Green politics is filled with points of contention

The discussions and the debates are interesting . . .

* The “realo” perspective vs. the “fundi” perspective
* Eco-development vs. de-growth praxis
* Socialism or bioregionalism?
* Higher tech or lower tech?
* Is Gandhian pacifism tenable?
* Should ecological degradation or social injustice be our priority focus?
* Are there valid issues re: accepting transgender women as women in all respects?
* Is there an over-population problem or not?
* Can megalopolis cities be made sustainable?
* Is nuclear energy viable?
* Is modern civilization essentially making progress (improving our lot) or essentially heading for disaster?

It’s a shame when people become so partisan or rigid in their viewpoint that they demonize others who see things a little differently.

I’d hope we would, in good faith, try to keep our eyes on the prize re: “A Better World Is Possible” . . .

Personally, for all of the particulars and specifics and contentions, getting to the essence, I think our objectives should be informed by these over-arching ideas:

. the left needs to transition, ideologically, from Red to Green

. that can best happen if we work toward an in-gathering of activists under the Green Party umbrella