Can Greens avoid the pitfalls of capitalist electoral politics?

Charles Posa McFadden and Karen Howell McFadden, 2020-10-18 Fredericton NB, Canada

Is it possible to achieve a social system which is at the same time democratic, just, and environmentally sustainable? And if so, how? What are the main obstacles in the path of doing so? Will the global Green political parties be able to avoid the pitfalls of capitalist electoral politics?

In prior articles published in the US based online journal, Green Social Thought, we argued that capitalism is the main driver of the global ecological crisis and growing inequality within and between countries, two trends inherent to capitalism. Now converging, these trends have created an existential crisis, threatening the natural diversity of living things on Earth and the very future of humanity.

Here we explore the possibilities and pitfalls of relying on electoral politics within a given capitalist nation-state to achieve an alternative system. Evidently, a principal obstacle is the global character of the now dominant capitalist mode of production. At the very least, global solidarity of the peoples in struggle for more just, democratic, and sustainable societies is necessary. The struggle for survival in the face of the climate crisis that capitalism has created will need to be won globally.

The Green commitment to environmentalism is meaningless without a concurrent commitment to all oppressed and exploited peoples to rid the world of imperialism and European settler colonialism. The Green Parties of some countries, for example the Green Party of the United States, have embraced this understanding. The Green Parties of some other countries, such as Canada, have not, at least not yet, not until they have consistently adopted corresponding international policies and elected as their public spokespersons only those who unequivocally separate themselves from the international policies of the ruling capitalist parties.

All countries and regions, and the nations within them, are currently dependent on their participation in a globalized capitalist market, one maintained by the military and financial system centred in the United States, although there are seeds of a globally competing capitalist market system based on the emergent economic might of the Chinese People’s Republic. It is this latter challenge that explains the cold war rhetoric and behavior of both political wings of the capitalist class in the United States, who hope to divert China into an arms race, while in the process diverting the peoples of all countries from addressing the real source of the existential crisis, the capitalist system itself.

Serving as a weight in favor of preserving the world from another world war between competing centers of capitalism is the extent to which all countries are locked into a global capitalist network, exemplified by Chinese ownership of US government bonds, US dependence on cheap manufactured goods from China to keep wage demands down from US workers, and from the extent of every country’s participation in globalized supply chains linking the exploitation of nature and the capitalist production and sale of resulting commodities.

On the other hand, the risk of use of weapons of mass destruction will continue to exist and come to the surface during this period of decline of capitalism as a means of controlling and distributing the surplus produced by human labor. A strengthened, more active peace movement in all countries of the world is, as much as ever, a necessary lever against the threat of violence from a dying capitalism, whose political legitimacy will inevitably decline with every further crisis.

Ultimately, only a global transition away from capitalism can save humanity and all those species whose health and diversity humanity depends upon. This transition, however prolonged it may be, must begin as soon as possible if there is to be a future for humanity.

Here we respond to the question in the title of this article by examining recent developments in the United States and Canada. While illusions about scope for democratic access to political power are still alive and well in Canada, there is more reason to question such access within the United States. Evident in the current presidential election in the United States is the capture of the executive and, increasingly, the judicial branches of the US government by the extreme right wing of the capitalist class, with realistic aspirations for participation in governance reduced to the legislative branch of the federal government. It is there where politics in the United States more closely approximates that in Canada.

Nevertheless, participation in electoral struggles in both Canada and the United States is a vital opportunity for public engagement in political struggle. This permits a fight for policies that correspond to the new institutions which must be built if humanity is to continue its journey on Earth. The contest within more progressive electoral parties for an ecosocialist political orientation, as opposed to the current dominance of an ecocapitalist one within some of these parties, is integral to the struggle for transition beyond capitalism to the more just, democratic and collaborative form of decision-making needed to achieve and maintain an ecologically sustainable relationship between humanity and the rest of the biosphere.

We draw next upon our recent experience of a contest for Leader of the Green Party of Canada, in which three of the eight candidates more explicitly declared their ecosocialist orientation. While the more explicit ecosocialist candidates narrowly lost that contest, thousands of new members joined the Green Party in response, almost doubling the membership of the Party to 35,000 from 20,000. Given that Green values and Green Party of Canada membership developed policies were already better aligned to an ecosocialist orientation than an ecocapitalist one, the Overton window is now open within the Green Party of Canada to explicit consideration of policies that go beyond incrementalism. Increasingly active engagement by new and older Green Party members in educational and policy development is already evident.

