Green on Green unfriendly fire
Apparently Substack is where all the cool kids criticise the Greens these days, this is Ryan Ward at ‘Free Market Moralism‘ vs Natalia Albert from ‘Less Certain‘.
It’s woke middle class liberals criticising each other for being too woke.
It’s tedious as fuck and comes across as the narcissism of petty difference.
These kids have just never had to fight for anything.
One says Greens are too radical…
Chlöe Swarbrick’s Greens: Passionate but Politically Powerless
…the other side says they aren’t radical….
Stop calling the Greens radical
…I don’t care.
While the liberal middle class echo chamber wring their hands, the reality is the planet is burning and we need a Left that is capable of actually putting together a strategy that wins with a clear 100 day programme to generate real material change in people’s lives.
Chloe is one of the few with the vision to do that.
There is an MMP strategy that can win the Greens the election, but it requires the Greens to be serious about winning and real courage from the Green leadership.
The membership are still trying to define the brand, we are way past that, we are now 12 months from the 2026 election, the time is for tactics and strategies, not branding.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
This article really nails it—so much infighting among the Greens while the planet burns! It’s frustrating to see them wasting time on internal bickering instead of focusing on winning and real change. Chloe Swarbrick seems like the only one with a clear vision.growagardenplants
Natalia Albert is not a green but a former deputy leader of the opportunities party
Thanks comrade yes please help the LEFT to somehow realise we need then to be representing not defenestrating.
I found when joining a community group with worthy objects, that they could list the positive values they intended to operate under, but when I asked for an example of each in use there was a look of surprise. The idea and ideal need to be thought through to illustrate how it would work in our everyday lives as each person puts on his own interpretation. Saying – ‘Fine feathers do not make fine birds’ was an Aesop fable: the Peacock was fine, but earth-bound while the Crane was plain but had the practical ability to fly distances.
https://fablesofaesop.com/the-peacock-and-the-crane.html
Noble sentiments rigidly applied can result in distressingly ignoble actions such as burning religious dissenters to death eg France: Minerve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albigensian_Crusade#
In 1210 this Crusade was madly pursued. In one battle only one in 6,0000 Crusaders survived. But the main target were Cathar ‘perfects’ who differed in beliefs from Catholics. Some were burned as a death sentence. Simon and many of his soldiers made determined efforts to convert the Cathar perfects but failed.[103] Ultimately, only three women recanted.[102] The 140 who refused were burned at the stake. Some entered the flames voluntarily, not awaiting their executioners…
The way that theories and systems are implemented is important, can the Greens assure us that they will be fair and light in controls if given power? In medicine there are values : The Hippocratic Oath contains these principles and many others, such as gratitude, compassion, justice, honesty, humbleness, sanctity, integrity, confidentiality, fidelity to the bond, and respect for human life and dignity.
[The Hippocratic Oath] – PubMed https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
and
According to ethicist Manuel G. Velasquez, there are four basic kinds of moral standards: “utility” (61), “rights, justice, and caring” (59).4 Feb 2025
3.1: Introduction to Ethics – Humanities LibreTexts
https://human.libretexts.org › Composition › 03:_Ethics
It’s a story as old as time. The left is busy punching itself in the face, while the right march in lockstep over the top of them. How many elections do we have to lose before we get a clue? Always one more it seems.
The right, as vicious and venal as they are, know enough to put aside their petty squabbles and manoeuvring for advantage to pursue the larger goal. Our side seems to devolve into meaningless bickering at the drop of a hat over the dumbest shit.
It’d be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic and boring.
That book was propaganda for high school students to indoctrinate them into the capitalist way of thinking. That you appear to believe that it is a valid explanation for current events just confirms the dubious thought behind your other comments.