Playing Spore For Greens
Over the Fourth of July Weekend, my young daughter and I learned how to play the video game Spore together. It’s a wonderfully flexible game, in which players can choose to advance through the levels in a very Green way, making friends and allies and never getting into a fight.
My daughter is only four years old, but she learned one lesson very quickly: Whenever two creatures of the same kind meet, and they like each other, they lay an egg. I would like local Green Party activists to learn the same lesson.
Yesterday, there were meetings of three separate Green Party organizations in Arizona: The Mesa Greens, the Green Party of Pima County and the University of Arizona Campus Greens. Those meetings were great, I’m sure, but the rest of the world won’t have the chance to find out about that, because there were no news reporters present to write about them.
There are two groups of people who share responsibility for that. There’s the mainstream media, yes, which we Green Party members love to complain about. But where was the Green Party media?
Honestly, I don’t think that anyone here at Green Party Watch has the money to fly over to Arizona just in order to report on what happened at those meetings in Arizona yesterday. Besides that, it wouldn’t be a very sustainable use of energy.
Instead, Green Party media is going to have to work the way that Green Party political campaigns do: From the bottom up. In addition to the mainstream media, the Arizona Greens who attended those meetings yesterday share responsibility for the lack of news about their events. Every person in attendance could have acted as a reporter.
It’s like playing Spore: Every time that two Greens meet, they need to lay an egg. They need to write about that meeting, and make news of their activities available to the world. They need to get the news online, so that writers at places like Green Party Watch can write articles here, though they’re not jetting all over the country to gather the information in person.
They need to issue a press release too, and send it to the local mainstream media. When organizations hold meetings, but don’t issue press releases, they’re sending a message to local reporters anyway. The message is that the organization isn’t doing anything newsworthy. If you don’t think that your local Green Party’s meetings involve anything worth writing a press release about, then that’s a good sign that you need to change the way you hold your meetings.
The structure for getting this kind of grassroots reporting is already present. It just needs to be put into action. All three groups that met last night already have their own web sites, places that can include a news page to tell the stories of the Green organizations’ activities, and why they matter. If they’re organized in the right way, each group should have had an official secretary, with the job of ensuring that meeting minutes are taken (even better would be a digital audio recording, excerpts of which could be transcribed and edited into a podcast).
We Greens need to regard every meeting as a crucial campaign event which is designed to persuade people who haven’t joined the Green Party yet that they need to do so. Before the meeting, at the meeting, and after meeting, we need to craft a story that makes people care about the Green Party.
If you never take the trouble to lay an egg, you don’t have much right to complain that you’re not seeing as many new Greens running around as you’d like to.
I find this article to match a lot of the culture of the national Green Party clique.
The article sounds all lovey-dovey. And, it urges us to be all lovey dovey.
But, still, it is a kind of “dig” at the Greens in Arizona for not doing something the way the author would have liked.
Maybe the greens in Arizona wanted to hold one get-to-know you meeting where there was not the pressure of having a document to report. Maybe the greens in Arizona are so poor they do not have computers. Or, maybe they just weighed their priorities and realized doing work together now would have greater impact for some reason than doing outreach.
I like the idea that greens should get empowered and do their own media. Great idea.
But, no need to use someone else’s purported failure as an object lesson.
Anyway, sounds to me like perhaps the author is just a little nosy, and upset he didn’t get to hear about the meeting in Arizona…
Kimberly, I certainly will admit to being nosy. I’m nosy, because I’m interested in what people are doing to strengthen the Green Party to deal with the serious problems our country and our communities are facing.
I happen to think that people in the Green Party need to start taking their work to a new level, so if you perceive this article as something of a challenge, well, it is – not just to the Greens in Arizona, but to those all over the country.
We Greens love to complain about how we’re shut out of the mainstream media, and how we don’t have access to channels of power, but the fact is that there are routes to use of media and power that are wide open to us already. We just aren’t using them.
How can our complaints about having our candidates shut out of televised debates be taken seriously when we’re not even using our own web sites, media we already own, and we’re not establishing relationships with journalists when we have the opportunity.
Greens need to decide whether they want the Green Party to be a real political party that is doing everything it can to make a difference, or just a social club where we whine that nobody listens to us. I’m sorry to put in harsh terms like that, but that’s really what it comes down to.
I’m not trying to “dig” anyone just for not doing what I want them to do. This isn’t about what I want. It’s about what Green activists want. I hear a lot of Green Party activists say that they want media access, and to be regarded as equal to the Democrats and Republicans, and not to be ignored any more, and to elect candidates to public office.
Well, if that’s really what Greens want, then Greens need to start acting like it. We will be taken seriously when we start acting seriously.
If the Greens in Arizona don’t want to do outreach, and if they don’t want the pressure of reporting on their activities, then they don’t want to do politics.
This is a GREAT post! How many local chapters are in your state? When do they meet? Does anyone know? There are Greens meeting all over the country and there are Greens all over who don’t even know how to get involved because they don’t know that there are Greens next door meeting and organizing. If my local chapter doesn’t advertise its meetings, how will we ever get any new people involved? Instead we have the same people, month after month, with no new blood.
We need that new blood, we need new people in the Green Party, getting involved locally and at the state level. Otherwise we end up with what Kimberly fears – a ‘clique’ of Greens that don’t change and grow.
When our local chapter was engaged with our local government and local media and visible in our community, we got attention. The local paper called us up for quotes along with the local Dems and Reps. After we burned out and stopped being so visible, we vanished from the local attention and local media. This is my fault.
Green Party Watch is a tool for local and state parties to promote their activities both nationally and locally since we are picked up by Google News and other outlets. The “events calendar” was put in place so we could promote local and state chapter meetings. One of the best covered local chapters in the nation is Kimberly’s Babylon Greens due to the coverage on The Wilder Side, Kimberly’s blog. If only all local chapters were so well covered, as Jonathan is suggesting.
The world needs the Green Party now more than ever, and there are more potential Greens in America now more than ever. We need to open the Green Party up to America and invite them in but they can’t go to the party if they don’t know where it is at. We need new leaders, new organizers, new candidates, new activists, or the Green Party will wither and die on the vine like a private club exclusive to those with the “proper credentials” or insider track.
I still say that the Arizona Greens may have their reasons…
Blah-blah. The diplomatic posturing is not easy for everyone to understand. It is like a game of “the manager’s smile” that freaks out people used to simplicity and authenticity.
Either help people, or stay out of their way!
And, don’t be a green writing about greens unless you are doing so entirely with support and understanding. No bosses needed.
(And, thanks for the compliments. But, I still think Jonathan’s post was kind of bossy.)
Very enjoyable discussion. As a fan of both Mr. Hardy and Mrs. Wilder, thank you.
The most effective avenue available for growing the Green Party, getting mainstream media attention, is as a candidate on ballot.
The Greens will grow with more candidates on the ballot.
Kimberly, I understand that this isn’t the kind of thing that many people are used to hearing Greens say about Greens. I think that Greens need a new perspective, one in which they’re willing to accept the need to grow, rather than to settle into a comfortable spot.
It isn’t balanced for us to criticize Democrats and Republicans, but then regard Greens as immune from critical examination. If we’re to withstand the competition of the much bigger and better financed Democrats and Republicans, we can’t let the Green Party become a cushy place where everyone says only positive things about what’s going on, even when there are problems and opportunities for improvement.
I’m not trying to be the boss of the Arizona Greens. I’m offering some advice that I think could help them grow. They can choose to take it or not.
I would think that all honest Greens could agree that the approach of sitting back and hoping for the mainstream media to do the job of spreading the Green message has not been a success.
“And, don’t be a green writing about greens unless you are doing so entirely with support and understanding. No bosses needed.”
A Green telling other Greens what they ought to do is one thing, but nothing is worse than a NON-Green telling Greens what they ought to do or not do! Its like talking to me Democrat friends!
Love the site, keep it up!
The title is a little enigmatic, but I really enjoyed the post. If we want the Green Party to go anywhere, it’s important to be constantly reflecting on what has worked, what hasn’t, and how we can do things better.
Greens have always been ignored by the corporate media, and as much as we’d like that to change, I don’t see much evidence that it will anytime soon. So time to stop hoping for change, and time to do something about it. We live in a time where self-publishing is easier and cheaper than ever (granted, for those with access to computers – but Greens in every state have channels allowing them to publish content online).
With the internet and social media, we have the power to bypass establishment media gatekeepers and let the people know that Greens ARE doing something – we’re organizing locally and globally.
That’s what we’re trying to do at Green Change – help people start networking with others who share their values, so we can organize to make real change in the world. If you haven’t joined yet, come check it out!
http://network.greenchange.org/
Jonathan:
You said – Kimberly, I understand that this isn’t the kind of thing that many people are used to hearing Greens say about Greens. I think that Greens need a new perspective, one in which they’re willing to accept the need to grow, rather than to settle into a comfortable spot.-
How long have you been around? What you did is not different. What I was saying is that it is a pattern for greens to critique greens in a condescending way and it is wearisome.
There are a lot of Greens – especially at national – that think they know everything and tell other greens what they are doing wrong all the time.