But first, we offer some background for those readers who may be less familiar with the structure of government in Canada, followed by evidence of the continuing lure of capitalist culture and practice, identification of problems posed by capitalist electoral politics, and in the concluding section of this argument some proposed actions, all of which may be relevant to discussion within the Green Parties of other capitalist countries.

In a parliamentary system like Canada’s, the head of government is not directly elected by the people. The Leader elected by the membership of the Canadian Green Party, if not already an elected member of Canada’s federal parliament, is expected to seek election to parliament in order to assume the role of parliamentary Leader of the Party, and potentially Prime Minister of Canada if the Green Party were to become the governing party, or the leading member of a governing coalition. The Green Party of Canada now has three elected members of Canada’s Federal parliament, two from Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and the other from our home riding of Fredericton, New Brunswick.

With the retirement of Green Member of Parliament Elizabeth May from her role as Leader of the Green Party of Canada, a contest was organized and just concluded to elect a new Leader. In a contest among eight candidates, using a preferential voting system, human rights lawyer Annamie Paul won on the eighth and final ballot, gaining the necessary majority support by a narrow margin over the runner-up, human rights lawyer and Real News journalist Dimitri Lascaris, who advocated for an explicit ecosocialist direction for the Party.

While the respective forms of capitalist democracy differ, in the USA a republican form, in Canada a parliamentary one, they share a decisive characteristic: the economic power of the capitalist class is exercised politically, finding abundant opportunities to shape both the electoral contests and the subsequent legislative outcomes. Notwithstanding the democratic demands of the majority, both forms of government mimic corporate organization, today featuring increased political power exercised at the executive level.

This reality presents problems to political parties committed to participatory democracy, social justice, and ecological sustainability. The challenge is to find the best way to achieve the peoples’ purposes while participating in quasi-democratic electoral contests and governmental bodies whose rules and structures were primarily shaped by the dominant capitalist class within these settler-colonial and ultimately cooperating imperialist states.

Green Party leadership contests in both countries have been characterized by significant advances in policy consensus in the direction of ecosocialism (as opposed to ecocapitalism), accompanied though by the discrepant appearance of political acrimony. Realization of the political potential of the present historical moment necessitates identification of both the cultural expression and socio-economic causes of this acrimony so that it can be addressed successfully.

Manifestation of political differences within the Green Party of Canada

Our examples arise from our participation in membership discussion and campaign events during the just concluded leadership contest within the Green Party of Canada. Those more familiar with the US context will have to judge whether any of our observations also apply there.

Before illustrating some of the differences in political orientation within the Green Party of Canada, we first note that Green values and membership developed policies which align well with an ecosocialist political orientation, are evident in the latest representation of GPC policy, https://www.greenparty.ca/en/reimagining-our-future, which includes commitments to tax back the wealth of the wealthy to guarantee a livable income to everyone and otherwise meet social needs, to utilize the Bank of Canada to invest in the transition to an ecologically sustainable Canada, to make participatory democracy the normal approach to decision-making at work and in governance, and to institute the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) as the law of the land, among many other ecosocialist priorities advanced in this latest document.

Deepening wealth and income inequality and social breakdown, expressed in racist violence and every form of bigotry, in the face of deteriorating environmental conditions and a global health emergency have combined to motivate an ecosocialist response among Canadians, even among formerly conservative sections of the population. Each of these consequences of capitalist exploitation of people and nature is being traced by increasing numbers of people to the profit motive which defines capitalism. Some are recognizing that this causal force is amenable to correction by human agency. Created by laws which make profits for shareholders the fiduciary responsibility of the managers of capitalist corporations, there is now some recognition that capitalism can be undone through application of laws that prioritize human health and well being over private-profits and ecological destruction.

Still dominant ecocapitalism, on the other hand, is the misconception that the socio-ecological crisis can be resolved by reforms within capitalism, combined with the use of new technology as a substitute for fossil fuels. While opening space for a renewal of capitalist exploitation of nature and people (think of lithium mining in Bolivia), this misconception is readily corrected by evidence that wasteful economic growth is essential to capitalism and that the production of goods by any form of technology requires non-renewable materials which are in finite supply on a finite planet.

