I share many of Green Party Presidential Nominee Jill Stein’s values. On climate and energy, I absolutely agree that our world is in crisis and that we need some form of a “Green New Deal,” though whether that would be her plan, or some other approach, is, for me, still a point of debate.
On her view that an energy transition would have multiple cost-saving and health benefits that aren’t immediately apparent simply by solarizing every roof in America or shifting to smarter development, putting in a 21st century train infrastructure, and other retrofits to re-imagine our society and culture, I also agree.
But I probably share those values with a great many Transition Voice readers, plenty of Bernieites, Bernie himself, and folks like Bill McKibben, Wendell Berry, and even famous enviro-activists like Ted Danson and Julia Louis-Dreyfus.
But that doesn’t mean I think any of them should be president.
Experience Counts
Lots of us share good ideas for a better world. The best of us take that and work where and how we can based on things like our experience, influence, affluence or lack of it, special concerns such as for social justice and the environment, or whatever.
However, it’s another thing entirely to translate that to a campaign that makes a compelling case for why you have the skills to pay the bills in elected office…at any level! By the way, what Stein’s running for is executive office. Administration. Of the entire federal government. So it’s a second thing, once elected, to execute your plans successfully.
And on none of this can Stein make any special claim.
From a purely practical point of view, Stein has held a total of one elected office, that of Town Meeting Representative in Lexington, Massachusetts. And I hate to put it this way, but it’s not a very impressive position at all. It’s one of 21 elected people in a body that can have as many as 203 total participants.
And what do they do? According to the Town of Lexington website they meet a few times each spring to:
- Appropriate funds for operating and capital budgets for the upcoming fiscal year (July 1 to June 30);
- Approve all General and Zoning By-Laws (contained in the Code of Lexington); and
- Accept certain “local option” statutes of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Town Meeting isn’t even the prevailing elected board in Lexington. Far more important for the day-to-day is the Lexington Board of Selectmen which are elected and paid positions with regular office hours, and weekly meetings year round.
By this count, my hubby Erik, who’s a twice-elected City Council Member in our small Virginia city of Staunton is more qualified to be the Green Party candidate.
Erik’s influence is larger as one of only a seven-member body. His is also a modestly paid position, elected for four-year terms, that meets year-round, voting on similar things to Lexington’s Town Meeting — and yet much more ongoing city business. Staunton City Council members gain additional and wider political experience by serving on state-wide boards connected to the Virginia Municipal League in its larger organized lobbying business with the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Not that I’m making a case for his candidacy; it’s just he shares many (though not all) of her values, beliefs, and aims, and yet has far more political experience. There are others out there with even more of these traits.
We Don’t Love You
Worse than her lack of experience may be Stein’s multiple rejections by the state of Massachusetts in her several runs for state-wide office. She was rejected in her two gubernatorial runs in 2002 and 2010. She was rejected in her own district in a bid for the Massachusetts House in 2004. She was rejected in 2006 to be the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth.
This ain’t Alabama, folks! These multiple rejections were in what’s just about the second most liberal state in the whole country! It’s just teeming with liberals and lefties and even they wouldn’t vote her in. What’s up with that?
It’s pretty lame for the Green Party to put up this serially-failed candidate, who, incidentally represented them for the presidency in 2012 and as you know, lost.
Equally ineffective of them, though, is that they’re not recruiting candidates with a more resounding record of political success. And that they’re just not doing a good enough job of building their party in general.
In the end, the work on the ground to build a political party, gain adherents and supporters, work for measures in all 50 states, and change the face of a nation doesn’t happen on good ideas alone. In fact, as I wrote a few weeks ago, most of it is thankless elbow grease in the hidden trenches of the world at a pace that takes endless years and only succeeds against tremendous odds if at all.
The Unfinished Job
One one score Stein’s presence in the political sphere appears both laudable and partially effective. She helped lead a ballot initiative in Massachusetts called “Secure Green Future” which was intended to pull subsidies from fossil fuels and redirect them to clean energy and green jobs. It passed overwhelmingly in the 11 districts where it appeared on the state ballot in 2008.
Less clear is what became of it.
