A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

Left-Right fusion in ’06 (and beyond?)

This is interesting – Maryland’s independent Senate candidate Kevin Zeese has been endorsed by the state’s Green, Populist, and Libertarian parties, essentially creating a left-right fusion ticket. Zeese is emphasizing a populist-based opposition to the Iraq war, ending the war on drugs, cutting corporate welfare, defense of civil liberties, election reform, and shoring up Social Security by lifting the ceiling on income that is subject to Social Security taxes.

This strikes me as a smart move for those who are interested in challenging the two-party status quo. By themselves, Greens and Libertarians rarely attract more than a tiny minority of voters, but by emphasizing what they have in common (which is actually more than most people might think) and downplaying ideological purity tests, they stand a chance of connecting with the real concerns of many voters.

3 responses to “Left-Right fusion in ’06 (and beyond?)”

  1. Chip Frontz

    Populism and libertarianism? Am I missing something?

    Sounds like the party of schizophrenia. “Let’s clean up the environment, stop the war, and all do our own thing. Yeah.”

    Mark: “We wanted to come up with a comprehensive statement on the war, but we had trouble agreeing on the details.”
    Mike: “What did you eventually come with?”
    Mark: “War is bad.”

    Reply
  2. Lee

    I dunno, is it more schizophrenic than the libertarians, defense hawks, conservative Christians, pro-lifers, etc. who inhabit the GOP?

    Seems to me for this kind of fusion you don’t need comprehensive agreement on first principles, but rather agreement on certain key pressing issues. Greens and Libs might be able to agree on, say, the Iraq war and the PATRIOT Act, and can defer discussion of whether the streets should be privatized or the auto industry nationalized until those become live issues.

    Reply
  3. Joshie

    It seems more like an act of desperation that anything else. The Greens had the big mo with the first Nader candidacy, but have lost it in the years following. The Libertarians have had their name stolen by right-wing talk-show hosts and are losing their identity.

    Speaking as someone who has voted Green in the past, if I learned that the Greens had endorsed a candidate that the Libertarians were running, I would NOT vote Green just for that reason. It makes no sense and is short-sighted on the part of both parties.
    Plus what’s the point of uniting behind a single candidate who can’t win when each party could run their own candidate who couldn’t win, but at least might better reflect the values of each party?

    Reply

Leave a reply to Chip Frontz Cancel reply