Why are Third Parties Important?

NOTE: This only at this current stage, applies to federal level elections(barring a very strong Green party or progressive independent downballot candiate).  I noticed how the Bernie Sanders campaign has spurred Berniecrats like him to run for office.  As a result, my belief is that in downballot initiatives, they should support Berniecrats running for office against establishiment democrats, establishiment Republicans, and alt-rightists.  However, progressives should vote for Stein on the federal level and from there, work to ensure that states allow for more alternatives on local elections.

The 2016 election is shaping up to be easily the most unpopular election in American history.  Both Trump and Clinton net unavailability ratings on a massive scale.  Both candidates are viewed to be not only unlikable, but also untrustworthy.  Under these conditions, it is time to consider the importance of third parties and how they may prevent American democracy from being dominated by "the candiate" the populace hate the least and the rule of "voting the lesser evil" to prevent the greater evil from emerging.

Some say that it is impossible for third parties to make a dent on America, that all they would do is split the vote and allow the greater evil to win.  While some may argue that from a right-wing libertarian or moderate prespective, building a third party has a good chance of bearing fruit this election, it seems to be harder to justify progressives building the Green Party in the wake of Gary Johnson's growing chances electoral success that Jill Stein and the Green Party does not seem to share.  This blog entry will discuss some of the reasons to vote Third Party, framing it in the context of the Green Party's struggle for electoral breakthroughs.  It ultimately argues that in an election with the most derided candidates, 2016 offers the best opportunity to start building an alternative to the two party system.

Apologies for the Delay

Hello, Daniel here, and I apologize for the delay.  Watching the Olympics, taking all the beautiful No Man's Sky pictures as well as preparing for my grad school program in September seems to have drained quite a bit of time from me.  Neverthless, this sociopolitical blog is still on, I am not quitting my bloggers' chair any time soon, and will have my next article up as soon as possible.

But first, a quick note on the Green Party Town Hall that occured yesterday.  I was more excited for the Green Party town hall to say the least then any of the upcoming Hillary vs. Trump debates.  As I feel the 2016 election will not be a progressive campaign pitted against a alt-right one, but a business-as-usual neoliberal establishment campaign pitted against an alt-right one.  Despite Bernie's efforts to inject left wing discourse into American politics, it seems that politics remains wedded to the notion of lesser of two evils.  And Hillary looks to be shaping up to be business as usual, seemingly abandoning the most progressive democratic platform in history.  The Green Party Town Hall with Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka is thus a refershing alternative to dead-end politics where voters have to pick between the maintaining of neoliberal policies or give way to the far-right and the dangers it might entail.  The dominance of the political duopoly is even more jarring considering a large percentage of young people want a third party to represent them.

The DNC: Democratic Disunity?

The theme of the Democratic Convention is "Unity".  In this case, unity against Trump and the GOP.  Yet, recent events have shown that unity be out of their reach.  This apparent disunity is because of the revelation of the Democratic Party's disenfranchisement torwards its progressive wing, represented by the supporters of Bernie Sanders.

The cracks were already showing before the convention.  An earlier article I've written discussed ways that Hillary had withdrawn on her promise of a more progressive platform even before Sanders' misguided endorsement of Clinton.  The retreat from fighting for progressive policy and a return to Third Way policies further intensified with Clinton's appointment of Tim Kaine as her Vice President pick.  This is because Tim Kaine has expressed support for the TPP as an "upgrade for labour standards"(he was one of the 13 senators that wanted Obama to fast track this act through Congress), as well as pro-fracking positions and support for the Hyde Act.  The Hyde Act prohibits federal funding for abortions under Medicaid — the repeal of which is called for in the Democratic Party’s own platform promising unlimited federal funding of abortions.  Kaine was also known to support "tough on crime" policies such as  Project Exile, which gave long prison sentences to thoseconvicted on illegal firearm ownership.  This law has bee accused of targeting the black population and feeding the prison-industrial complex.  Thus, it is contradictory for Hillary to promise a leftward shift, yet have a center-right neoliberal VP with policies contradictory to all her promises.

Thoughts on the Backlash torwards the New Ghostbusters(Rant torwards the alt-right)

The new Ghostbusters is not particularly a movie that I had any intention of seeing.  This has nothing to do with its quality or the acting or the characters, but rather because it is not the sort of movie that I'd like.  I admit that I am not a big horror or comedy fan, more of a TV drama fan as well as a sci-fi and fantasy fan. However I was compelled to watch this movie because of one reason: The various Men's Rights movements and the Alt-Right have been hating on it just because it has a fully female cast, which they believe is pushing a supposedly left-wing, progressive identity politics, and politically correct agenda at the expense of film quality.  The trailer for Ghostbusters has received the most dislikes out of any trailer for a Youtube movie, with many far-right commentators condemning the movie for pushing "SJW Values" over actual quality itself, with the implication that a movie with progressive identity politics is inherently bad.  As a result, I chose to watch this movie on the basis of unpacking some of these worldviews and see for myself: "Is the all-female cast supposedly hiding the movie's flaws?"