A website called SecureGreenFuture.org, ostensibly about the measure, boasts of its electoral success but then has relatively little if any other content, marking a stunning failure to communicate what else either should happen in Massachusetts or did happen there because of this well-supported ballot initiative.
One wouldn’t be faulted for imagining that if this is such a feather in Stein’s political cap as she makes a bid for prez that this website would be chock full of the accomplishments of this key piece of green electoral matter. Even on Stein’s official website it’s only mentioned as a voting win, but not as a policy with details and the story of its successful implementation.
Stein has been faulted for talking a good game but them coming up short on details so it’s just as easy to believe that nothing came of the Secure Green Future initiative, and that it’s more fluff from Stein and the Greenies, who have the moral weight of many of the right ideas at the right time but none of the proof in the pudding to give it any real cred.
Waking Up To The Realities of Politics
Meanwhile, purist lefties — who totally embrace making the perfect the enemy of the good — regularly fault President Obama for what they wrongly claim are his continual failures on energy, climate, and the environment, a critical posture that takes into account none of his proposals nor any of the complexities of contemporary American politics and governance.
Hard-core lefties extend the same disdain to Hillary Clinton, a dyed-in-the-wool social justice devotee, being as righteously indignant about her as the most rabid Trump supporter would be, proving that at least those two groups have something in common — idiocy!
And all because the world isn’t perfect. But apparently it’s still better for many of my fellow lefties to hold tight to ideas, ideals, and principals even if they never achieve a thing at all.
Stein calls denouncements like mine the “politics of fear,” because, she says, it encourages people to “vote against what you’re afraid of rather than for what you truly believe.” But that’s nonsense.
Her accusation implies, first of all, that the other side, let’s say Hillary Clinton in this instance, has no merits to her record, positions, or policies whatsoever. It also suggests that it’s better to lose based on what you “believe” than to win based on what’s incrementally achievable in a complex national context.
Don’t get me wrong. I get just how flawed our system is and I’m disgusted by it, too. It’s high time that we made some strategic changes, particularly on energy and the environment, and that we did so while knowing that we can still build a prosperous, healthy polity and economy.
It’s also time that the policy elite spent some time outside their G-8- (7) sized echo chamber and start listening not only to aggrieved rust-belters but also those Americans with innovative regional and local ideas that address where clean energy meets a slower lifestyle, culture, community, and economy all in the name of sustainable progress.
This is a must do, yesterday!
But the system would be every bit as flawed — and perhaps even more so — if either Bernie or Stein were in office. Change doesn’t happen because of one figurehead or because of his or her good ideas, particularly when the figure stands alone.
Things happen because you’re actually at the table of discussion and in a position to initiate change, such as by drawing on allies and laying out practical, achievable plans — and even then it’s a bitch!
Voters who think they’re making a statement or being counted as a protest vote because they pull the lever for Stein are deluding themselves. If they think they get to do this in “safe blue states,” they’re imperiling a larger mandate on the left.
The Democrats, who are not in fact “just as bad as the Republicans,” aren’t really going to care a fig for the people who vote against them. They’re going to pay attention to who walked the admittedly flawed path with them.
We don’t live in a parliamentary system. The Greens will gain nothing from this effort. They will gain from truly building a party into grassroots, on-the-ground NUMBERS and then and only then advancing presidential candidates who actually have proven executive experience and electoral successes. And that could take 40 years.
In the meantime, the climate will worsen, energy depletion will continue to threaten us on many fronts, and cleaner energy solutions will need to be advanced. Being in on those conversations doesn’t happen from the either sidelines or from being rejected by the vast majority of the electorate.
— Lindsay Curren, Transition Voice
So, let me make sure that I understand you correctly: a candidate who hasn’t been embraced by the establishment (you know, the same establishment who has enabled the destruction of the global ecosystem) should be rejected for not ‘being liked’ and we should get behind yet ANOTHER establishment politician who has a proven history of enabling the same ecosystem destruction?
Great logic there…
I have no idea what you’re talking about. What I’m talking about is experience and electoral victories in a complex national context. What I’m not talking about are rigid principles and fantasies. As for logic, there was none in your comment.
I’m talking about, and responding to your piece – you know, the one that has the marginalizing headline?