It has been a constant strand for a few years for some greens to have the attitude of “stop whining about lack of media attention. you can fix it if you…”
And, the fact is, the press is not kind to the Green Party. Green Party activists and candidates have a lot harder time getting covered in almost every newspaper than Dems and Reps. And, to publicly refute that point is to take away the moral righteousness of our cause when we rightfully complain.
It is as simple as can be. If you thought the Arizona Greens should have done more to report on and publicize their event, you should have sent them an e-mail or given them a call and asked them for a report. If you went offering them the favor that you would post about it, they probably would have talked.
And, if they did not, then they may have had a reason. And, local control allows them to share or withhold information as they see fit.
The reason that I am not just dropping it, and hoping you understand is that it is very important and a pattern. (And, probably not just in the Green universe…probably in all small groups…)
Greens from places like NY and CA have a certain style and manner due to being “the coast” and high population. They tend to look at greens from other places and think they are less “professional” or “polished” or something. And, so, they don’t realize it, but they speak condescendingly of others’ efforts. Even though it is nearly impossible to apply tricks and strategies from one place to another place.
And – separately from this situation – there is a pattern that “white people” –in the Green Party and elsewhere–have a pattern of running organizations which is more top-down and has certain manners. And, sometimes we as “white people” don’t realize how controlling and bossy we come off. I, personally, have experienced this situation where I thought I was being helpful or recruiting African-Americans, but I have come off as telling people what to do or controlling.
So, anyway, my point is, when you sincerely want to give advice to other greens, give advice humbly, directly and sweetly.
And, when you want to critique another green entity:
-Be sure you have the facts
-Be extra sure if there are regional or cultural differences.
-Don’t critique other greens in public on green media if you are “the reporter” or “the leader” privileged with the platform.
A last thought…my favorite piece of teaching advice…
I had this book about how to raise your Labroudor Retriever. And, the part about training said, “The puppy cannot learn when it is confused or ashamed.”
Learning and growing are very risky things. So, if you really want to teach someone, you have to make them feel safe and comfortable. Shaming people is not a way to make them grow.
Johnathan – keep on doing what you’re doing. There was nothing condescending about your post, from my perspective… just a bunch of good ideas and helpful suggestions. That is the sort of thing that Greens need to hear.
Greens are tough. We take a lot of extremely unconstructive criticism. So we can handle a little constructive criticism.
Can you see me?????
Guess not.
Oh, well, even among greens, there is sometimes an old boys network…
;)
Though, some of these are the younger boys…
Kay sera. We can’t all be open minded and willing to dialogue…
Kimberly, I think that you ought to be able to back up your accusations, especially if you’re going to claim that others aren’t joining your open minded dialogue.
I would really like to see some documentation that shows that I’m part of a Green Party old boys network. I can’t fathom what fact-based rationale you could have for saying such a thing.
Disagreement is not an attack. Disagreement is an important form of dialogue. That’s why it’s called “dialogue” – the prefix DI stands for two, as in two different points of view. If we in the Green Party aren’t allowed to disagree with each other, but can only write purely positive things about Greens, as you say, then we’ll be having a monologue, not a dialogue.
I don’t think that Green Party Watch ought to become the Fox News of the Green Party, where only the party line can be heard, without criticism. That approach wasn’t good for the Republican Party, and it wouldn’t help the Greens either.
Jonathan,
First of all, the person I was addressing mostly above was David Schwab, who ignored all my comments and “talked passed me.”
Now, I cannot prove it. Because, it is a subtle, communications and feeling thing. But, I will say, I have been reading “Jane Eyre” and thinking of “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”, and just thinking that there are not enough women in the Green Party, and not enough people who are committed to the task of making a culture where there is room for women-style and feminist communication, whatever that happens to be.
I note that– while I highly respect the people who run this blog — hardly any women post. After awhile, you have to figure it is not a coincidence. It must mean something.
If anyone cared about including women in the discourse they would think, study, question, survey, compare….should you change the format? Focus on certain issues that are not covered? Or, maybe when women post or comment, they are not being “heard” and “responded to” in ways that validate them.
This site is in no way WORSE than others or most. And, I am thankful that most of the leaders here respect me a lot and give me space. But, it is still kind of a lonely place for women.
I find that that is how politics is a lot.
Also, about “proving” that the article above has some negative strands…anyone could dissect it and do it.
It is critique-ing the Arizona Greens for not doing enough – for holding a meeting, but not doing ENOUGH by getting press for it. How could I prove that. It is there in black and white.
And, I say, there is so much to do in the Green universe. How could a green have time to write an article about a green local demanding they DO MORE, when some green locals do NOTHING?
