For slightly more than 15 years, I was involved deeply with alternative political parties: the Socialist Party, 1993-98, and the Green Party, 1998-2009. Throughout this period, no matter how tirelessly I and my mates worked to bring to America a vision of environmental and economic justice, we gained little to no traction.
When we nominated candidates for federal, state, county or local office, these fine folks had almost no chance of winning their races, let only even impacting those races. Most of the time, we were lucky if any candidate polled higher than five percent.
There are a multitude of reasons WHY political parties that aren't the two-headed monster -- particularly those left-of-center -- can't seem to crack into the political discussion. It would take many posts to scratch the surface. One explanation, however, is really galling: When it comes to the issue of environmental degradation, far too many Americans simply don't get it!!
While generic polls conducted in this nation consistently indicate that the majority of voters rank the environment as a crucial issue, they certainly don't vote that way. Year after year voters elect candidates who enact legislation that further degrades our fragile ecosystems. When faced with a decision of short-term profit versus environmental destruction/long-term costs, our elected leaders continually vote for the former. Short-term profit trumps everything else!
While American voters can't seem to muster the will actively to support candidates who support the environmental as well as the health and safety of their own citizens, voters in other parts of the world don't share this same reticence. Australia, New Zealand and several European nations have elected many Greens and even some Reds to serve as their representatives in national, regional and local government.
For example, in Germany, the party of the current Merkel government appears "set to lose power in a major regional stronghold on Sunday after early results suggested the anti-nuclear Greens were surging to their first ever state premiership." The Greens and Social Democrats also wrested control away from the conservatives in two other states.
In the aftermath of the nuclear catastrophe in Japan, many countries and their voters are taking a more critical look at the whole issue of nuclear power. Many people have come to the conclusion that nuclear energy simply isn't worth the risks involved. In the US, unfortunately, this issue barely causes a ripple on the periphery of mainstream political discourse primarily because there are no left-leaning political parties with enough muscle to push this issue to the forefront.
And, if you think that maybe America might develop a stronger political will in this overall area, a recent study doesn't bode well for the prospect. While over 80% of our neighbors to the north (Canada, for those of you at home keeping score) acknowledge that climate change is real and predominantly human-caused, only 50-60% of Americans agree. If we can't get more Americans to face this simple truth, what chances do we have of convincing them that nuclear power isn't the panacea that nuclear energy apologists say it is?
When we nominated candidates for federal, state, county or local office, these fine folks had almost no chance of winning their races, let only even impacting those races. Most of the time, we were lucky if any candidate polled higher than five percent.
There are a multitude of reasons WHY political parties that aren't the two-headed monster -- particularly those left-of-center -- can't seem to crack into the political discussion. It would take many posts to scratch the surface. One explanation, however, is really galling: When it comes to the issue of environmental degradation, far too many Americans simply don't get it!!
While generic polls conducted in this nation consistently indicate that the majority of voters rank the environment as a crucial issue, they certainly don't vote that way. Year after year voters elect candidates who enact legislation that further degrades our fragile ecosystems. When faced with a decision of short-term profit versus environmental destruction/long-term costs, our elected leaders continually vote for the former. Short-term profit trumps everything else!
While American voters can't seem to muster the will actively to support candidates who support the environmental as well as the health and safety of their own citizens, voters in other parts of the world don't share this same reticence. Australia, New Zealand and several European nations have elected many Greens and even some Reds to serve as their representatives in national, regional and local government.
For example, in Germany, the party of the current Merkel government appears "set to lose power in a major regional stronghold on Sunday after early results suggested the anti-nuclear Greens were surging to their first ever state premiership." The Greens and Social Democrats also wrested control away from the conservatives in two other states.
In the aftermath of the nuclear catastrophe in Japan, many countries and their voters are taking a more critical look at the whole issue of nuclear power. Many people have come to the conclusion that nuclear energy simply isn't worth the risks involved. In the US, unfortunately, this issue barely causes a ripple on the periphery of mainstream political discourse primarily because there are no left-leaning political parties with enough muscle to push this issue to the forefront.
And, if you think that maybe America might develop a stronger political will in this overall area, a recent study doesn't bode well for the prospect. While over 80% of our neighbors to the north (Canada, for those of you at home keeping score) acknowledge that climate change is real and predominantly human-caused, only 50-60% of Americans agree. If we can't get more Americans to face this simple truth, what chances do we have of convincing them that nuclear power isn't the panacea that nuclear energy apologists say it is?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are unmoderated, so you can write whatever you want.