The ‘complex national context’ that you refer to is otherwise known as decades of government-for-hire and other types of corruption. Perhaps you think it’s a good idea to continue to support those who are ‘successful’ in this context (much to the detriment of the planet and its inhabitants) but quite a few of us have been watching these not-so-rigid complexities grow into a blood-stained, greedy monster and are refusing to continue supporting the facade. Nothing personal to those who decide to continue supporting it but when an insulting piece is posted in an apparent attempt to marginalize and otherwise shut down valid alternatives, people might get a bit understandably upset. Peace.
No, a complex national context is known as things like 13 1/2 million Americans voting for a nationalist, racist, misogynist glam demi-Hitler in the GOP primary, and a larger number voting for other Republicans, most of whom were also on the crazy spectrum.
It’s things like regions of the country, the differences in wealth and education, women and men, religions, cultures, values, and the city mice versus the country mice.
It’s things like the deep state, the foreign policy establishment, and entrenched economic interests.
And all of this just scratches the surface of elections and governance of a YUGE population across a vast landmass.
It’s not about ideals, however seductive ideals are. It’s about reality on the ground. We can pour our ideals in, they are valid aspirations to a point. But if it’s all we’ve got we have a choice: cling to them in righteous indignation and get nothing done, or compromise and work within what’s possible.
I’m interested in discussion with people who have enough intellectual maturity to know the difference.
So Lindsey, just vote for someone you do not want and tell yourself that you are not throwing your vote away.
Huh?
Lindsey – it’s challenging to have an intellectually mature discussion when you consistently misrepresent not only the other person’s points but American political reality. As I said; peace and good luck with that approach. Quite a few of us have had our eyes opened to the reality of the American political system and we are no longer going to fall for controlled opposition which continues to enable the very evil that you claim to be concerned about…
It’s sad to see the environmental voters give up to the corporate Democratic Party machine. It’s not about purity- its about integrity.
I will not be supporting ‘Transition Voice’ in its future endeavors.
I am enjoying watching my candidate, Jill Stein, in North Dakota. Meanwhile, Clinton adds more pro-frackers to her future cabinet.
Even though Dr. Stein is an imperfect candidate for POTUS we still have a need for a candidate position within the Green Party. I have met Dr. Stein as she came to visit our tool library in Seattle, and I can say she has no illusions of winning an election bid. The Green Party has been a force for the progress you describe as where you agree with the candidates positions. Dr Stein is only a representative of that vision. The more support we get for the Green Party in the USA the more progress we will make. Remember step 4 in the transition. There are Green Party candidates being elected at local levels.
Who cares who agrees with what? I probably even agree with Donald Trump on SOMETHING, SOMEWHERE.
Touchy-Feelie enviros too often mistake the merits of belief for integrity, or worse, of the right stance to take, come what may.
My biggest beef with Jill Stein is that she’s an unserious candidate. At least that wacko Johnson has held a real and meaningful office. Are the Greens utterly incapable of putting up anyone beyond what amounts to local street captain for the world’s most important and powerful position? They made her a joke, and so they must account for it.
As for Jill, and all her followers, politics, especially at the national and international level is tough, tough business. If you can’t stand the heat, get the fuck out of the kitchen!
And guess what? Even Transition is political. When you’re asking followers and the world to reject the dominant energy, trade, organizing, food, medicine, and cultural paradigms in favor of “small is beautiful” (with which I agree, btw), that’s freaking political, man! You’d have to be blind to not see that!
It is a misconception of reaity to think of Dr. Stein as a candidate rather than a figure head. If you believe her to be a candidate then you believe she has a chance to win in this nation. It is important to support the Green Party platform and it’s candidate without handing the eletion to Trump. The possibility of getting to the 5% mark gets closer all of the time which would amplify our united voice with serious funding. In the meantime think local. Elect municiple, county and state candidates in areas where support comes easier, then move to the harder political climates.
As a member of of the Transition Movement, I feel frustrated to see this article here. This attack on a third-party candidate who is significantly more aligned with our movement than the establishment politicians running things carries the real risk of alienating progressives from the important grassroots work of Transition.