If you want to be in a “progressive” organization, and offer “critiques”, it is far better to offer the critiques of the folks at the top, than the folks organizing at the bottom in the trenches.
Anyway, all I said is…next time you notice a green local does not get enough press, give them a ring-a-ding on the phone and ask them if you can help? It is probably time better spent than putting them up as an example of what is wrong in the world.
Now, do you want me to prove the part that local and national media is LESS LIKELY to cover Green Party events than other events? I don’t think that is difficult to do. Just google-new “Green Party” and google news “Democratic Party” and compare the coverage. The Arizona Greens are not the only ones left out of the news…
P.S. My husband finds it endlessly amusing that someone suggests that I am afraid of criticism among greens. He calls over to me, “Are you still towing the Green Party line over there?”
;)
P.S. Jonathan,
If you wanted to pretend that I might be on to something, or trying to help, why don’t you try to rewrite the article again from a more “positive” point of view? Just for yourself, as an exercise in listening to constructive criticism.
Just an FYI:
We are very self-conscious here and have actively recruited women writers and contributors to GPW since the beginning, including Kimberly. Although both males and females can regurgitate equally Green Party news posted on other news sites, we appreciate the female perspective editorially. We can invite, but we can’t make people write.
After Gregg and myself, who both have posted around 400 pieces each, our contributors have been predominantly male, it is true. Below are those who have contributed at least 10 posts:
(F) Dee Taylor – 50 posts
(M) Walter Pituc – 29 posts
(M) Mato Ska – 29 posts
(M) Dave Schwab – 19 posts
(M) Dennis Spisak – 18 posts
(F) Rachel Treichler – 14 posts
(M) Paulie – 12 posts
(M) Jay Parks – 11 posts
Nonetheless, we will continue to invite Green women writers but we won’t stop posting Green Party news in the mean time.
PS I’m back from vacation and wading through email. I hope I have time to start posting stories again tomorrow!
With a “manager’s smile” :-)
Ron
Kimberly,
What can I say – I disagree with you. I try to be self-aware, but I can find nothing disrespectful in anything I’ve written, and I don’t think there is anything condescending in the original post.
To be honest, I found your response to be bossy and condescending. Greens are not puppies, they are political activists. I love puppies, but politics is not for puppies, it’s for people who are capable of participating in dialogue and receiving feedback without lashing out.
If you want to portray yourself as a victim whenever someone disagrees with you, that is your prerogative. But you do not have the right to speak for others and make them into victims. If you think that making someone out as a victim is empowering, then I must disagree vehemently with you.
If Arizona Greens felt that this commentary was unfair to them, then I would like to hear why, from them. But saying “Maybe the greens in Arizona are so poor they do not have computers” is provocative and lazy. If you take a look at the links in the post, each of the chapters in question has its own website.
In an era when Greens have their own websites, we can try to engage potential supporters by updating those sites with interesting, relevant content. That, I believe, was the central point of Jonathan’s post, and I think it’s a great one.
If you want to talk about online manners, try heading over to the threads about Cynthia McKinney, where there are a lot more folks who could use some sensitivity training.
By the way, ascribing everyone who disagrees with you to a “national clique” or “old boys’ network” without a shred of evidence is not only unfair, it calls into question whether you are even aware of your own prejudices.
Just trying to be real with you. Peace.
Dear Dave,
You wrote:
-If you want to portray yourself as a victim whenever someone disagrees with you, that is your prerogative. But you do not have the right to speak for others and make them into victims.-
I want you to reflect on the fact, that the language and angle you are using above is how people consistently stop people from discussin “racism” or “sexism”.
If, when I, as a woman, feel a pattern of women not being treated fairly, and I try to use my life or situation as an example, and then someone says, “That is not fair. You are making yourself into a victim. You are speaking for other women out of turn.” Then, no woman can ever speak up about her oppression.
It is an old game. It is THE game. The victims are squashed from even pleasant conversation and reflection on the situation. So, if the victims can’t speak up, who the heck will?
With racism, that is why people have the idea of “anti-racist, white ally”. Because, people who genuinely care about healing racism know that if a black person says something about racism, the whites will get their prickles up, plus the whites have the hidden disregard for the oppressed. So, white people are asked to speak up for black people, to kind of be spokespeople so that the person with hidden racism sees that a WHITE person is saying something, and can’t confuse the issue and say the BLACK person is just playing victim and trying to speak out for all their race.
Same with women. And, some people–a lot of people– in politics get that women’s groups need male spokespeople as liasons with the old boys network.
