How Dare You?

How dare the (so-called) "League of Conservation Voters" call me and ask I caucus for Hillary Clinton?

This action is actively weakening the conservation movement by fragmenting and dividing a base of support they have worked hard to mobilize. They are spending their time and credibility campaigning against a conservationist candidate which is self-destructive to the environmental movement in America. Do they not realize how motivated the Political Revolution is? How passionate? How many more people might show up to vote in the general election and in the mid-term elections because of it?

Why is it so hard to see that this is the future of the Democratic Party if it is to have one at all?

Explain to me the reasoning behind this, because I do not understand why you would alienate your allies and your future. Young voters who have grown up under the yoke of unbridled capitalism can see how detrimental it can be to the environment -- And how powerless we are made to do anything about it. Young voters overwhelmingly support the Political Revolution.

I would understand backing a half-assed ally (she wont answer Keystone -- thus TarSands -- questions) in a race against an enemy. I don't agree (for there is always an ally to back and if there's not then don't back anyone) but I understand. But do not campaign in a race against two allies and back the least supportive one.

I know that non-profits are having a difficult time securing funds and that part of this reason is generating trust because I have worked in non-profit development. So I have difficulty understanding our nonprofits when they do this: it fills me with distrust. I can't say I will ever trust the League of Conservation Voters in the future, nor will I trust the Human Rights Campaign for they have done the same thing but in an even more striking way. You have abandoned the progressive platform.

We, we all, have been convinced of a very misguided political philosophy. In a bad attempt to be strategic within a two-party we have lost our collective voice. Because we don't vote for our interests or with integrity, we have slowly lost almost all our representation and are losing more every day. Our elected officials only have to be marginally better than awful to get our vote, so that is all they are. Voter confidence turns down, less people go out to vote, but for politicians, that is hardly a problem. Now they have even less reason to listen to what people want; they can do what they want. Then we convince ourselves (or allow ourselves to be convinced) that it is unrealistic to expect more.

That is how we have arrived here, with a more oligarchic system: through dishonesty and cowardice.

The only way we have a hope of taking back our democracy is to vote with integrity. It is the only way to make a real achievement. We might lose a battle or two, but if we stand by the righteousness of our position, and it is truly the righteous position, it will prevail in the end.

Or we will succumb. We may anyway, but the only chance we have to prevail is through honesty, integrity, and follow-though, and some bravery. A two-party system cannot ever represent all of the voices and views in the world; it is inherently undemocratic. Eventually, we will need to figure out how to have more than two choices. Following the status-quo, allowing fear and cowardice to own your vote, will not get there.

LCV, I am caucusing for Bernie on Tuesday. And if he doesn't get the democratic nomination, I will still vote for the stronger candidate: probably Jill Stein. Win or lose, I will vote for what I believe is right, rather than spiral slowly down the toilet.