Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Lexikon

Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #1 
http://www.modernwhig.org/forums/public-discussion/website-suggestionsfeedback/merge-justice-citizens-and-reform-party

The Modern Whig Party is a new party founded in 2007 by Iraq War Veterans which focuses on pragmaticism and populism. They are trying to unite people through their similarities and find good solutions to the nation's problems.

Here is their platform, which you can compare with Rocky's

http://www.modernwhig.org/handbook/who-are-modern-whigs/where-we-stand

They support same sex marriage, fiscal responsibility, education reform and fairness, and environmentalism. I think merging with the Justice Party will improve people on both sides, like how it merged with US centrist party and will be influential as a populist centrist progressive party.

Even though I'm neither a Whig nor JP member, I think this is a good idea.

__________________
"The legitimacy of a state rests upon its claim to do justice"- ALAN RYAN

"In my view, all that is necessary for faith is the belief that by doing our best we shall come nearer to success and that success in our aims (the improvement of the lot of mankind, present and future) is worth attaining."- ROSALIND FRANKLIN

I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community, and as long as I live it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can- GEORGE BERNARD SHAW
Kristine Kubat

Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #2 
Thanks for bringing the Modern Whig Party to our collective attention.  There are reformers everywhere.  I didn't have time to read much but what I did read led me to believe that you are right in saying there is a great deal of overlap between this group and the JP.  I will bring this to the attention of others and see if we can reach out to them on some level. We must do some serious coalition building over the next few months and that outreach has to go beyond liberal circles.

Unregistered
Reply with quote  #3 
  There is common agreement here. This group needs a common identity. Therefore, you need to not just have liberals involved but all types of people. I for one am not a member of Justice Party but just giving advice. Though, you might have a hard time with conservatives. You can observe what they are all about through Santorum. He is so off with society. I could not imagine a man like that even running for office. It is a circus out there.  I know many people who are conservatives but are embarrassed by who is representing them. Those people I know are into helping the world and want to bring the country back into normalcy.

I refuse to be part of any group. I am a human and believe in life and all people.

What happened to integrity and dignity in this country?



Kristine Kubat

Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #4 
You do a good job of pointing out the problem with using labels when trying to build consensus. They are fine when your goal is to divide people and pit them against one another. . . or herd them off into some extreme behavior.

The point I want to make is that there are people who identify themselves as conservatives only because they don't want to be called liberals or progressives, when in fact they have a lot of common ground with these people.

How to create a unifying force. . . that's the challenge.

nolesfan2011

Registered:
Posts: 33
Reply with quote  #5 
I think the modern whig party is non existent outside of Florida though where the ballot access laws are actually easier than most states.  I don't see a reason to do this unless they were to bring it up.  Also "whigs" still carry a bit of a negative connotation as a defunct party.  
social democrat

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #6 
I would focus on fellow left-of-center parties before looking rightward.  The Socialist Party USA shares more in common with the JP than Rocky likes to admit, simply because the word "socialism" is such a taboo in American society.  Socialism is not the way most Americans imagine it.  There are also a lot of different forms.  Social democracy, for example, includes and even makes use of private business, especially small ones, to achieve social justice.  It also includes a safety net for the neediest, a right to affordable health care for all, strong collective bargaining rights, world peace, fairer distribution of wealth, a right to affordable education for everyone, and equality between men and women of all races, religious groups (and those who have no religion), and all sexual orientations.  More recently it has grown to include environmentalist concerns, as well.  The Justice Party should merge not only with the Socialist Party, USA, but the Democratic Socialists of America, a non-electoral group which has tried to work within the Democratic Party, unsuccessfully, to achieve progressive change.  The JP should unite with them to form a new Social Democratic Party, which should look to the New Democratic Party of Canada for inspiration.  For those who don't know, the NDP is Canada's main social democratic party, which has normally been confined to being the third or fourth largest party in parliament, but it finally broke through to become the official opposition in the federal election last year.  Its first leader, Tommy Douglas was the one who first had the idea for Canada's universal health care system, and he fought long and hard to ensure that it became reality in Canada until the Liberals and Conservatives finally adopted it.  The NDP has also formed provincial governments in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scota.  Of all the parties that have formed provincial governmnets across Canada, the NDP actually has the greatest record of balanced budgets.  Every country needs a Green Party, so I don't think the Green Party should join in this merger, but the Justice Party (or whatever name it should have after the merger) should co-operate in elections.  
Lexikon

Registered:
Posts: 31
Reply with quote  #7 
Quote:
Originally Posted by social democrat
I would focus on fellow left-of-center parties before looking rightward.

MWP is not necesairly right, but non-ideological. Which means they go with the position that they deem is best for the country.

SPUSA is even more fringe than GPUSA


"We strongly support affirmative action"

"We call for the right of retirement at age 55"

"We demand full support for every woman's right to choose when, if, and how to have children, including the right to free [wtf!?] abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy [wtf!?]"

"We call for the decriminalization [not legalization] of prostitution"

"We call for the lowering of the voting age to 15"

"We call for a total ban on Genetically Engineered crops."

"We oppose any new nuclear power projects and call for the rapid phasing out of all nuclear power plants, and a ban on the export of nuclear technology [It's talk like this that is preventing nuclear plants from being improved]."

Quote:
The Socialist Party USA shares more in common with the JP than Rocky likes to admit, simply because the word "socialism" is such a taboo in American society. Socialism is not the way most Americans imagine it.

Yeah...

no.

JP doesn't even have a platform yet. Here's two issues Rocky covered, and they're not very similar.

"I recognize that decisions about abortion can be difficult, but it is not the business of government to make the situation even more difficult. The decision should be between a woman, her doctor, and anyone else she wants to have involved."

