Voting for Resistance, Voting for the Youth: Why the Green Party is the Party of the Future
Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala, Occupy Wall Street 1 Year Anniversary. September 17, 2012
(Image by Michael Fleshman) Details DMCA
Matthew Vernon Whalan
For younger generations in the United States, it is hard to know how to vote in any way that will accommodate the future. The Democratic Party is not the party of change. This article will analyze three issues: first, how the Democratic Party in the 21st has shown absolute continuity with the Republican Party on major issues, often in rhetoric and almost always in policy. Second, the article will explain some of the only differences between the Democratic and Republican parties. In conclusion, an argument will be made for why the Green Party will be the only safely electable party of the 21st century in America -- the only party of any substantial vision and change, since the primary two parties are locked into a cynical servitude to the same apocalyptic corporate agenda. The young must align themselves against this agenda.
The thoughts about the Green Party outlined in this article are not intended to form a prediction but, rather, a recommendation. Furthermore, the Green Party is by no means the only way, or the most important way, to save the future. Much will have to be accomplished in addition to supporting the Green Party, and most efforts toward a safe future will be accomplished outside of electoral politics. However, in light of the Presidential election season and the political stalemate in the United States, this article considers how the Green Party represents the only possibility for significant change within electoral politics.
Many people in younger generations of the United States know that their futures are in the hands of a small clique of global oligarchs who control some of the most powerful forces of death in human history -- mainly the fossil fuel and industrial agriculture industries, the global war industry and its nuclear weapons, and global economic corruption and insecurity. The young largely recognize that they cannot afford the patience of incrementalism on these key issues.
This article will start by analyzing some of the key issues on which the Democratic and Republican parties are -- with very few individual exceptions on both sides -- exactly the same in policy, no matter what the reasons are. The issues that follow are not the only points of continuity between the two parties but they are, perhaps, some of the most important ones, and certainly demonstrate the issue of continuity in the most relevant terms:
(Note: In the following list, I will mainly focus on Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for reasons of relevance and relative conciseness, with some mentions of other relevant Democrats.)
More environmental destruction has been accomplished by the U.S. under the Obama administration than under the Bush II administration, largely through drilling and fracking . Indeed, Obama brags about this, depending, probably, on his crowd. Here it is in Obama's own words :
"Now, it starts with the need for safe, responsible oil production here in America. We're not going to transition out of oil anytime soon. And that's why under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years. That's why we have a record number of oilrigs operating right now -- more working oil and gas rigs than the rest of the world combined."
The comments in that speech get even more frightening, as he eventually glorifies the U.S.'s plan to authorize drilling in the Arctic. Obama, Clinton, and -- just for relevance -- Tim Kaine, all have dubious ties to the oil industry, consistent with most of the Democratic party, and hard to stomach for voters used to viewing the Democrats as the party that understands the threat of climate change. The Democrats, contrary to their rhetoric, have not realized the threat of climate change. Realizing climate change would entail an understanding that it could significantly shorten the lives of the younger generations, and acting on this truth as the emergency that it is. As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton played a key part in America's efforts to spread fracking all over the globe. Whenever a Democrat is talking about climate change, keep in mind that expanding renewable and sustainable energy does not help the environment at all unless there is simultaneous enormous reduction in fossil fuels. Renewable and sustainable energy has to be instead of, not in addition to, the fossil fuel industry. For additional information on the politics of the oil industry, see also the Green Peace Report, "The Kingpins of Carbon and their War on Democracy." Despite the fact that most of the money thrown at the political game by big oil finds its way to Republicans, the industry has nonetheless expanded under Democratic control. Hillary Clinton has received the third largest sum of money from the oil industry of all members of U.S. government, including twice as much as her current opponent Donald Trump.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).