Among many natural and social scientists and those who follow their arguments, there is also a growing recognition that we are leaving the era of abundance and entering an era of scarcity. These conditions are ripe for the majority to now recognize that the only way to respond in a humanitarian fashion is through equal sharing of the resources available on a finite planet, in other words, ecosocialism. But for this, ecocapitalist illusions will need to be addressed and undermined.

In the contest for Leader of the Green Party of Canada, capitalist cultural influence and political orientation were evident in arguments about the qualifications needed for a Party Leader. Included was a concern by some for “leadership succession” (as if the selection of the next group of leaders by the present ones were consistent with the Green Party’s commitment to participatory democracy), an emphasis on “branding” (as if policy were a commodity in the capitalist market place, to be bought and sold by wealthy consumers), an interest in “star power” (reflecting the narcissism and cult of personality encouraged by those of monarchical persuasion), a focus on “media attention” (prioritizing attachment to the pro-capitalist corporate media over responsiveness to the electorate), emphasis on “winning” elections without corresponding attention to the opportunity an election presents for self and public political education, engagement in “electoral politics” as a popularity contest or a sporting activity disconnected from the social movements of the people and their policy concerns, the belief that into the future there can be a place for inequality in decision-making rights and personal welfare between capitalists and those they employ, and an emphasis on the ability to raise funds as a criterion for leadership (meaning that those with wealthy connections are thereby more worthy of leadership responsibility than those whose primary credentials are their successful organization and leadership of the struggles for full human rights of the exploited and oppressed.)

Problem Solving

I. What kind of political organizations do we need for the transition to an ecosocialist democracy?

The ruling capitalist class has the advantage of economic power, able to purchase political representatives and influence public opinion.

Our advantage is numbers. This advantage increases with increasing ownership concentration at the top of the economic pyramid. But it decreases to the extent that a dying capitalist system and destroyed natural environment undermines the resilience of the exploited and oppressed classes.

1. The urgent need is for a mature, unified, ecosocialist political movement, open to all who share its commitment to serve as a conscience and a guide for the transition out of capitalism into a more just, democratic, and environmentally sustainable relationship among people and with the rest of nature. While working politically to achieve the earliest replacement of capitalism by ecosocialist democracy, the ecosocialist movement, like all prior revolutionary ones, has the complementary tasks of a legislative struggle and an on the ground organizational effort to provide mutual aid in support of the resilience and capacity of the people.

2. This unity will be needed so long as we face a resisting capitalist class, whose defining characteristic is the competitive drive for private profit. It can only be created and maintained by assigning priority to continuous self and public education and policy development.

3. The centralized, individual- or executive-committee-led types of organizations which characterized the socialist movements of the past are incapable of meeting the need to transition from capitalism to ecosocialism. This latter requires rapid response to an environmental challenge that varies with each essential economic activity, from location to location, and over time.

4. The centralized leadership of socialist movements of the past century, characterized by the elevation of a so-called “vanguard” over the so-called “masses” is not up to the challenge humanity now faces. Rather, centralized leadership replicates those practices of a class-divided society which serve as obstacles to an exit from the present existential crisis.

II. How might such an organization participate in capitalist electoral politics yet avoid the pitfalls of such participation?

The assumption here is the existence of capitalist electoral politics. Where this route is closed, the primary activities of ecosocialists features organized opposition to dictatorial rule, using all the tools available to the people.

In relation to participation in capitalist electoral politics, the metaphor of “walking and chewing gum at the same time” applies, if by “walking” we mean participation in capitalist electoral politics and by “chewing gum” we mean all those other activities essential to achieving an ecosocialist alternative, including participation in the peoples’ social movements, self and public education, and development of ecosocialist policies, organizations, and institutions.

In Canada, the Federal Green Party operates quasi independently from Provincial and Territorial Green Parties, perhaps as an acknowledgement that the Province of Quebec and two of the Territories have majoritarian populations distinct from the majoritarian anglophone settler populations in the other provincial jurisdictions. The base units for participation in electoral politics are Electoral District Associations (EDAs), based on electoral boundaries set by the Federal government for Federal elections, and by the Provincial and Territorial governments for their respective elections.

Consistent with the aim of achieving a more just, democratic and ecologically sustainable alternative to capitalism, we argue for the following practices by the base Party units of an ecosocialist electoral party (in Canada, these are Electoral District Associations, that is, EDAs):

1. Meet regularly (at least monthly) and feature policy development, self education, and public education as their core activities between and alongside their participation in electoral activities.

