“I’d rather vote for something I want and not get it than vote for something I don’t want, and get it.”
Eugene V. Debs

The Socialist Party [ of Great Britain ] , campaigns on the maximum programme of socialism and nothing less than socialism.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
John Quincy Adams

Socialists have no illusions about the democratic credentials of the politicians of the Left, the Right or the Centre. What the capitalist class, and the political parties that serve that class, call democracy is a contrived form of consensus in which the political parties conspire to ensure that the maximum number of people accept a system of law which guarantees a minority class in society the legal right to own and control the means of life of the great majority. To achieve and maintain that system of Law – and the Order that ensures the right of that minority to exploit and impoverish the majority – capitalism must have political control of the state machine.

A vital part of the process that maintains the illusion of democratic choice is the power to confine political knowledge – and, thus, political options – to those parties whose policies are firmly rooted in an acceptance of capitalism.

When it comes to elections, choice is governed by information and knowledge and, since the allegedly democratic parties have ensured that the public have information about, and knowledge of, the present system and the politicians offering themselves to run this system capitalism goes unchallenged. Like Henry Ford’s Model T, which was available in any colour providing it was black, current “democratic” practice is to allow us the widest possible choice as long as it is capitalism.Of course capitalist politicians and the people to whom capitalism entrusts the control of news and information will hotly dispute this. A party stating a case for an alternative way of running society would be disadvantaged, for capitalist politics, its parties and its media, are not based on rational examination of ideas but on the performance of media celebrities.

But there is one heartening thought: unlike the parties of capitalism whose purpose is a permanent struggle, to gain power and, when power has been lost, struggle to regain it, our purpose is to make that initial breakthrough which will finally overcome the ability of capitalism’s political agents to lie, confuse and misinform and unlike politicians elected to service capitalism, socialist delegates will not be observing parliamentary meaningless rituals but real participative democracy in the administration of social affairs, at local, regional and world levels, will be the order of the day .

Nevertheless I support them both and will determine which should receive the vote. I don’t see it as a waste because it represents a choice. But I’m not particularly interested in who actually becomes president.

The real challenge is ground level and that work needs to go on. I don’t think either McKinney or Nader have really hoed the ground to create more than a ripple.

That’s not “realism” or pessimism. It’s actually a call to organize and continue to push for local transformation.

My issue is that we keep abstracting the problem by looking at national politics. As I keep on saying, if you can’t change it locally, you can’t change it. Start where you are.

My perception of Cynthia McKinney is that of a progressive who was trashed by her very own “party”, the same repressive, corporatist Democratic Party that Obama, Clinton, and so many other sold-out corporatists and supporters of empire and destruction of the Bill of Rights in “congress” so proudly claim to represent.

Cynthia McKinney’s run-in with the security people, whose real job is to protect “congress” from its own constituents, was for me simply another example of how this country has degraded over the past 40 years. When government, at any level, has so completely failed the people who put it in power that it fears for its existence, and then responds, not by reassessing and changing its direction, but by erecting barriers, hiring security guards, and enacting repressive legislation with the sole intent of keeping track of and being able to better control those it supposedly represents, then that government is close to failure, all the bellowing about the dangers posed by the evil, terrorist “others” notwithstanding.

The truth is, McKinney, or Nader, are quite electable. Just turn off your TV, recycle your “news”paper, and vote for them!

Swear allegiance to the flag
Whatever flag they offer
Never hint at what you really feel
Teach the children quietly
For some day sons and daughters
Will rise up and fight while we stood still

As an Aussie watching from afar, I fall asleep every time the “news” reports on the US election circus.

Regarding your words about “grassroots activism is alive and well across the land in some of the most remote, forgotten places you could imagine. ….. People in our own backyard are fighting over the essentials of life: water, food, human liberty”. I’m sure these activists are tireless and dedicated and may enjoy a “small victory” here and there on a micro level. However, let’s not forget the over-riding truth that the bad guys (not just in the US) are winning the battle on a macro level (by a long margin) and this imbalance doesn’t look like abating soon.

Activists are holding an umbrella up to a tsunami……….

Notwithstanding the above, I empathize with Noam Chomsky in his book “Understanding Power” when he said that it’s better to fight, knowing that it may be in vain, than to do nothing and try to tell the next generation that you gave in.

Call my comments above pessimistic. I like to call them realistic.

Sometimes I blog over at http://www.McKinney2008.com and have found a root of supporters growing grassroots efforts nationally for her. We should celebrate the victory she has conquered in this momentus legacy and finish with a victory!

Yes. I’ve observed Nader for over 40 years. I’ve never seen any person so dedicated to the human spirit. Son of Lebanese immigrants. Raised in a small town in Connecticut. He is owned by no one.

I know of no other living American in our midst who has done what Ralph Nader has done for people.

Nice piece Josh.

But it’s so frustratingly simple. Distill down the talk and ask yourselves the questions. What do you stand for and what do you want to endorse? And who, let’s get real, can you trust through experience, past record and damn force of conviction to deliver?

I wonder if our moderators have ever worked with, or for, Ralph Nader.

If they had they might recall his response to nay-sayers: Pessimism, by definition doesn’t look for solutions.

I ask you this….is getting what this country needs more possible, or less possible, when we knock the good guy who stands for what we all believe in? (By knock I mean giving the impression that it’s hardly worth the trouble to support him…) Is it more possible, or less possible, when we don’t support, nor put in the sleeves-rolled-up work to get him on the ballot? Really now, more or less possible. So, are you serving to dissuade or encourage people to do the work that’s necessary when you say it doesn’t matter?

You’ve mentioned some great things that are happening. Does it hurt or hinder our chance for a peaceful, free, sovereign nation of people to not include in that list to join the forces of people who are volunteering for the candidate that can achieve that sovereignty, through simple force of conviction, above all others running?

Buck up. You’d be extremely surprised at what honest-to-goodness hard work in support of what we actually want can achieve.

Policy makers just can’t make hard choices for the future. Many of the things I see with business heads same thing just can’t make hard choices for the future. When is somebody going to step up and make some hard choices, yes there are a few but very few. What Mike wrote a few day’s ago will that happen? Well Bernanke used that pen today and so far it didn’t take the dollar to long to start dropping. Bigger game at play maybe.

–Alexis De Tocqueville

But when was it ever otherwise? This sillyass country of ours, so magnificent in essence and so indulged for the wrong things for so long, has a long, stupid arrogance to overcome, and it will probably kill a good many of we in the opposition before we start to break surface with the mass of our fellow citizens. Let’s keep cranking.

In addition to grassroots activities of the kind that Josh mentions, there seems to be quite a bit of political energy on the Libertarian and Paleoconservative side, with the excellent antiwar.com serving as an example. They still seem free to speak their mind without being hit over the head by one of the major political parties. This does, however, mean that there will probably be an increase in grass roots activism on 9-11 truth, anti-Federal Reserve, NAFTA superhighway, and so forth, things that the left has tended to poo-poo over the years as being beside the point, if not downright harmfull. Oh, well. Tough. If you have your moment in the sun, and then run away like a bunch of scared chickens, you forfeit your right to define what the point is. Enjoy the sidelines, everyone.