The third party alternative is called “Green” 

Thomas Friedman in the New York Times (5/3/06):

> The situation is ripe for [a third party]:
> America is facing a challenge as big as the
> cold war - how we satisfy our long-term energy
> needs, at reasonable prices, while decreasing
> our dependence on oil ...  and neither major party
> [is offering an adequate] solution.
> I would not call it the “Green Party” ...
> it connotes an agenda that is too narrow
> and liberal. Today’s third party has to be big,
> strategic, centrist ...

Thomas Friedman has never demonstrated himself to be politically sophisticated. The idea of a “centrist” (non-ideological) party has been thought of and tried many times, most recently in the guise of the Reform Party. Like all such attempts, the Reform Party floundered when the crafting of a party platform required some degree of agreement on a basic ideological orientation. The “non-ideological” party had drawn members from “all over the lot” who (unsurprisingly) turned out to be people with radically discordant ideas!

The Green parties have a solid ideological foundation and raison d’etre precisely because they are the organizational manifestation of something distinctive, namely, the global Green politics movement. Greens worldwide share the understanding that we can only satisfy our long-term energy needs by learning to live sustainably.

Going well beyond that issue, Greens are in broad agreement around principles of peace, ecological responsibility, social responsibility, and the idea of a deeper, more participatory, form of democracy. Other values commonly shared include gender equity and respect for diversity.

Few Greens identify themselves with liberalism or with any of the old ideologies. The movement is infused with a communitarian sensibility because recent history has shown that neither social responsibility nor participatory democracy are possible within the context of hyper-scale, remote, bureaucratic institutions like nation-state governments and mega-corporations. The principles and key values of the Green movement suggest that a simpler, community-based way of life could be more sustainable, more peaceful, and more satisfying.

So, while the vision of the Greens is coherent and distinctive, it is not “narrow” or “liberal.” It would behoove Thomas Friedman to gain an appreciation of the growing movement for Green politics and to reconsider what kind of party has the potential for broad appeal in our time.

Comments