Green Purge: How the Green Party US is Too Busy Eating Its Own to Save the Planet
Darlene Elias is an example of how strong and accomplished Green Party leadership could be. A Latinx activist for housing rights who prevented the demolition of the housing project in which she grew up in Holyoke, MA, Darlene is no stranger to adversity and well versed in fighting the good fight. She’s served as a co-chair of the national Green Party, co-chair of its Women’s Caucus, co-chair of its Latinx Caucus and co-chair of the Green Rainbow Party, the MA state affiliate.
So why is the Green Party engaged in a mission to attack and take down Elias, one of its strongest leaders?
The Proposal
A proposal (attached below) has been put forth in the Green Rainbow Party state committee to ‘disapprove’ of Elias’ alleged “hostile actions” after allegations of rigging in the recent Presidential primary. Darlene formerly served as Vice Presidential candidate with myself, Dario Hunter, in the race for the Green Party nomination.
The proposal rebukes Elias for: rejecting the legitimacy of the primary, calling the party toxic, corrupt and taken over by fascists (which this proposal certainly doesn’t disprove), stating the party doesn’t uphold election integrity, and remarking that the party’s primary rigging makes it “barely progressive.” Though no longer a candidate, the proposal also attacks Elias for her continued personal support for the Hunter campaign, and remarkably for not letting the party monitor her social media.
The GRP’s allegations of opinion ‘crimes,’ as petty as they are lengthy, are all centered around Elias’ unwillingness to support the selected Green nominee, Howie Hawkins, and her criticism of the conduct of that primary race.
Behind the Attack: Allegations of Primary Rigging
Elias refers to ethical allegations about the Green Party primary that are numerous and well documented. The party has been called out for providing exclusive promotional opportunities to Hawkins, excluding other candidates from primary ballots and debates, conducting state primaries/conventions without public notice, and allowing massive conflicts of interest in favor of Hawkins. That includes the controversial choice of a co-chair of the national party, Andrea Merida, to serve simultaneously as the manager for the Hawkins campaign.
One of the cosponsors of the GRP’s recent proposal is Team Hawkins booster, Matthew Andrews, son of John Andrews, the embattled former chair of the Greens’ Presidential Campaign Support Committee. The senior Andrews was dogged with accusations of rigging for Hawkins throughout the race, including those related to a PCSC proposal to kick numerous candidates off the Green Party’s website.
Some of the circumstances criticized are simply a matter of undeniable fact — such as the appearance of only Hawkins on the North Carolina primary ballot and the admission from the Kansas Green Party that they did not inform the public or candidates of their nominating convention.
Multiple candidates have signed multiple joint letters protesting these ethical issues. At one point or another, every primary candidate except Hawkins has called out the party for primary rigging.
The party, through its official indifference and internal push back, has created a perfect storm of frustration over the ethical issues. Neither the national party nor any state party has taken any actions to acknowledge or address the ethical issues in the primary. Complaints brought by groups of Greens in Colorado as well as North Carolina were simply dismissed without genuine debate or consideration.
It’s easy to see how an activist like Elias, and anyone fed up with political corruption, could be compelled to publicly call out the party for its refusal to do better.
Related: Joint Candidates Letter — Equal Access for All Candidates (Apr. 19, 2019)
Related: 2nd Joint Statement from Green Presidential Candidates
Related: Hawkins Team Sends Letter Demanding I Let Them Have an Unfair Advantage (by Ian Schlakman)
The Green Party’s History of Rejecting and Repelling Members
With all the corruption and political inaction taking place in the Democratic Party, outside observers have often asked why more progressives aren’t abandoning them for the Greens. After all, from a progressive perspective, they sound great on paper and have more ballot lines than any other self-proclaimed left party.
The simple answer is that the party is pushing them away — either directly by rejecting and/or attacking them, or indirectly by showing its true face as a deeply ethically challenged political organization.
In Colorado, a group called Restore Green Values, lodged a complaint with the Green Party’s national accreditation committee about a laundry list of alleged violations committed by Colorado’s party co-chair, none other than current Hawkins campaign manager, Andrea Merida. RGV alleged in part that Merida “failed to support and actively rejected and opposed admission of supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders who were moving or attempting to move to the Green Party.”
It appears that her actions were less about differences of political opinion and more about control, as the allegations also claimed she “approved of a conspiracy to rig the election of officers… appointed herself to fill every [Green Party of Colorado] position that has recently fallen vacant while ignoring volunteers for those positions… [and] removed her co-chair under questionable circumstances….”
Despite RGV’s effort to end the controversies caused by Merida, she continued to be co-chair of the Green Party of Colorado — and presided over that party’s state primary process while manager for the Hawkins campaign.
