Friday, July 14, 2006
Them's Fightin' Words
The Green National Committee has two mailing lists, and I am not sure I fully understand why. One is for discussion before voting begins, and another for afterward, but both are supposed to let it drop after a decision is made and the committee moves on.
If a group of Greens opposes a position taken by the Green National Committee, they can get a state or caucus to present a resolution for debate and vote to change policy. That means, for example, that Greens who oppose the adoption of Proposal 190, which calls for a boycott of Israeli goods and divestment from companies doing business in Israel, can take their concerns to the various states and seek a sponsor for a proposal to overturn proposal 190.
But, since I don't get the impression that Proposal 190 is not supported by a majority of Greens in any state, the prospect of overturning it would seem dim indeed. Of course, it's possible that it could be brought up by some other mechanism I am unaware of.
As Israel has begun a bombing campaign that I think everyone would agree is the biggest in a generation, the National Committee mailings have been filled with vitriol, often times hidden behind a "proper" style. I find it much more appropriate to say "Fuck you" when I mean fuck you, instead of "Your contributions have not gone unnoticed to all Greens who care about peace." when I mean fuck you. Come on...Geeze. We are too educated for our own good.
Anyway, there are four or five people on the National Committee mailing list who seem hell bent on using veiled attacks to promote a position the party is already in agreement with. But that's not enough. The people who are taking a position at the slightest variance are told that they must answer this or that question, fulfill this or that pledge.
The thing is, I agree with the assertion that the Green Party cannot leave the impression that we think the Palestinians and Israelis have anything approaching equality. A nation with nuclear bombs, jet fighters and a universal conscripted military is in no way comparable to an occupied people with rocks, Molotov cocktails, machine guns and home made rockets.
The fact that these occupied peoples choose to elect a Hamas led government pissed off a lot of people. They knew what they were doing. They had a good idea of what the consequences would be, not that Israel would go ape shit, but that there would be international backlash. We should all respect the intelligence of the Palestinian people, unless we want to believe that they are somehow different from us, and I reject that notion, as do most Greens I feel sure.
But there is one woman in particular who seems insistent on doing what she can to get the vitriol stirred up. She will post the most inflammatory stuff about Arabs, Muslims or Palestinians, often forwarded to her by Lorna Salzman. I will say quickly that I agree that the fate of girls and women in those parts of the globe are important, but we need a uniform approach, which we don't have as yet. Yes, in my opinion, we can and should condemn female genital mutilation, but I couldn't care less where that is happening. Personally, I believe that male genital mutilation, aka circumcision, should be outlawed, and I am not sure I believe that religion is a good enough reason to do something permanent to a baby's penis. But I am not going to win that argument, so why raise it?
My point is the same here. Since the Green Party is on record supporting:
Non-violence
Social Justice
Ecological Wisdom
and Grassroots Democracy
As the keystones to success, we should find ways to use those tools to help bring justice to the Palestinian peoples. We support a single State of Israel, secular and with equal rights for all, including protections for all sorts of minority concerns.
Ultimately though, all these attacks do, from either side, is distract the Green Party from being a force for good. And that is a pity.
If a group of Greens opposes a position taken by the Green National Committee, they can get a state or caucus to present a resolution for debate and vote to change policy. That means, for example, that Greens who oppose the adoption of Proposal 190, which calls for a boycott of Israeli goods and divestment from companies doing business in Israel, can take their concerns to the various states and seek a sponsor for a proposal to overturn proposal 190.
But, since I don't get the impression that Proposal 190 is not supported by a majority of Greens in any state, the prospect of overturning it would seem dim indeed. Of course, it's possible that it could be brought up by some other mechanism I am unaware of.
As Israel has begun a bombing campaign that I think everyone would agree is the biggest in a generation, the National Committee mailings have been filled with vitriol, often times hidden behind a "proper" style. I find it much more appropriate to say "Fuck you" when I mean fuck you, instead of "Your contributions have not gone unnoticed to all Greens who care about peace." when I mean fuck you. Come on...Geeze. We are too educated for our own good.
Anyway, there are four or five people on the National Committee mailing list who seem hell bent on using veiled attacks to promote a position the party is already in agreement with. But that's not enough. The people who are taking a position at the slightest variance are told that they must answer this or that question, fulfill this or that pledge.
The thing is, I agree with the assertion that the Green Party cannot leave the impression that we think the Palestinians and Israelis have anything approaching equality. A nation with nuclear bombs, jet fighters and a universal conscripted military is in no way comparable to an occupied people with rocks, Molotov cocktails, machine guns and home made rockets.
The fact that these occupied peoples choose to elect a Hamas led government pissed off a lot of people. They knew what they were doing. They had a good idea of what the consequences would be, not that Israel would go ape shit, but that there would be international backlash. We should all respect the intelligence of the Palestinian people, unless we want to believe that they are somehow different from us, and I reject that notion, as do most Greens I feel sure.
But there is one woman in particular who seems insistent on doing what she can to get the vitriol stirred up. She will post the most inflammatory stuff about Arabs, Muslims or Palestinians, often forwarded to her by Lorna Salzman. I will say quickly that I agree that the fate of girls and women in those parts of the globe are important, but we need a uniform approach, which we don't have as yet. Yes, in my opinion, we can and should condemn female genital mutilation, but I couldn't care less where that is happening. Personally, I believe that male genital mutilation, aka circumcision, should be outlawed, and I am not sure I believe that religion is a good enough reason to do something permanent to a baby's penis. But I am not going to win that argument, so why raise it?
My point is the same here. Since the Green Party is on record supporting:
Non-violence
Social Justice
Ecological Wisdom
and Grassroots Democracy
As the keystones to success, we should find ways to use those tools to help bring justice to the Palestinian peoples. We support a single State of Israel, secular and with equal rights for all, including protections for all sorts of minority concerns.
Ultimately though, all these attacks do, from either side, is distract the Green Party from being a force for good. And that is a pity.
// posted by Gregg Jocoy @ 1:56 PM 