Not free abortion.

"End public subsidies for nuclear energy, an industry that has never existed without taxpayer support.  While nuclear power generation does not produce carbon emissions, it should not be a high priority until the industry solves the problem of wastes, until power plants are better protected from terrorist attack, and until the international community creates a reliable way to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons."

He recognizes that Nuclear Power is safer than coal.

Quote:
The Justice Party should merge not only with the Socialist Party, USA, but the Democratic Socialists of America, a non-electoral group which has tried to work within the Democratic Party, unsuccessfully, to achieve progressive change.

The other socialists parties have tried to merge. It didn't go so well. In fact many socialist parties are splinters of previous socialist parties.

Read more here:


Quote:
Every country needs a Green Party, so I don't think the Green Party should join in this merger, but the Justice Party (or whatever name it should have after the merger) should co-operate in elections.  

I suggested that JP could have dual memberships with SPUSA and GPUSA.

Anyways, I like the name "Justice". Social democratic sound too similar to the democratic party, Socialist is too diverse. We are to focus on Social Justice, Economic Justice, and Ecological Justice, and going their through any means necessary, not based on ideologies. Similar to the MWP.

__________________
"The legitimacy of a state rests upon its claim to do justice"- ALAN RYAN

"In my view, all that is necessary for faith is the belief that by doing our best we shall come nearer to success and that success in our aims (the improvement of the lot of mankind, present and future) is worth attaining."- ROSALIND FRANKLIN

I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community, and as long as I live it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can- GEORGE BERNARD SHAW
Chris Stegman
Reply with quote  #8 

Whig Party???  You've got to be kidding me.   The name alone is enough to turn anyone in their right mind OFF.  That name represents the precursor to the Republican Party.   If they are only in Florida and want to merge with the FL JP (if there is one there) then fine.  If the values and vision actually mesh.

 

The Greens are light years ahead of the JP with 225 or more elected officials nationwide.  And they are not likely to change their brand, they have an international base in many governments and a 20 year head start.   If we merge with anybodey it should be on a principled programatic basis, not a watering down of our principles.  We are NOT a centrist populist party.  That is NOT what we want to become. 

 

I believe our true base is left  independent progressive and radical elements, including Socialist, Democratic Socialist, or Social Democrat types.  But our pole should include those 'conservatives' that are aligned with us programatically which will mean almost none.   We are 'left' populists, not right.  If not, I'm in the wrong party in spite of liking Rocky alot. 

 

Chris (ballot access coordinator for WA state)

 

ps by the way when is our founding convention scheduled for and when will Rocky be vetting a VP.  Will he do so from the top down or bottom up i.e. democratically.  

Robert

Registered:
Posts: 114
Reply with quote  #9 
Chris, I think you are on target about the true base of the Justice Party. It's pretty left wing.
Ben Eastwood

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 41
Reply with quote  #10 
Left and right are outdated mindsets.  My uncle was the chairman of the Libertarian party in the state of CT.  What I learned from helping him and debating him, is that the political spectrum is a circle in many ways.
 Whatever their individual reasons are, "C" conservatives and Liberals both tend to be against war based foreign policies, against government restrictions on marriage, and against the erosion of civil liberties by the federal government.  While I do not agree with the Libertarian platform on all areas, I do see that we need to redirect the peoples' focus from the Right/Left neocon/neoprog slight of hand that passes for democracy, and on the real division between corporations and real people.

  I believe that we should embrace and encourage coalitions with other parties on issues where our priorities are straight, but that we need to be careful that we do not tie our own hands in the process.  For example, while it's great that Rocky got the Oregon Progressive nomination, we should not let that stop us from promoting the Justice Party in Oregon especially on the upcoming campaign cycles.
  If our goal is to promote and grow the JP then we need to focus on growing the JP and not worry about what the whigs, greens, progs or libs are doing.  Then again, I come from a state which allows fusion candidates, so it is possible to support, say Anthony Pollina without making him give up his Progressive and Democratic nominations.
  Speaking of Mr. Pollina, he brings up the point of party building over campaigning.  In 2008 he was essentially offered the Democratic nomination if he would join the D party.  He was building the P party, so he said no.  The Dems ended up running a spoiler candidate, and Pollina lost the election because of the split vote and the drag on voter turnout it caused.
  If he had been more interested in winning office than building the party, he'd have been a shoo-in.  As it stood, he beat the D's and got the support of the labor unions, including the teachers union, a first for a 3rd party candidate.  If we are talking about party building the decision to accept the Oregon nomination was counter productive, although from an election standpoint, it was the right call.

__________________
We came, we saw, we gathered signatures, we sued, we gathered signatures, we got Rocky on the Ballot in Vermont. That was the easy part, now we have to get this Justice Party Started!
eric1

Registered:
Posts: 16
Reply with quote  #11 
Clearly I believe it is very doable for the Justice Party to attract DISENCHANTED members from some of the other left-leaning parties. However, one has to be careful in this regard because some of these other parties might view more aggressive recruitment as "stealing their membership." Then come Presidential election time that could have a negative impact. Along these lines, one has to distinguish between recruiting people to vote for a Presidential candidate versus recruiting people to build a party. Though similar in many respects, they are not the same. In order to build the party at the state level, one has to start first at the county level. In counties where the Democratic Party is strong this could be a challenge or a plus depending on how disenchanted the local base is with the Democratic Party. With more and more people registering as Independents, these are the individuals who probably should be targeted first and foremost. I also believe moderate Republicans(RINOS) should also be lobbied to consider joining.
As per the socialist parties, caution has to be exercised here as well because as one previous poster put it, the word "socialism" has become taboo in our society largely as  a result of the Republicans repeating THE BIG LIE.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!