way whatsoever. In
fact this has served to cement the party into dysfunction, distrust, and
inaction.
At the tail end of this effort, just 2 1/2 weeks before the National
Convention,
stacking a virtual StateCom meeting with new "faces" is appearing to take
this battle to a new height in cyberspace.

c) The counter-productive nature of bringing diversity into the Party
via cyberspace: incredibly, the same people who are moving to add 22 members
to the State Committee argued successfully in the Administrative Committee
that face-to-face meetings were necessary because of the friction within
AdCom. Incredibly, some of the same people who see the virtual State
Committee
meeting as an appropriate venue to introduce some entirely new people into
the SC, on grounds of diversity, have argued that the online presence of the
Party has negative impacts on our diversity. As an ecological party that
should be very conscious of the impact of technology on our thinking,
our interaction, and our behavior, and as a committee that has noticed the
toxic interchanges that are polluting our e-discussions, it is a major
mistake to recruit people into that kind of setting, already poisoned with
impatience, disrespect, and despair. One new voice has already spoken to
some of the bizarre communication and dysfunction of our organization,
and we're just getting warmed up!

d) A much more appropriate venue for improving the diversity of our State
Committee exists, and it happens to be 6 days away.

e) It is painfully clear that we must improve our basic functioning before
we can possibly become a nurturing organization to ANY new members. Without
committing to improve our fundamental and deep dysfunctionality as a Party,
recruiting new diversity delegates will only serve short-term and fleeting
agendas and further frustrate the long-term strengthening of a genuine party
of the people. Chuck's note of his hesitation in encouraging his
constituents
to get involved in our party should open everyone's eyes to where we are.
Is recruiting diversity members to the State Committee an answer to the
important critiques he offered us? I think Ron's old proposal of helping to
organize a GRP local in a community of color is a much more thoughtful
approach.