About heading over to the Cynthia McKinney threads…That is such a cop-out. Yes, there are nasty, horrible, racists who will post things about Cynthia McKinney. People who dislike her and the Green Party and us. And, sometimes we should call them out and correct them and set the record straight. But, most of them won’t listen to us. And, most of them won’t be changed.
We are here. A group who is supposed to be dedicated to diversity. We are working on projects together and have many of the same values. Let’s do the slower, harder work of getting ourselves on correct paths. That work is more realistic, if we put our minds to it. And, will have more important results for ourselves, our colleague and our mission.
But, yes, there are some real racists on line. Whenever we post stuff about Cynthia McKinney at our youtube or our blog, we have to sift through things, delete nastiness, and deal with yucky, overtly racist and sexist people.
Ron,
Many thanks for your calm and logical reaction to my suggesting that there is a diversity problem in regards to women here. Often, when someone raises the diversity question, one of the reactions of the organization or group is to specifically clam up on such stats. So, a brave gesture to put out the stats as you did, and confess there are some flaws.
As I suggested, I have felt a lot of welcoming and respect from the leaders here at Green Party Watch. And, on a scale of 1 to 10 in the world, I think GPW is about an 8 or 9 for being woman-friendly/inviting/useful. But, I was hoping for a 10. And, also hoping that some of the folks in the circle who have traces of sexism/patriarchy might learn and grow and become even more welcoming and aware.
There is a lot of patriarchy in the Green Party itself which goes unaware. And, some of it is the subtle things – the hierarchy even more than how many women are at the top of the hierarchy; the assumption that “professional” is a desirable value, when professional is a part of our corporate/patriarchal/wounded culture; the attitude that each group may judge each other group and make public pronouncements about their failure and success, etc.
But, since we got on the subject, maybe it would be interesting to make one small push of an effort to get this venue to be more woman friendly. I mean, thinking outside the box, and having a real commitment to the idea of participatory democracy, that women–even if they are shy or reluctant–deserve and should be part of creating the political universe. So, people should go out of their way to beg, cajole, invite, or even bribe them into participation in a place where they feel uncomfortable due to past patterns.
For instance, if this was the physical world -and not virtual world- I would say “provide childcare”. It is a way to go out of one’s way for women in our culture.
But…
Hmmmm….what if you did a survey of women greens? Just open-ended questions such as “What news is important to you?” “What level of green politics do you mostly read about?” “Who are your favorite political figures past and present?” “What do you like at GPW?” “Is there anything that GPW could do to make you feel more welcome to write or comment?” “Is there anything you could do to make GPW more exciting?”
Maybe nothing would happen. But, maybe it would.
One thing that I have been thinking about is the “culture” thing. Right now, I am in the midst of a kind of retro — though there are aspects of feminism and the woman question — obsession with Jane Austen novels and Charlotte Bronte/Jane Eyre lore. But, overall, culture can invite in people who like different styles than the usual political debate atmosphere. Perhaps Green Party Watch should have a link to Green Party music. I think that there have been CD collections for sale at gp.org. And, I know several greens who have been in bands. Maybe there should be weekly profiles of the artistic lives of Green Party activists.
And, what about children? For better or for worse, women in our culture still usually are the ones focused on the children. (I say that knowing that my colleague Roger is a feminist and stay-at-home dad, and that Ron H and Gregg J from here are both very family-focused.) But, what about making a sidebar with links to natural mother-ing sites, or organic clothing shopping? Or, interviewing green party activists who are moms and asking how they balance politics and families?
Just thinking about things.
Since I have taken somewhat of a hiatus from the Green Party proper, I am realizing that some of the reason it was not working for me is that I was lonely as a woman in a man’s world of meetings and bickering. And, when I was inside it, I got into the culture of bickering. And, I see that other women inside it (or any national organization, probably) often follow the men’s patterns sometimes, as a way of going with the flow and winning the game.
Anyway…one of my visions of late is this: What if all the green women came to the national meeting in suits and ties? Try to absorb that image. Because, many people in the Green Party are still saying that we should look like candidates and adopt the uniform of the winning culture (old argument, many groups have had.) But, when you adopt that style, note that men can wear the suit and red power tie and exude power. But, when a woman wears a suit for formal or business, to be at the proper level of dress, she is technically supposed to wear a skirt with the suit. (Might be some changes in attitude about pants, but they are very recent, and many people still have the old code of the skirt as most proper.) And, a woman wearing a tie looks kind of fashion-risque or even silly.
So, people should examine the games that they play. And, who is truly invited to play them.
Just thinking…
Thanks for the dialogue…
Getting lonely as a registered “blank”…
Thank goodness for Victorian and late Victorian literature…they bicker a lot, but with much more wit and elegance, and often more fulfilling results…