portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts portland metro

government oregon elections 2006

Socialist Equality Party (SEP) public meeting in Portland

Portland, OregonóChristie Schaefer for State Senate, 19th District
Saturday, June 17, 2-4 p.m.
Hillsdale Library Meeting Room
1525 S.W. Sunset Blvd
Portland, OregonóChristie Schaefer for State Senate, 19th District
Saturday, June 17, 2-4 p.m.
Hillsdale Library Meeting Room
1525 S.W. Sunset Blvd

homepage: homepage: http://www.wsws.org

make the fascists scream for overtime 16.Jun.2006 10:24

idea person

schedule 3,000 socialist meetings

What about a Green Socialist Party or a Bioregional Cooperative Party 16.Jun.2006 12:18

a_cascadian@yahoo.com

I love some forms of Socialism and of course totally believe in Equality in all aspects of our identity... infact when I think of real socialism I think of elected group of people working for equality be that in gender, ethnicity, "race", class and even freedom of (and from) religion... so I see use of both the words "equality" and "socialism" as redundent. Over a year ago over dinner I suggested to Walt Brown (hopefully Pacific NorthWestern Socialists should know Walt) "Walt here is an idea ... merge the Greens with the Socialists... raw preditorial capitalism is the enemy of both the environment and those that believe in social justice" (ok not exactly those words.. hell it was over a year ago).

So I ask you "why not create a Green Socialist Party or better a new approach with a newer grassroots idea of a Bioregional Cooperative Party where the idea of "horizontalism" instead of hierarchal thinking and problem solving is a key part. With the goal of creating a bioregional cooperative commonwealth. Maybe that sounds too Green Anarchist or Green Syndicalist?

Cooperative Party sounds good to me! 17.Jun.2006 08:14

feather

Yeah I really must agree, the issues we all need to get behind are those that serve the public interest in general. Bioregionalizing into a Cooperative Party consciousness is really the only way to fight the "divide and conquer" mentality. And to continue with the hierarchical paradigm, which is understandably tempting, seeing as how it's serving the Right so well, is to perpetuate inequality.

So we need to make the "values" of this country come to the forefront - the agreement among most voters (voters are who we're working on convincing by trying to make one party the "stronger" party, right?) is that we need to have some form of governance that ensures health care for all, equal access to education (or some form of belief that education is an inalienable right), adequate living wages... and (most people feel) environmental sustainability for future generations, or at least finding alternatives to oil pretty quickly...

And these are pretty widely held ideas, among social conservatives too, especially as many are losing access to health care at an alarming rate...

So then the challenge is, to remove the hierarchical nature from the inner workings of the political party system... wouldn't it be great to make decisions in a more egalitarian way across the board? In our communities, homes, work-places, and of course, in the political realm??

Wouldn't that make for a better future working relationship with those in positions of political power? I mean, it's important to get leftists with positive health-promoting community-building ideals into positions of political power, but if they just end up stuck in the same corporatocracy and the party that put them there is also ingrained into that same system, will they really be able to effect meaningful change once they're there? Without training on how to organize horizontally (facilitation workshops, practicing active listening skills, conflict resolution strategizing, direct action trainings, copwatch legal observer trainings) and learning to work together on smaller projects, these "leaders" will end up falling into step with the corporate status quo, and lose their base of support - we must grow these parties from the bottom-up.

It starts with Us, or it ends with Them.... and if We lead, They might follow, especially if They see another world is possible... They are Us, and We are Them.... keep the lines of communication open, everyone is just as important to this effort, talk with your parents, co-workers, bosses, kids... the nation is at a critical juncture where people are really wanting to hear answers to the questions that are coming to the forefront daily; there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the direction this country is going in... are we going to use the strength of public opinion to turn the tide? Or are we going to allow our voices and our vision to be silenced along with those who are just now waking up, but are too afraid to speak out?

what is socialism? 17.Jun.2006 12:00

rosa

I believe the above two posters have a confused view of what Socialism is. Both posters seem to think that one can have socialism within capitalism; the first of the two posters mentions 'class' as something that can be solved via a middle ground. Socialists view class as the most degrading, dehumanizing aspect of how our society is arranged. Much in the same weigh a slave owner reaped the benefits from his slave, so too do share-holders sit lazily by while the working-class earns them their billions. There are at least 45 million people in America - and billions around the world- living much as Arican slaves did upon their arrival in the new world. This system of gross exploitation requires a revolution to destroy, meaning, it requires the majority of the worlds population to reject slavery and for the first time since our hunter gatherer ancestors, establish real democracy.

Socialism- what it is why not to merge 24.Aug.2006 17:37

Christie Schaefer (yes, that one) CMSenate@hotmail.com

The reasons not to merge the Green Party with any Socialist party are many- the most important one being that the Green Party is still a capitalist party. We have seen through history what merging and coalition parties will bring- compromise on issues which affect the working people. We saw this most dramatically demonstrated with the vote in favour of war credits by the German Socialists at the start of WWI. This left the Party moarally bankrupt, without a steady theory from which to base their actions. They had sold out. We know what happened next.

What we have seen through the years is that trying to influence either capitalist party (Dems and Reps) is futile. They mean money. The Green Party- as represented by the breakaway candidate Camejo (who once called himself a Socialist as well, by the way)- has, wherever it has taken any kind of office, immediately turned into an "influence party"- willing to compromise a lot to gain a little. See what has happened in Germany for further demonstrations.

(Camejo, to finish a thought here, represents the very basest element of opportunistic collaborationism. Hitching his cart to the star of Nader (with whom I do not on many subject agree), he was later heard at an ISO meeting to say that knowledge of the history of Socialism is not important. A rather stupid thing to say not only in that particular venue, but in general. What is it that they say of those who forget history?)

In any event: We will not be merging. We do not mean to become an influence group. We mean to become a Party for Workers.

In the past decades we have seen the globalisation of industry and the decimation of the people who work in those industries. We see the rise of Wall-Marts, the wars being fought over resources. We also see workers pitted against workers on a nationalistic basis. It is time for the workers all over the world to realise the power we do have, focus it into a party, and use it to the advantage of all.

In this scientifically advanced time, we see the advantages brought by these advances funnelled into the pockets of fewer and fewer people at the top. Meanwhile, we have increasing poverty here, and throughout the developed and developing world.

The time for compromise is past.