Ballot Access News informs us that independent Presidential candidate Ralph Nader has petitioned for the ballot in Iowa using the Peace and Freedom label. Nader became the official nominee of the Peace and Freedom Party last weekend at the Californian state party’s convention in Sacramento.
The development bodes well for the PFP’s planned re-expansion adopted by the State Central Committee last March, decades after the first national incarnation of the party succumbed to ballot-access woes and hostile takeovers. California State Chair Kevin Akin has confirmed to IPR that this is not the last Peace and Freedom label we’ll be seeing this year, and had this to say regarding the party’s broader goals in returning the national stage:
I should emphasize that this national expansion, on which we were already working, is not intended to push anyone else off. We want to work with anyone else on the Left who is willing, to establish organizations with ballot status that do electoral and non-electoral work to advance the interests of working people. We want independent Leftists and people affiliated with many Left groups to run as candidates for office on the Peace and Freedom line. We also want to develop alliances with existing parties in other states, no matter which Left candidate they may be running this year, to develop a united campaign for 2010 and a process leading to a broad Left national candidacy for 2012.
A few of us in Alaska are hoping to jump start an Alaska Peace and Freedom Party. We are considering whether we have the support and ability to run a candidate on the Peace and Freedom Party label in Alaska in hopes to meet the threshold needed to get ballot access.
We have a rather high profile individual that is well known in our state especially the Native community for her work in education. She has the name recognition to possibly get enough support if we have the resources to get her on the ballot. Nothing is confirmed yet but we have till 2010 to decide.
Disclaimer: This would not be a crazy crack pot Robert style candidacy should a candidate decide to run.
“Green” is a good name because it’s short. “Peace and Freedom” is longer (four syllables), but doesn’t use any big words and appeals to the popular ideas of peace and freedom. Libertarian (five syllables) and Constitutionalist (six syllables) are both long, abstract, and harder to say and spell. Kind of a disadvantage, terminology wise.
I sometimes think LP might have been better off with a different name (“Gold Party”?), or maybe not, but that’s all conjecture now.
I always disliked the “Green†name. “Peace and Freedom†is a much more inclusive name than “Green.â€
I like both names better than Libertarian or Constitutionalist.
The reason the Peace and Freedom Party hangs together so nicely is because it ISNT specifically socialists, or marxist, or leninist, or maoist. From what I understand, there are elements of each branch of socialism–as well as many who do NOT consider themselves communist or socialist—just leftist.
Of course,they ARE still socialist according to the understandings of libertarians and conservatives. But they’ve never enforced this “only socialists” pledge or anything. I think they’d have broad appeal nationwide to the various fractious socialist parties and disgruntled Green Party members. I can see a future for them in places like Oregon, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Massachussetts, and other highly-urban-concentrated states.
I think I prefer the Green Party. At least the GP isn’t openly socialist.
If Nader sticks with this effort even for two years, the Peace and Freedom Party will supplant the Greens as the dominant national progressive party.
Fromm what I understand, Nader is not himself seeking to be a member of or leader of the PDP. His campaign is doing this in part to broadly help third parties expand. Smae thing with his challenges to restrictive ballot access in many states. he is doing this as much to help other minor parties expand, as for his upcoming four years in the White House.
It will be interesting to see if the ecosocialists and Green Lefties do participate in building a national, multitendency socialist feminist ecological party.
I do not see any conflict between building the GP and building a national PFP.
“Green” had a lot better meaning when the movement was started in Germany in the 80s. Rudolf Bahro’s From Red to Green, is an excellent example of what they were initially working towards.
In Germany. much of the non-social democrat, non-M-L Left in Germany has abandoned the Greens after they joined the Social Democratic lead government.
From what I can read, the Greens world wide are encountering a rift between the radicals and the centrists.
I always disliked the “Green” name. “Peace and Freedom” is a much more inclusive name than “Green.”
While I personally doubt Nader would ever stick with a political party for more then a few years, this surely can’t be good for the Greens. Many Nader supporters who have remained in the Greens might leave the party to help launch new PFP affiliates. Another interesting question might be the future status of Nader running mate Matt Gonzalez. Gonzalez who became an independent due to ballot restrictions which prevented him from remaining a Green, had been one of the parties “stars” having served as president of the board of supervisors in San Francisco and nearly getting elected mayor in race which attracted national attention.
Insider bickering drove Nader from the Greens. We’ll see if the PFP can hold his attention.