While it’s true that the past few leaders of the Green party have been steering the Party in the wrong direction for too long now, we need clear-sighted members such as yourself to stay around to help return the Green Party to its fundamental Green democratic principles.

I hope you can reconsider your decision, especially as many of the issues in the Green Party are also at play within the federal NDP. It may be too late to reform that party, but I believe that with the help of people such as yourself, we can restructure the Green Party to become a model of an eco-centric, participatory democracy for all Canadians, and for the world.

Don’t forget London North prior to Central Nova. On my calculator that now makes three.

The fact so many of you are defending Ms. May and the Council’s tactics in this matter only shows me how misguided and corrupted this party has become.

Parachuting candidates is a game I thought was reserved for the Big 3, but Ms.May has now done this on 2 separate occasions. Loyalty, trust, integrity, honesty???? REALLY????

This party was on its way up after the ’08 election, you had momentum, the country was finally taking you seriously, and then…..

Mr. Hertzog, you should be commended for your stance. It is people of your strength and fortitude who make me proud to live in Canada. I sincerely hope that Elections Canada investigates your complaints, though I doubt they will.

As for those of you who try to silence this man, well all I can say is your misguided ways have pushed me into the waiting arms of the NDP. If I am going to support a party that plays the same old political games, I figure it should be for a leader I believe in.

There is an enormous difference between ‘purity’ and ‘principles.’ Purity is innocence of character and intent; principles are a set of values that motivate policies and actions. Everything is pure both in essence and reality, it’s just that many people are so confused by their ignorance so that their actions are primarily driven by their unconscious.

To me, the job that has to get done is to strip away the veil of illusion that hides the grimy political reality that lies beneath, and return the Green Party to its core principles — or do you prefer to cling to your ‘impure’ political illusions? Perhaps in reality I’m too much of a realist for you?

I take your accusing me of being pure as a compliment, Line. But I must remind you that I stood as a nomination candidate against Elizabeth May on a matter of principle, in this case the principle of participatory democracy, a core Green value embedded within the Party’s constitution.

I am firmly of the opinion that the current leadership of the Green Party of Canada has forgotten this core Green value in their blind drive to GET ANYONE ELECTED, specifically Elizabeth May, which seems to be their definition of The Job That Needs To Be Done. Unfortunately, I believe they are missing the point of participatory Green politics entirely.

Finally, your suggestion that I should be rightfully (hmm, that sounds somewhat defamatory to me) sued for defamation as a way of making me pay for my sins, makes you a Job’s comforter. Maybe that’s the Job you insist must be done? If so, I am reassured that despite all the travails I must endure, my wish for a better democracy that respects both people and Nature will be answered a hundredfold, and that I will live to be 140.

Will the Green Party will have smartened up by then? Who knows!

I may not have been a member of the GPC for long but I’ve been green-minded and active for close to 30 years (I won’t mention any organizations as Mr. Hertzog will probably not find them “pure” enough). Purists are the ones who turn ordinary people away (and off!) from ecology. It is a sectarian attitude. And I don’t want the GPC to be a sect of purists. One has to begin somewhere.

There is a thing that is called reality, you know and it exists even if purists find it inconvenient. They like to discuss endlessly about principles, structures and stuff but meanwhile nothing concrete (rien de concret, pardon my French) gets done. One has to strike a balance between structures and principles and GETTING THE JOB DONE.

I hope (for you) you have ironclad proof of your accusations otherwise you might rightfully be sued for defamation (read the Criminal Code!), besides becoming a laughingstock. Your timing is also very suspicious, but I won’t jump to conclusions.

And I’m not being sent by anyone to write this. It is my own opinion and I’m sharing it.

“I SHOOK HIS HAND AND I PUBLICLY THANKED HIM FOR MAKING THE POINT VERY CLEAR, THAT IF ANY SUSPECTED THE GREEN PARTY OF CANADA MIGHT HAVE BECOME TOP DOWN OR THAT THE LEADER COULD DICTATE ANYTHING, HE HAD ABSOLUTELY PROVEN THAT THAT ISN’T THE CASE.”

MAY SAYS SHE WILL PUT HERTZOG’S COMPLAINT BEHIND HER NOW.

