Reformism and Kookism

Between 2000 and around 2005, I was heavily involved in the Green Party at the local, state and national levels. Then I started focusing heavily on other things, followed by a period of moving around a lot and not being too involved in politics at all.

Over the past few weeks, after intending for a while to get involved again, I have suddenly found myself jumping in head-first.

Coming back after a bit of a break, I can see that as it was before, the Green Party is largely made up of committed, progressive people with good motivations who are doing good work on many of the issues I care about. However, one change is undeniable: The Greens, as a group, have gotten kookier.

Part of why I slowed down my involvement in the party was my feeling that it was largely reformist: that most Greens thought large-scale social change could be brought about through wonky policy adjustments.

That tendency certainly still exists, but I am also seeing a dramatic upswing in the number of Greens who believe the World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition, the Federal Reserve creates fake money out of thin air, the winners of our elections are chosen by Diebold, and other such things.

People who believe these things (I'll court controversy by calling them "kooks") often set themselves up as the true "radicals," as opposed to the more reformist currents. But I am coming to see these positions as two sides of the same coin.

A kook is a reformist who has been confronted with objective world events that can no longer be processed from the frame of reference of reformism.

And it would seem to me that the cure for both reformism and kookism is that dreaded bore, theory.

The Green Party's foundational principles are a set of "values." Sometimes, Green meetings are planned with some time set aside for discussing these values. Such discussions tend to be superficial, and to the extent that people say anything at all, they're often talking past each other.

This is not surprising. I can't take a sound political position based solely on values. I need values, but I also need a correct account of the relevant facts. And as a bridge between the two, I need some sort of theory that allows me to understand the facts in light of my values.

There are a variety of theoretical frameworks that are relevant to the Green Party and have historically been adopted by many Greens, including socialism, anarchism, social ecology and radical democracy. (I have yet to see a rigorous theory of "deep ecology," but some people claim to adhere to that.) But we don't talk much about this stuff anymore.

Let's start.

Take Two

I used to have a blog called WWID. Then, about two and a half years ago, I stopped posting to it. Recently, I've found myself once again drawn to the idea of writing what I think and seeing if anyone cares. So here is the resurrected WWID, looking pretty much like it did before.