2. Expect, encourage, and assist every member to participate in one or more of the social movements of the people, and where necessary, participate in efforts to initiate such movements where they are needed, but do not already exist.

3. In cooperation with other base Party units (EDAs in the example of Canada), conduct webinars, organize and participate in town halls, and produce online and print materials in support of the education and policy development activities of the base Party units locally, provincially, regionally and across the country, linking members with each other and with their communities.

4. Use electoral engagement and participation in legislative bodies as opportunities for public education and public participation in policy development.

5. Serve as a link between elected Greens and the progressive social movements and aspirations of the people.

6. Ensure through candidate nomination and periodic review of elected Greens that the preservation and expansion of the commons is their core political goal and activity, where the commons are understood to include all those aspects of nature and economic activity which are public, that is, not controlled by wealthy individuals and private-for-profit corporations.

7. Through all these activities, assist our communities to envision and work for a global solidaristic, peaceful, democratic, just, and environmentally sustainable world (an ecologically sustainable global civilization) as our common future.

8. Recognize and act on the recognition that a new communal system as a replacement for capitalism requires communal institutions designed to facilitate informed democratic participation in decision-making at work and in the community, locally, regionally and globally, where possible through the reform of existing institutions and where necessary by their replacement.

9. In the process, expect and encourage fellow Greens to engage others with respect and civility, avoiding ad-hominem arguments, instead focussing on education and advocacy, while modelling principled behavior.

III. What is the alternative to the autocratic forms of governmental and economic institutions characteristic of class-divided societies?

1. Both the republican and parliamentary systems of democratic government were created and modified over time by the dominant propertied classes within their respective nation-states. Both have served the continuing rule of the propertied classes, with modifications as needed in relation to the positional strength of opposition from those classes which produce the surplus wealth captured and held by the dominant classes. Needed in place of these institutions of class rule is the creation of new institutions designed to facilitate a continuously interactive linkage between participatory democratic policy development as guidance to participatory democratic decision-making within every place of work.

2. The development of digital communication now enables the realization at every scale of activity (global, regional, country-wide, individual state or province, and local) of participatory democratic decision-making and coordination of economic policy and practice. This can be envisioned as direct democracy at the smallest scale, with a combination of representative and direct democracy at larger scales.

3. The current response to the COVID-19 pandemic, using virtual meetings to replace physical ones, illustrates the technical means of accomplishing participatory democracy in a complex globalized socio-economic system. When the numbers affected by a decision are small, those concerned can meet directly for decision-making, either virtually or physically. When the numbers are larger, a combination of representative and participatory democracy can be envisioned using virtual meetings in which the locally elected representatives would have voice and vote, but each of these elected representatives would interact with their electors during decision-making meetings, using an open, transparent messaging system (think “chat” function within Zoom technology).

4. Two interacting forms of decision-making should be envisioned: policy development at the community level and operational decision-making within work collectives, with the latter guided by the policies established by the former.

Capitalism itself is the ultimate barrier to justice, democracy, and sustainability

The defining characteristic of a democratic ecosocialist political party is its recognition that the ultimate barrier to justice, democracy and sustainability is capitalism itself.

In common with all class and caste divided societies throughout human history, the governmental institutions of capitalism, including justice and law enforcement, are designed to ensure differential rights of access to nature and the products of human labor. The only assurance of equal access to nature and the products of human labor is the achievement of a democratic ecosocialist society.

Under capitalism, justice is adversarial. The advantage goes to the propertied classes, those best able to purchase justice through the hiring of advocates or influence over public opinion. In this respect, injustice is inherent to capitalism. The only assurance of justice for all is the replacement of capitalism by democratic ecosocialism.

Electoral politics in a class-based system like capitalism features individual, rather than collective leadership and decision-making. Individual leadership is readily purchased as a Brand by the propertied classes. Collective leadership is essential to high quality decisions in support of an ecologically sustainable relationship between people and with nature, bringing the available knowledge and experience to bear on problem solving. Individual leadership is purchasable, but not scientifically and ecologically reliable. The only assurance of an ecologically sustainable society is the elimination of class division. The goal of an ecosocialist political movement, therefore, must be a classless society, one no longer in need of political parties.

 

Charles and Karen McFadden are the authors of Achieving an ecologically sustainable global civilization, accessible from the homepage of this website and as eleven sequentially published articles in the online journal, Green Social Thought

Welcome!

