In a major self-inflicted wound Israeli nationalist groups recently turned support for a BDS motion targeting Israel’s occupation into overwhelming approval for a resolution also demanding action to address the plight of Palestinian refugees and Palestinian citizens of Israel. And, in a further bizarre twist, Elizabeth May and others within the Green Party leadership have tried to obfuscate the extent of the membership’s support for Palestinian rights.
During live US presidential election coverage on RT, after it became clear that Donald Trump was going to secure the required number of electoral college votes to win the election, word came that Hillary Clinton would not make a concession speech that night. The moderator of the live election coverage at RT was gobsmacked. He called Clinton’s behavior the “epitome of arrogance.” It certainly did smack of being a poor loser.
What to take home about the 2016 US presidential election results? The two presidential contenders (at least four, but “third” party contenders are effectively obscured by the establishment) were highly loathed. So what do the results mean? Are people really happy that Donald Trump won, or is it more accurate to state that people are happy that Hillary Clinton lost?
Eleven quick take home-points:
The frustration that prompted the “Bernie or Bust” movement is not just about economic stagnation. Rather, it is more basic, more institutional-centered, than that. From the viewpoint of progressives, there is in addition a frustration with the once liberal, now neoliberal political philosophy and its supporters, many of whom hold political office. This includes the presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton.
Al Gore, former Democratic nominee in 2000, has a warning for anyone concerned about climate change that is planning on voting for a third-party candidate like Jill Stein: don’t! He urges them to vote for Hillary Clinton, saying that he knows from “experience” the damage that third party candidates can do to spoil it for corporatist Democrats. We explain why he’s wrong.
The Green Party might have had a realistic chance for the presidency had Bernie Sanders not amputated his “political revolution” and instead joined presidential nominee Jill Stein on the Green ticket. But Sanders was the sheep-dogging company man Glen Ford at Black Agenda Report said he was. The Green Party will not win this year, but with support it may win soon. A decade ago Syriza in Greece polled at five percent. Now it is in power. In 1853 there was no Republican Party.
As hard as it is to admit for a former junior hockey player who spends many hours writing at the neighbourhood Tim Hortons, some things are better in the USA.
For example, comparing Green Party leader Elizabeth May to her American counterpart Jill Stein on foreign-policy issues puts Canada to shame. While Stein has articulated forthright criticism on various international issues, May spouts nationalist platitudes as often as she challenges unjust policies.
When detractors accused the great English economist John Maynard Keynes of being inconsistent in his views, he reputedly replied, “When my information changes, I change my mind. What do you do?”
In a June 2015 op-ed, I wrote, “If the race in Pennsylvania or New Jersey is extremely close, I can imagine voting for Clinton for only reason: The Krusty the Clown clone emerging as the GOP candidate will be worse…” I was, of course, voicing the by now well-rehearsed “lesser of two evils” position, a topic adroitly analyzed by both David Swanson and Mike Albert in recent days.
The great Fred Hampton, Black Panther leader that was murdered by Chicago police in cahoots with the FBI on December 3,1969, had a refrain he used in his speeches. “I am a revolutionary.” Partly he was killed because of his oratory skills, partly because of his organizing skills. He was in the process of merging the Black Panthers with other activists groups of the day — and J. Edgar Hoover put a stop to all that.
