FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

A Brown Party?

Did you see it? Did you hear? Brian Jones just might be running for Lieutenant Governor of the state of New York! On the Green Party ticket! I know what you’re thinking. I thought it myself. Brian Jones? The late Rolling Stone? He died in 1969! Just weeks before Lance Armstong’s father – Neil – landed on the moon. But you know I’m just kidding, right? Lance Armstrong’s dad’s not Neil. Lance Armstrong’s name isn’t even Lance Armstrong. It’s Lance Gunderson. True fact. According to Wikipedia, his father’s name is Eddie – worked for The Dallas Morning News. Just a little bit of… what would you call that? Americana?

At any event… No, Brian Jones has not returned from the hereafter. It’s a fairly common name, Jones. Derived from John. And Brian, well, that’s common, too. Yes, so Brian Jones, a committed activist and public school teacher here in New York, announced he’d like to run. And you know how I found this out? I read about it on the Jacobin website. You know Jacobin, right? They call themselves Jacobin, but don’t worry, they won’t be guillotining any necks anytime soon. Their name, like so many things these days, is merely ironical. Indeed, rather than threatening anyone, their editor-in-chief and publisher, Bhaskar Sunkara, according to The New Statesman, is positioning his publication to be, as Doug Henwood phrased it, “the reasonable alternative to some more threatening force” – you know, like how Martin Luther King, Jr. (before he was radicalized) was supposed to be the “reasonable alternative” to Malcolm X (who wanted to actually, forcefully, redistribute land and whatnot).

So, when I saw this thing about the Greens in this ostensibly Red publication, like any reasonable person I couldn’t help but wonder what it all meant. Was this an instance of the Red-green alliance? Could it mean that the Greens and the Reds, in spite of their differences, are beginning to recognize their common destiny? Or did it, rather, have something to do with that “reasonable alternative” angle? Or was it something else entirely? And then, after considering the various shortcomings of the Reds and the Greens, it occurred to me that it could portend something bigger – in vulgar Hegelese: the overcoming and sublation of their respective limitations in a new unity. That was my first thought. My second thought was: Green and Red Makes Brown – a notion that, pretty much all by itself, suggests… a Brown Party. Brown, like the Earth. Not just plants, trees, vegetables, but land. Brown.

Although I’m partially kidding, this should neither distract nor detract from the fact that Brown raises serious questions. For instance, a Brown Party would have to confront the problem (latent, perhaps, in all Parties) of that which manifested, notably, in the murderous, racist Brownshirts – the Nazi Sturmabteilung, or SA. With racism and xenophobia on the rise (just look at last month’s US Supreme Court ruling in Schuette), a Brown Party would have to critically root out such tendencies. It would not be able to ignore opinions that, for instance, are found among some Greens these days. For who’s unaware of the fact that quite a few people who identify as Greens harbor implicitly genocidal opinions regarding population control (in spite of the fact that most of the world’s pollution and resource extraction is committed by the US, which comprises only 5% of the global population)? To put it mildly, that’s something of a problem – one that manifests in, among other places, the issue of immigration (remember the Sierra Club’s position?). Unlike the Greens, though, a Brown Party would have to explicitly rectify this disturbing phenomenon. And then, of course, there’s green’s other troubling association: money. As mentioned earlier, a “green economy” is not necessarily incompatible with systemic exploitation, poverty, disease, and misery. The Greens need that infusion of Red to rid them of their market-economy shortsightedness and prejudice. Likewise, the Reds need the Greens’ sensitivity to environmental and ecological issues. And both of them are in need of a serious makeover. Vote Brown!

Peter Berllios is a writer and teacher. He can be reached at peterberllios@yahoo.com

 

More articles by:

Peter Berllios is a Brooklyn based writer and artist. He can be reached at peterberllios@yahoo.com and on Twitter @PeterBerllios

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
Weekend Edition
January 24, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
A Letter From Iowa
Jim Kavanagh
Aftermath: The Iran War After the Soleimani Assassination
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Camp by the Lake
Chuck Churchill
The Long History of Elite Rule: What Will It Take To End It?
Robert Hunziker
A Climate Time Bomb With Trump’s Name Inscribed
Andrew Levine
Trump: The King
James Graham
From Paris, With Tear Gas…
Rob Urie
Why the Primaries Matter
Dan Bacher
Will the Extinction of Delta Smelt Be Governor Gavin Newsom’s Environmental Legacy?
Ramzy Baroud
In the Name of “Israel’s Security”: Retreating US Gives Israel Billions More in Military Funding
Vijay Prashad
What the Right Wing in Latin America Means by Democracy Is Violence
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Biden’s Shameful Foreign Policy Record Extends Well Beyond Iraq
Louis Proyect
Isabel dos Santos and Africa’s Lumpen-Bourgeoisie
Nick Pemberton
AK-46: The Case Against Amy Klobuchar
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Promtheus’ Fire: Climate Change in the Time of Willful Ignorance
Linn Washington Jr.
Waiting for Justice in New Jersey
Ralph Nader
Pelosi’s Choice: Enough for Trump’s Impeachment but not going All Out for Removal
Ted Rall
If This is a Democracy, Why Don’t We Vote for the Vice President Too?
Mike Garrity – Jason Christensen
Don’t Kill 72 Grizzly Bears So Cattle Can Graze on Public Lands
Joseph Natoli
Who’s Speaking?
Kavaljit Singh
The US-China Trade Deal is Mostly Symbolic
Cesar Chelala
The Coronavirus Serious Public Health Threat in China
Nino Pagliccia
Venezuela Must Remain Vigilant and on Guard Against US Hybrid Warfare
Robert Fantina
Impeachment as a Distraction
Courtney Bourgoin
What We Lose When We Lose Wildlife
Mark Ashwill
Why Constructive Criticism of the US is Not Anti-American
Daniel Warner
Charlie Chaplin and Truly Modern Times
Manuel Perez-Rocha
How NAFTA 2.0 Boosts Fossil Fuel Polluters, Particularly in Mexico
Dean Baker
What Minimum Wage Would Be If It Kept Pace With Productivity
Mel Gurtov
India’s Failed Democracy
Thomas Knapp
US v. Sineneng-Smith: Does Immigration Law Trump Free Speech?
Winslow Myers
Turning Point: The new documentary “Coup 53”
Jeff Mackler
U.S. vs. Iran: Which Side are You On?
Sam Pizzigati
Braggadocio in the White House, Carcinogens in Our Neighborhoods
Christopher Brauchli
The Company Trump Keeps
Julian Vigo
Why Student Debt is a Human Rights Issue
Ramzy Baroud
These Chains Will Be Broken
Chris Wright
A Modest Proposal for Socialist Revolution
Thomas Barker
The Slow Death of European Social Democracy: How Corbynism Bucked the Trend
Nicky Reid
It’s Time to Bring the War Home Again
Michelle Valadez
Amy Klobuchar isn’t Green
David Swanson
CNN Poll: Sanders Is The Most Electable
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Our Dire Need for “Creative Extremists”—MLK’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”
Robert Koehler
FBI, King and the Tremors of History
Jill Richardson
‘Little Women’ and the American Attitude Toward Poverty
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail