On Aug 27, 9:15=A0am, John Holmes <jhol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, nada wrote:
> > On Aug 26, 11:35 pm, John Holmes <jhol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> On the below interchange between the Davids, a general comment.
>
> >> What this is all about is "progressive reform" of the political
> >> system, which California was a cornerstone of. We even had a
> >> Progressive governor, elected on a third party slate, one Hiram
> >> Johnson, who introduced referenda, recall, non-party elections for
> >> municipals etc., and cross-party primary voting, all to, or so it was
> >> claimed, take politics in California out of the clutches of the party
> >> bosses in their smoke-filled rooms and put it into the hands of The
> >> People.
>
> >> Where it has remained ever since, of course.
>
> >> On the details, I will note that it is curious that the P&FP party
> >> bosses in their smoke-filled rooms (marijuana smoke presumably)
picked
> >> Nader, being as most of them are allegedly socialists of one species
> >> or another. If it was the voters, as I thought, that would be
> >> self-explanatory. But since it wasn't, just how did it happen? Who
are
> >> "Nader's people" on the PFP CC? Which group? I'd have thought all the
> >> reform-minded socialists would be backing either McKinney or Obama.
>
> >> -jh-
>
> > You were not paying attention :). What I explained John is that the
> > process to does not involve the old P&F Oligarchy as much as it does
> > the CCs in each county and State wide. The CC has a few of the older
> > P&F folks like Tom Condit (who you know), TC Weber (out of LA) and
> > about a dozen people who have been there since 1968 or so. They wield
> > influence because the P&F IS their area of political activity (such as
> > that is).
>
> > The State CC holds a Convention. The Convention is composed of all the
> > County CC members. These members are chosen during the state primary.
> > To get elected it means visiting as many registered members of the
> > Party as posisble to get them 1. To go to the polls to actually vote
> > and 2. to vote for you over anyone else.
>
> > No one of the older P&F Nomenklatura sup****ted Nader and they
> > succesfully defeated the GP/ISO attempt to get him nominated in 2000
> > and 2004. This time the Nader/Camejo forces did it 'correctly' and
> > actually went after County CC positions during the primary election.
> > The Convention was thus dominated by newly minted P&Fers.
>
> > Others have tried this before and failed. The WWP routinely did this,
> > or tried, in the past but were always too weak to do it. The old soft-
> > Maoist proto-Feminist party and cult of Elizabeth Martinez, leader of
> > the "Democratic Workers Party" made a full on effort in 1983 to do
> > this. I was there at the Convention in Anaheim when they did a full
> > court press to pack on the State Central Committee. I worked with the
> > Morenoists to do battle with them to seize control of the P&F
> > "machinery". That was fun.
>
> > Later, not so much fun, was when the Fulani people of the New Alliance
> > Party tried a rerun of this in 1984, which was quite a serious effort
> > mobilizing almost a 100 black youth from LA to try a take over at the
> > Convention itself, which was also defeated by the then Morenoist IWP
> > (a certain irony here in that in 1976 or so when those that became the
> > NAP came out of Larouche's NCLC, the also called themselves the
> > "International Workers Party").
>
> > Anyway, that's the story. Hope you and David enjoyed it.
>
> > david
>
> So OK, got it, the PFP registered voters *do* in fact control the PFP
> if they actually want to, or more to the point, if one group or
> another rouses them out of their lethargy to do so.
>
> So this time it was the Camejoites? The bona-fried progressive
> capitalists, seeking progressive investments in wind and water power
> and cruelty-free dolphin-safe Chilean sea bass for gourmet
> restaurants? Instead of the things you make the best dividends on, to
> the eternal annoyance of Camejo's customers?
>
> Then, as of this moment, PFP is a capitalist party in the most literal
> sense, in a certain sense more so than the Democrats in California,
> within whom the labor unions have a powerful influence. Which is why
> Hilary, the union candidate, won the Democratic California primary
> instead of Obama.
>
> -jh-
yeah, sort of, kind of, maybe not. They are running an non/anti-
socialist for prez but the program that goes out to everyone is the
P&F socialist program. go figure?
D.
|