“STUART CHOSE TO DO WHAT I THINK IS ALL TOO COMMON IN POLITICS WHICH IS TRYING TO THROW MUD AT SOMEBODY AND HOPING SOME OF IT STICKS. I’M NOT GOING TO WASTE ANYMORE TIME THINKING ABOUT IT FRANKLY BECUASE THERE WAS NOTHING TO IT.”

http://www.cfax1070.com/newsstory.php?newsId=10589

Anyway, I didn’t even want to reincarnate as a human being on this Dog-Star-awful quarantine planet. You humans live nasty, brutish, and short lives and you seem to be dedicated to either killing yourselves or are busy trashing your home. You won’t be allowed into the Greater Galactic Community until you evolve some more, which right now seems unlikely.

Let me tell you, Constantine, YOU AREN’T GOING TO GET ANOTHER PLANET after I report back to Galactic Council. No way! Fix this one or you will be exterminated. Them’s the rules, you silly, primitive humans.

On your previous blog, Stuart, I posted a rather detailed, factual list drawn from the GPC constitution showing how the GPC is very different from the top-down, centralist, anti-grassroots (or whatever) structures of the other major parties. Rather than address or even acknowledge any of these facts, you just wrap up with “You and I are not going to agree, Erich, so there’s no point in my trying to convince you.” This isn’t a matter of difference of opinion – I’ve provided facts which refute your basic argument. You have not presented any facts to support yours – you just keep repeating vague accusations like “decades of drift away from fundamental Green principles”. When people call you on it and list factual counter-points, all you do is throw up your hands and say they somehow won’t understand your point, so why bother explaining it. (If you can’t explain your ideas even to other Greens, how good of a candidate could you be for the public?) At this point I really think the truth is you are basing your entire candidacy on “truthiness” rather than verifiable fact. (Here I’m talking about the structure of the GPC, not the facts around your spurious complaint to Elections Canada, which has it’s own divergence from reality).
If it matters, I also posted a list of long-time practices which also differentiate the GPC from mainstream parties. Since these are actions rather than rules enshrined in our constitution, you blithely dismiss them as “procedural concessions”. Yet if the party acts in contradiction to its rules (according to you), you’ll happily hold that as a failing of the party. Do you not see the double standard? If the practice is good but the rule isn’t written, you dismiss it: GPC = bad. If the rule is good but the practice doesn’t match, then GPC = bad. You can’t have it both ways. Myself, I would say the proof is in the pudding and if long-time practices (like revenue-sharing, as one example) demonstrate grassroots principles, then that’s how the party should be judged. But either way (rule or practice) you have failed to make your case in the face of contrary evidence.
You also, just before closing off comments, threw this at me: “You’re a centralist, Erich. But many people are rejecting the old centralist political parties,”
You know what? I’m certainly NOT a centralist. If I were, then I’d be working for one of the old centralist political parties. The grassroots nature of the Greens is part of what drew (and still draws) me to the GPC. Supporting the Leader’s bid to run in a riding whose grassroots members have enthusiastically invited her to represent them no more makes me a “centralist” than wearing a red shirt last week made me a communist.
I guess we’ll find out pretty soon how much of a “grassroots candidate” you really are when the true grassroots of SGI cast their nomination ballots. I think you (and Sebastian, and his 4 other supporters) are in for a rude surpise. Of course, you’ve already got that covered by blaming your loss on central party shenanigans. I suppose $62,000 gathering dust in an EDA bank account can really keep a guy down.
And one last thing: you simultaneously attack Elizabeth for being a “parachute” or “foreign to the bioregion”, yet also attack her for having rented or bought a house there and living in SGI. When exactly does someone qualify as a local? I note that you were not born in the riding, bioregion, province, or even country where you now claim (implicitly) to not be “foreign”. Have you got an exact amount of time it takes for her to settle in and qualify? Does it not matter that she lives in the riding but you don’t? And dismissing her as only living there “temporarily” is irrelevant – no-one is forcing you to stay, you could move away tomorrow, too. If a person like you can become the grassroots representative of their ADOPTED bio-region, then so can Elizabeth May. No?