Editorial 4.8, September/October 2002, by Deirdre Helfferich On Being Green Kermit has it right: it isn’t easy being Green. People look at you like you’re from Mars when they find out you really mean it. Their eyes glaze over instantly and they sort of edge away from you at parties, saying things like, "Oh? That’s interesting. I have to go water my dog now." Perhaps this is because they consider the Green ticket as merely a place to cast a protest vote on the left, rather than as a legitimate political option. In our rather rigidly two-party system, any third party is going to be at the most a spoiler and at the least a collector of politically-minded nutcases who can be safely ignored (the truly insane, of course, gravitate to the party in power, where they can be responsible for really big messes but get to hang the blame on someone else). The Green party is on the ballot in, I think, only three states, if that, and was just a whisker away from losing its official status in Alaska in the election before last. In the last election, of course, the Green party was vilified by the Democrats for throwing the presidency to Bush, but that is the kind of problem any growing third party will be faced with while it starts to gain momentum. The Green party is a peculiarly international party, unlike the Democratic and Republican parties, and there are parties in almost all 50 states, territories, and possessions of the United States. And the Greens are growing. Contrast this with Germany, the first country to have a Green party, where the coalition government’s leading players include the Greens. A good ten percent of the vote usually goes to the Greens, and has for over a decade. The Greens have influenced national and local politics in profound ways, and their continued popular support indicates that the German people take Green concerns to be their own. But here, in many circles being a Green seems to mean being considered a Wacko Humorless Radical Totalitarian Environmental Preservationist. For the most part, at least in this country, I’d say they’re right--or were. Purported Green party members often seem to be from some other planet, with little or no sense of political realism, and very little political experience. Frequently they don’t even seem to be espousing what I would consider Green politics; instead, somebody starts ranting on a curious range of fringe causes with a vaguely leftish inclination, in antagonistic, self-righteous terms, and labels it all Green. No wonder people get a little nervous. But just because some kook claims he’s Green doesn’t mean he is. For that matter, just because a person isn’t an official member of the Green party doesn’t mean he or she isn’t Green at heart. I’m a Green because I think that the Green party philosophy is simply common sense. It’s silly to think that Green values are extremist or weird, because they are perfectly ordinary. Fresh air is nice stuff. A quiet evening is relaxing. Clean water is good for you and tasty, too. In fact, these values seem to be reflected more and more by mainstream America, and politicians continue to ignore these values at their increasing peril. It’s also a rather optimistic philosophy: you, too, can make a difference. Judging by the very low voter turnout in the nation’s elections for the last several decades, the Republicans and Democrats don’t seem to be inspiring much confidence or even interest, despite their quite solid dominance. Or perhaps they’re just predictable, and therefore don’t inspire much worry.... Unfortunately, successful politics hardly ever seems to be burdened by anything even approaching common sense. Misconceptions about Green politics are many. The Green party, for example, isn’t against making money. It also isn’t against mining, or any other heavy industry, for that matter. Your average Green is not going to throw out the last 6000 or 100 or even 20 years of artistic and industrial development in a protest move against the supposed evils of mining or manufacturing. After all, things like transistors, jewelry, heat, buildings, cars, farm equipment, recycling plants, table salt, ceramic glazes, dental fillings, surgical equipment, bicycles, solar panels, et cetera, result from these. What amazes me is how many people seem to see the Green party as being against something. No party can survive if it defines itself only by what it isn’t or by what its members hate, or (and this is the important thing) by what other people think it’s against. To let somebody else define what you believe in is foolhardy at best. To let them distract you from your sense of humor is far worse, for when a political animal can’t laugh at itself, it’s easy prey for every critic. Nobody likes a self-righteous doomsayer. Greeness means many things to many people, just like democracy or republicanism mean different things depending on who you talk to. The ideals of politics often get short-circuited by the practicalities of politics, and that’s sad. In this upcoming gubenatorial election, I’ve looked at the three major candidates (in my mind, the Greens are a major force) and I find that Diane Benson actually stands for what I believe in. I dislike several of the positions that Fran Ulmer has taken, and of course, Frank Murkowski scares the heck out of me. Yet people I respect and like are gung-ho for Frank or Fran. Friends have exhorted me to vote for Fran to keep Frank out--and vice versa--or to go ahead and vote for Diane so that Frank will get in. And, horribly, I’m tempted. But I’m tired of being against somebody, against something. I want to vote my conscience, even at the risk of incurring consequences that I don’t like, either. I hate feeling like a hypocrite. I don’t accept advertisements from political parties, but many of my columnists and contributors have political opinions and party affiliations that they make very clear to their readers. I appreciate their willingness to speak up. Yet much of what they say makes my voting decisions harder. So how will I vote in November? I don’t know. | ||
 | | |