Now in our fourteenth year, this website was launched September 1, 2010 in response to the convergence of growing inequality within and between countries and a rapidly developing ecological catastrophe. After several years of further participation in the social justice, democratic and environmental movements of the people and discussions with many of our friends in these movements about draft essays we have posted to this website, we believe we now have a relatively brief, coherent set of eleven arguments that can serve as a basis for further discussion and development by those committed to taking action to reverse the neoliberal tidal wave and move forward to the achievement of an ecologically sustainable global civilization. These were completed by spring 2021. Our further arguments, including updates on our prior posted ones, can be found in the What's New Section which accompanies each page. - C&K McFadden

What's New

Winter 2024

Charles Posa McFadden with assistance from Karen Howell McFadden and Scott Cameron McFadden

The Path to an Ecologically Sustainable Future is that of Class Struggle

Summer - Fall 2023

Charles Posa McFadden with assistance from Karen Howell McFadden and Scott Cameron McFadden

Achieving an ecological civilization is the challenge before us. A knowledge of applicable empirically validated natural and social science laws is the key that opens the door.

Charles Posa McFadden with assistance from Karen Howell McFadden

An alternative to destruction by capitalism: The case for communism

Winter - Spring 2023

Charles Posa McFadden with assistance from Karen Howell McFadden and Scott Cameron McFadden

For a future beyond capitalism

1. A contemporary lens for addressing the existential crises we now face

2. For a future, we must end the systemic causes of destruction and waste

3. Meeting the urgent need for revolutionary political renewal

Fall 2022

C & K McFadden (Sept. 2022): Capitalism is genocide and ecocide

Winter 2022

C McFadden (Feb. 2022) For Canada: On Freedom - A response to the “Freedom” Convoy

C & K McFadden (Feb. 2022) For Canada: A House Divided

C & K McFadden (Jan. 2022): The Need for an Ecosocialist Revolutionary Movement

Fall 2021

C & K McFadden (Sept. 2021) For Canada:  For a future: Organize!

Winter 2020-21

C McFadden (Feb. 2021) How scarcity necessitates a more ecologically sustainable global community and digital technology makes that feasible

C&K McFadden (Dec. 2020) Can Greens avoid the pitfalls of capitalist electoral politics?

Spring 2020

C&K McFadden Canadian electoral politics and the global loss of legitimacy of the neoliberal project

Fall 2019

C&K McFadden Beyond Marx for a 21st Century Revolutionary Perspective

Spring 2019

C&K McFadden To Change the System, We Must Know the System!

Fall 2018 

C&K McFadden, we either escape the internal logic of capitalism or descend with it into barbarism

C&K McFadden, We Need an Updated Manifesto 

Don Fitz, Revolving Doors

C McFadden, The Greens Have It Right

Don Fitz, Is Nuclear Power a Solution to the Climate Crisis  

CANADA

C&K McFadden (February 2022) A House Divided

C McFadden (February 2022) On Freedom - A response to the “Freedom” Convoy

C&K McFadden (September 2021) For a future: Organize!

David Gehl (2018), Fight Climate Change Not War

C&K McFadden (2018), It is time for Canada to do the right thing by its First Nations

George Hewison (2018)WINNIPEG 1919 & THE COLD WAR

George Hewison (2018)Art Manuel - "Unsettling Canada

NEW BRUNSWICK 

Charles & Karen McFadden, An Historic Turning Point on the Journey to Recovery from Capitalism and its History of Colonialism: Reclaiming Wolastoq Ceremony

Charles McFadden, Decolonizing the U.S. & Canada: The People United for a More Just Sustainable Future


REVIEWS 

Charles McFadden Is Canada a force for good in the world, as many imagine? Review of Tyler Shipley (2020) Canada in the World: Settler capitalism and the colonial imagination

Karen and Charles McFaddenCan emergent early 21st century neo-fascism be defeated without coming to grips with late 20th century restructuring of capitalism into a global system Review of William I Robinson (2014) Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Humanity

Karen and Charles McFaddenA Dominant Capitalism or a Sustainable Environment? Why we can't have both. Review of Fred Magdoff and John Bellamy Foster (2011) What Every Environmentalist Needs to Know About Capitalism

 

 

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) applies to all work posted on this website except that which appears with authors whose last name is other than McFadden, in which case standard copyright should be assumed to apply.