My opinion of the movie is that the movie, after been seen for itself, is not a bad movie.  It isn't objectively good but it is not the supposedly crap movie that the far right and sexists claim it to be.  I give it a 3/5.  And therefore, it is important to challenge them on this issue whenever they use social media to perpetuate their hatred.  Before we begin my dissection of the far-right's worldviews it bears noting that simply fighting the far-right on issues of misogyny, racism and identity politics, while necessary, is not the solution to the "root of the problem", and that there needs to be progressive socioeconomic policies opposed to neoliberalism to go hand in hand with progressive identity politics in order to effectively defeat this growing far-right.  Nevertheless, it must not be overlooked that the alt-right and the Men's Right's Movement are opposing the movie from the perspective of White Male Privilege, and must be confronted and called to account in battles between progressive forces and the alt-right over identity politics.

Thoughts on Bernie Sanders' endorsement of Hillary Clinton

On July 12th, 2016, Bernie Sanders endorsed Hillary Clinton in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.  He concedes the nomination to Hillary Clinton.  He congratulates her on the nomination and states he will do whatever it takes to allow her to become president to ensure a Democratic victory on November 8th.  He praises Hillary's supposed promises to create a living wage, as well as to rebuild crumbling infrastructure.  This will of course contrast with Trump's plan to nominate a right-wing Supreme Court Justice and to cut minimum ages.  

While this move has finally ended Bernie Sanders' conflict with the Democratic Party, it has split Sanders' progressive base.  Some believe that Sanders made the right decision, rooted in his earlier promises that he will endorse Clinton to defeat Donald Trump.  They believe that the threat of Donald Trump and the alt-right eclipses any sort of protest that could be achieved by voting Third Party.  Thus it is wrong to support Green Party presumptive nominee Jill Stein because all that would do is take away votes from Clinton, viewing Trump's plans to be detrimental to a progressive America because of his far-right polices.  Others believe that the Sanders' "Political Revolution" laid the grounds for genuine independence from the Democratic Party through an independent Left.  Consequently, they view Sanders' endorsement as a sell-out or a betrayal.  When looking at these arguments, I feel that, while Bernie Sanders may not have sold out(at least in my opinion), the latter camp is in the right, and that it was wrong for Bernie Sanders to have endorsed Hillary at this stage of the campaign.   That is because Hillary's behavior often makes it hard to believe that she would stay true to fighting for a progressive campaign, and this was in fact reflected in certain campaign decisions that was made by her as the convention neared.  Likewise, if she becomes president, it would not be guaranteed if she would actually move to implement more progressive policies because of the supreme court of whatnot as, much of which has come about as progressive policies was due to grassroots activism.  

It also bears noting that this endorsement could actually benefits the alt-right, whom would use Bernie's endorsement to paint Bernie as "corrupt" or no different than the rest.  This will be contrasted with Trump, who would be seen as "incorruptible" and the only one to "deliver" America from corruption.

The Current State of the World and what it means for the Far-Right

2016 couldn't be a more tumultuous time to be alive.  The ongoing stream of bad news seems to multiply every minute.  The war with ISIS for instance, doesn't seem to come to an end, and more terror attacks, such as the recent one on Nice, seem to manifest every single minute.  Geopolitical ties structures that are believed to last are falling apart.  Xenophobia and racism seems to be prevalent in Western societies, and elections seem to solve nothing despite the emphasis on their importance within a democratic society, with both parties representing special interests over those desired by the populace.  Income inequality appears to be rising

The current climate has given rise to a new group of far-right demagogues--the alternative right, or alt-right for short.  The alt-right are far-right activists viewing themselves as "purer" than mainstream American conservatives and more willing to supposedly "discuss" race and terrorism(read: meaning more willing be racist).  Under the current circumstances, the alt-right has been able to normalize their discourse within society and paint themselves as the only ones that are willing to fight against a political establishment perceived to be corrupt and supposedly killing Western civilization with "multiculturalism", "political correctness", and a perceived reluctance to fight against Islamic fundamentalism.  Unfortunately, with the rise of Donald Trump in American politics, a candidate that propagates these far-right worldviews,

The goal of this blog, written by a history and political science graduate, is to document the rise of this alt-right and how geopolitical events may be manipulated to be tilted in their favor.  It is written to be a voice of dissent against the complete dominance of the alt-right on the internet, with many websites, in particular Breibart, the Daily Stormer, Reddit and 4chan, being hubs of activity for this far-right.  This blog will analyze why is the alt-right growing, how they would respond to geopolitical events.  Yet unlike most mainstream media analysis of the alt-right, this is written to focus on more systemic issues as to explain what is causing the rise of the alt-right across Europe and America; hence the title "The Root of the Problem".  In particular, articles on this blog will analyze how current social, political and economic currents supported by current political establishments, or the backlash against these currents, may benefit or intensify support for the alt-right.  Ultimatly, it asks the question: Is it just enough for culture to progress to a certain level in order to leave the reactionary alt-right backlash behind, but maintain current sociopolitical currents?  Does defeating the alt-right require the preservation of current world sociopolitical systems, or to challenge it from a progressive or leftist perspective?  Is the current political establishiment, particuarly in the West, the "Root of the Problem"?