People stumble onto this blog thinking it is part of the Transition Network, and then see the political agenda of its editors and writers… and some of them turn away from Transition as a result. I appreciate your passion to share your political views, but please be conscious to post them in the appropriate forum. Isn’t this site supposed to be about community resilience and transition?
If anyone out there reads this article and feels annoyed by the attack on Jill, please be aware that Transition Voice is an independent blog that is not affiliated with Transition Network or Transition US.
Peace to All.
Do your homework. This is on our about us page for anyone to read:
Transition Voice covers peak oil, climate change and economic crisis along with the global Transition movement as society’s most promising response.
People around the world are helping their countries, communities and families to prepare for a future that will be cleaner, more local, and run on a human-scale.
But there are concerns as well, as competition for resources ramps up, population increases, and geopolitical tensions flare. How much is in our control? What can we do to engage with the changes that a lower-energy paradigm will bring?
An independent voice
I heartily recommend Transition Voice…It’s a great mix of interviews, probing essays and useful ideas…their writing staff are first class, often typifying that “heavy content, light reading” tone of voice that we strive for in Transition Network.
— Ben Brangwyn, co-founder, Transition Network
We deal with the issues that the Transition movement cares about. We also offer analysis on people and progress in the overall transition of a world facing a post-fossil fuel economy. But we are neither the house organ of the Transition Movement nor the official journal of any organization. Transition Voice is an independent international magazine and our responsibility for what we run is entirely our own.
We offer original commentary by some of the leading thinkers on the relation of the economy to energy and communities, along with fresh new voices reporting from diverse communities who’ve started to make the move towards their own energy and economy transition.
We tackle serious issues: the role of energy in industrial society, fossil fuel depletion, challenges of communicating to a larger public, balancing caution with optimism. But we also have fun. We prize edgy writing that’s more like watching Jon Stewart than reading Oil and Gas Review.
We also get a kick out of reviewing books and films, cooking in our test kitchens, and exploring the world of labor-intensive hand made goods and practices that define the reskilling that is setting the stage for the economy of tomorrow. We welcome writing contributions and support contributions.
Non-partisan but not a-political
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
— Mohandas Gandhi
We are non-partisan. But that doesn’t make us apolitical. We will hold public leaders of all parties responsible for telling the truth. And we will require politicians to support good policy on energy, climate and the economy — policy based on science and not on ideology.
We think that to do otherwise, for fear of giving offense, would simply be cowardly.
And we make fun of stuff, because in the face of global warming and peak oil if you can’t laugh, there’s not much point to anything anymore.
— Lindsay and Erik Curren,
Co-founders of Transition Voice
LIndsay, you sound like a typical partisan hack when you accuse other people of not having the advanced intellectual capability to have a proper discussion. Have some class and manners, as that is what is lacking in our two dead mainstream political parties. Jill Stein may not be a great candidate to you, but one thing is clear: she has a dignity and caring demeanor and respect for others that you lack in this column.
Dignity and care are awesome qualities in a candidate when that candidate is also experienced enough for the job. Stein had some really notable faux pas on the campaign trail that showed she lacked the skills for the job. So does The Donald, but that’s another story.
And I disagree about advanced intellectual capability. Americans think all they need is a mouth and they’re qualified to spout off on any topic. This field of equivalences which erode the credibility of expertise is ridiculous in the extreme. It’s not that some polymaths or autodidacts or just really well read persons CAN’T contribute to a conversation. It’s that most people don’t do any research, or very little, or use suspect sources for their insight and so end up not having the breadth to really understand an issue much less to convey important information on it.
Just because under God we’re all “created equally” doesn’t mean that we are actually equal on all fronts. Not being able to say that and deal with that is what brought us The Donald and his crew of Keystone Cops beginning with the aptly-named Conway.
My patience is running out for nonsensical views, ridiculous versions of egalitarianism, and immature nonsense by the aggrieved.
We should understand more clearly that we cannot control the volatile and elite controlled national politics. Transition happens from the bottom up. What is going on in your towns and cities. The transition has been going on. We need to be more a part of speeding up the process. The political atmosphere is a big part of that challenge but our local initiatives are the most important part of this advancement. Make your position digestible and appealing to the broader base with friends and family. Recruit, nominate and elect transition minded local officials with the intellectual skills and experience needed for the position they are running for..