Analysis
By laying out its allegations of opinion ‘crimes,’ the Green Party has put a spotlight on its tendency to purge all opposition to its deeply entrenched, privileged leadership, its mistreatment of activists from communities of color, and the deeply disturbing surveillance tactics it uses against members who don’t fall in line.
Shockingly, the proposal argues that the party has a right to monitor Elias’ social media for her “political agenda” and attempts to rebuke her for not making it available.
The effort to turn the focus away from serious ethical allegations and attack people personally, aided by disturbing surveillance, is something you’d expect to see in a Leah Remini series on Scientology — not from a credible political party.
The Green Party’s response to allegations of rigging — e.g. a disturbing assault on one of its best and brightest — makes it clear that the party’s leadership is more interested in providing a safe space for unethical behavior than growing as a party.
It’s remarkable to note that while the Green Rainbow Party is turning its attention to this proposal, holding an emergency meeting on it tomorrow (Sept. 15), their selected “nominee” is polling at 0% and netting 0% of Google searches on the presidential election. Compare that to the 2% or higher level of interest or support for Libertarian nominee Jo Jorgensen. It would seem that Elias isn’t the only one declining to support Hawkins.
The proposal suggests a fact finding committee investigate Elias and her opinions. However, what the party clearly needs is a fact finding committee to investigate why there is so little interest in their “nominee.” In the midst of a challenging election for leftists and on the precipice of a grave climate change catastrophe, the Green Party seems to be busy attacking its own activists to cover up its internal faults rather than focusing on saving the planet.
As Green leadership moved Howie Hawkins to the front of the line in the Presidential primary, comedian Jimmy Dore quipped that Hawkins would be “the death of the Green Party.” The reality is, the Green Party has been killing itself from the inside for years — and based on its recent actions, it seems intent upon continuing to do so.
The result will not be a loss for Elias who, based on her expressed opinions, has already written the Party off for its misdeeds and will no doubt continue her impactful activism. But it will deprive the larger public of what could have been in terms of left activism and environmental change in party politics.
Appendix: The Text of the GRP Proposal
PROPOSAL: State Committee Disapproval of Hostile Actions by Darlene Elias
SPONSORS: Matthew Andrews, Elizabeth Humphrey
VETTING COMMITTEES: Chapters
FLOOR MANAGER: Matthew Andrews
SHEPHERD: Matthew Andrews
TEXT OF PROPOSAL:
Part 1
State Committee expresses its strong disapproval of the following hostile actions taken against the GRP by Darlene Elias of Holyoke Massachusetts:
1) She publicly rejects the legitimacy of the Presidential Nominating Convention which chose Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker to be our presidential ticket by a vote of 210 versus Hunter’s 102 (Twitter, 7/11).
2) She publicly described the Green Party as “toxic” “vile” and stated that it “does not put the people first nor upholds election integrity” (Twitter, 7/12).
3) She publicly claimed the Party “has been taken over by authoritarians and fascist.” (Twitter, 7/24).
4) She publicly said “They are barely progressive when they need to rig an election to get a vote. #greenexit” (Twitter, 7/28).
5) She continues to publicly support Dario Hunter (Green Round Table, 8/17), an explicitly anti-Green Party candidate, seeking to form a new political party.
6) She has commented on Facebook that ?the Green Party is not Salvageable. It is corrupt, none of you stood up.? (Facebook, one month ago as of 8/18)
7) She has created multiple accounts on Facebook and blocked public access to her Twitter account obstructing the Green-Rainbow Party from observing her full political agenda.
These actions of Darlene Elias may cause serious injury to the Party, in the following ways:
1) Demotivate GPUS ballot access drives which are particularly dependent upon volunteers.
2) Cause the Green-Rainbow Party and other state parties to fall short of the thresholds required to maintain ballot access for the party in their state.
3) Cause the national vote total to fall short of the 5% threshold needed to secure federal party-building funds.
4) Make it more difficult for the GPUS candidate to gain entry to televised debates or to achieve increased press coverage.
5) Undermine efforts at the state level to leverage the presidential campaign to increase membership, recruit voters, recruit and support local candidates, or rejuvenate state parties.
6) Create partisan splits in the progressive movements that have, with great effort, come to see the Green Party as their natural ally.
7) Threaten the GRP?s affiliation with the GPUS and other Greens nationwide
8) Undermine the commitment to unity in action upon which our democratic process is based.
….
Part 2
State Committee invokes bylaws section 4.3 to form a three person fact-finding committee to investigate whether Darlene Elias is in contradiction with the purpose of the Green-Rainbow Party, bylaws section 3, to build an independent political party, and section 4.1, to uphold the Ten Key Values and be honest and forthright in all dealings. This fact-finding committee shall report findings to the co-chairs who will seek to mediate a resolution.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: none