It was an interesting enough idea that I followed the early days of the Green Party but soon came to the conclusion that it was going to be the typical secular-lefty screw-up as things like the pudding-headed idea of consensus decision making were asserted by people whose self-righteousness and attention seeking towered over their actual desire to do any work, take office and make law.
It's far more fun to be Prima Donnas of the future than to actually put in the work and learning enough to DO something, That has been and will, I've come to conclude, always be the actual character of secular leftism in the United States. I hear the younger generation of secular lefties and hear the discouraging sound of them repeating the same idiotic mistakes of the old-"new left" of my generation, looking to the total and absolute futility of the extinct groups and movements and the defunct figures of that discouraging sixty years of counter productive stupidity. And those are the smart ones among them I'm hearing, the ones who can actually name the groups and barren champions of the left, c. 1968. If they've sold that line of bullshit to even ten kids who don't know better, that's ten too many.
The history of the secular left in the United States is a history of total ineptitude mixed with dishonesty and duplicity, of leaders whose real concern wasn't making actual change by taking office and power in the government but by winning leadership of the mole hill of whatever group they were leaders of, fending off challengers to that position. It is such a stupid history that total and absolute futilities like the I.W.W. various cults of anarchism and the total disaster that the Marxists have been the substances of its heroic lore and lying mythology. All of which have one thing in common, they never produced a single thing that had any enduring effect except the discrediting of the left that had a proven ability to take office, to win majorities and to make change.
The Green Party does those historical actual enemies of actual change better by matching that with actual collusion with Republicans to put the worse of them in our history in office while attacking Democrats for not being lefty enough. The Green Party is a total fraud whose most recognizable figure is the shady, shifty false front, Jill Stein who is reasonably suspected of being a Putin asset, as the infamous photo of her at the RT dinner shows.
As an aside, and to Jill Stein's right side, if you don't know, Willy Wimmer is a far-right German political hack who has been a major figure in the "Querfront" a coalition of right-wing and pro-Putin fascists and "leftists" in Germany whose major feature is that they hate the United States.* I won't link to one of the few English language sources of his actual words, an interview with the Putin propaganda outfit "Sputnick" but one of the more hilariously hypocritical parts of it accuses the United States of murdering journalists, one of Putin's more obvious means of maintaining his terror state. In my opinion, Wimmer is most easily understood as a sort of revival of the Nazi "left" that Hitler dispatched during the Night of the Long Knives, in which he had rival leaders in the Nazi party murdered, along with a lot of other people.
The superficial coverage of the Green Party in the United States, part of the broader, international Green Party movement, has been short on noting one of the things I early on found disturbing about it, the presence of actual facists in Green Parties in Europe and the willingness of Green Parties to make common cause with fascists and white supremacists. If you want details of that you could look up "Third Position" "Third Way", the "Red-Green-Brown" phenomenon in France, . . If you look into it, seeing Jill Stein sitting next to Willy Wimmer at a table with Mike Flynn, Vlad Putin and a bunch of other anti-democratic, fascist scum won't surprise you anymore. It also doesn't surprise me to see Mike Flynn sitting down across the table from a major hater of the United States, even with him actually being a sworn American general with a long career in the military. But that's another post.
I have grown to understand that that is not a surprising thing but, actually, so often something that happens among figures of the secular left, that it betrays an actual similarity between the secular, alleged left, and the far right. It accounts for how so many Marxists, especially in the United States, Trotskyites, turn into fascists and crypto-fascists. That has been a feature of the "real left" in the United States from the 1920s certainly up till now, Christopher Hitchens being, perhaps, the most famous example in the memories of most people. I think that, itself, leads to one not being surprised by the long history of the persuit of and praise of the ineffectiveness of the "real left" the secular-left. That indifference to the futility and the failure to learn a single thing from failure proves that they never really believed in the goals they claimed to, to start with. I looked at In These Times magazine right before this, its mixture of claiming to champion "labor" as they discredit the only party with the power to do much of anything for actual labor, the Democrats and look at their romantic presentation of the history of the secular left and it makes me want to throw up.
The Green Party does have an effect in American politics, it regularly acts as or threatens to be Republican-fascist spoilers, defeating moderate and even liberal Democrats, putting some of the worst Republicans in the history of that corrupt party into office. That has been its only accomplishment, it continues to be its obvious reason for being. The thing and, in fact, the entire secular left should be exposed for the fraud it is and its phony romantic presentation torn down and scrapped before it dupes one more kid into buying into it.
* Along with its hostility to religion, Christianity most of all, one of the most common features of the American secular left which is serious ballot box poison is too little taken into account, the snobbish, reflexive anti-Americanism of that American "left". Virtually everything in that "American left" is an expression of disdain for even the least bad if not best of American history. Marilynne Robinson has asked:
Why do the Land Grant Act, the Homestead Act, and the G.I. Bill, three distributions of wealth to the public on a scale never contemplated in Britain, have no status among political events, when the dreary traffic in pittances institutionalized as the British Welfare State is hailed as an advance of socialism?
I think it's due to that habit of academic, secular-left disdain for the vulgar, aspiring to be democratic and egalitarian, United States as opposed to foreign, more aristocratic societies. Though it could be ignorance on the part of those snobs, figuring that British "socialism" of that kind lends it some kind of Marxist cachet. I can tell them that even as it was being adopted in the Parliament the architect of the British Welfare State William Beveridge, reported to the Eugenics Society he was a member of that he was dismayed that the pittances doled out by the final bill that created the Welfare State didn't give more money to people higher up in income, he hoped that it would encourage them to have more children. He held the typical Brit position, held by those on the "left" as well as the right, that the poor of Britain and the world needed to be harried out of existence through eugenics policies, holding that wealth was a sign of natural superiority. Quite frankly, when you get down to it, I think a majority of secular lefties also feel that way, though they might never admit to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment