Talk:Green politics/Archive 1

Old Discussion
I don't really agree that "Green" politics is a spectrum of it's own... it may advocate a very small number of things not traditionally left wing, but nearly 95% of their leanings are extreme left.

Most left/right political divisions are defunct, and are a hangover from 18th century french politics. You are probably using the terms "left" or "extreme left" in terms of opposition to current right wing politics, however, green politics is certainly not in accord with the traditional left. Muxxa 01:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't really "know" anything about Green Politics, or "Ideology" in General. I'm sure that I could find some examples of policies that would show them to advocate the same extreme left ideas of Lenin, Fidel Castro and Ted Kennedy. But seeing as nearly 95% of my understanding of ideology is based around extremey narrow, biased, unscientific interpretations of the US political spectrum I think I can contribute a baseless, generalised assertation to add to the intellectual richness of this site.

Colorless Green Ideas 21:34, 13 October 2005 (UTC) -- I find this page very interesting, as it expounds many ideas that I am interested in, but what I don't get is how they really relate to Green poltics. In my experience with local Green organizations and activists, well, most Greens seem more interested in full blown socialism with an environmentist slant. Do these ideas in this article truly reflect overal Green politics, or an emerging green politics, or do they actually just reflect the politics of the articles authors? I think of myself as a "Green Liberal" with a touch of Geolibertarianism, so I am not writing to criticize this article or the authors, I just want to understand what I see as an inconsistency between this article, which I find quite favorable, and most "Greens" that I know, which I don't.

I would love to know where this 95% number comes from? While each country's politics are different, I have found that leftist find the greens too right-wing, and conservatives find them too left-wing and centrists don't care. The whole left-right thing is rather generalising anyways, so I don't see why we need to say anying about them being more right than left or left than right. --24.141.165.81 22:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Interesting this persistent view that Green politics are all leftist. The Greens and Libertarians (an American party) share many views in common, although some, of course, are diametrically opposed. In many parts of the world, Green parties are definitely leftist or socialist leaning, but not in all countries. I would agree with the second poster, Muxxa, that the left-right dichotomy is inadequate to describe the positions of modern Green parties. Deirdre 21:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The Green Parties are modern left-wing parties. I am a member of The Socialistic Peoples Party in Denmark, which is a green socialistic party, and we share values and politics with green parties in all topics. The Green Parties social- and labour politics is so much based on solidarity and democracy that they have to be modern left-wing parties. I think the reason that some greens don't wan't to be called left is because the left-right scale usually defines socialism vs. liberalism. In that way the left-right scale is completly outdated. But if left-right scale is a question of how much you want to change society(like in Denmark), then almost all green parties is left-wing. Because making a society based on ecology, solidarity, radical democarcy, non-violence, sustainability and respect for diversity that is changing society. That is why I have changed the text the beginning of this article.(Loens 22:36, 7 October 2006 (UTC))

Sunflower
Why is the Sunflower such a universal Green symbol? Where did it come from?Fishal 22:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

PS: Extreme leftists like Lenin and Castro and Ted Kennedy??

Look, green republicans: http://www.repamerica.org/ Republicans for Environmental Protection

Greens on capital gains and income taxes
It surprised me to read that Greens promote cuts in taxes on income and capital gains. I thought Greens favored progressive taxes. The consumption taxes mentioned in this article tend to be regressive. Income and capital gains taxes are more progressive because they are levied at higher rates on higher earnings. Are you sure that Greens support cuts in income and capital gains taxes?Dylan23 01:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Major expansion
I feel-- and it is my impression that I have support here-- that this article, rather than Worldwide green parties, should be considered the "top-level" article on everything Green. I am currently working on expanding it gradually with material from other pages. My work-in-progress is at User:Fishal/Green_politics. Fishal 22:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

There are my major edits-- I think I have thoroughly reorganized this article as well as Green parties and Green movement. They're far from perfect and remain completely uncited, but I think that now at least they are organized enough that they can grow more easily. Fishal 15:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Green Politics articles
I think that there are too many separate articles on Green Politics and I want to unite them, before posting merger banners I'd hoped to discuss it with some of you. We have:
 * Green politics
 * Worldwide green parties
 * List of Green party issues
 * greens
 * Green movement

I'd hoped to reduce their number to at least two, one about green politics, parties, politicians and governments and one about green ideology, policy and issues.

What do you think? C mon 17:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. -- Rob C (Alarob) 20:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I'm working on some moves right now. Fishal 20:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support.EvokeNZ 22:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. This discussion is moribund, but it needs to be revived.  I am going to suggest a merger of Green movement with Green politics. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  17:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I suggest that the Green movement article be merged with this article. The two topics have a great deal of overlap, indeed repetition, and the Green movement article is better referenced. A merger would combine the best strengths of both articles and eliminate repetition. Thoughts? --- RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  18:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree completely, but some of the Green movement material might have a place in Green party. To quote C Mon's vision from two years ago, "I'd hoped to reduce their number to at least two, one about green politics, parties, politicians and governments [Green party] and one about green ideology, policy and issues [Green politics]."  I re-organized the material somewhat a year ago in the hopes that that would make the pages more "editable" and result in improved content.  It has not.  Another merge is in order.  But what we really need is good, reliable sources, which are lacking in all top-level Green articles.  Fishal (talk) 15:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with everything you have said here. But, we have to start someplace.  "Green movement" is really too vague a term.  Let's sort it out as best we can, and I will begin looking for good references. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  16:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it is high time we proceeded with this merger. --- RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  16:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Include info from annihilated wiki-page
Please include info from this annihalited wiki page into the article. thanks. KVDP (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup To do
After a review of this article, I've identified the following issues that could be improved: --Lendorien (talk) 14:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Needs to be added to related wikiprojects.
 * Better sourcing needed overall. This article has a good start at sourcing, but it's spotty.
 * Existing sourcing needs to be normalized based on proper sourcing standards. A bare link is not the correct method.
 * Green_politics needs definate work. It lacks a nuetral POV. It has no sourcing and needs to be generally rewritten for flow. The sourcing issue is a major one.
 * The Green_politics section should probably be renamed to something that has more clarity. "Trends in Green thought" or something.

Origin of "Green"
The article says the German Greens, founded in 1980, were the first to use the term "green" in a political sense. However, Bob Brown of the Australian Greens suggests that Petra Kelly of the German Greens was inspired by the union "green bans" of the 1970s when she visited Australia. While the "green bans" started in 1971, the term is said in the article to have been coined by Jack Mundey in 1973. "Greenpeace", however, was first used in 1971 as the name of a protest ship. Whoever started to use "green" to refer to environmental politics, it doesn't seem to be the German Green. In fact, the term "green" is such an obvious one to use, and had been used in similar contexts (green belt) for a while, so it is likely that several people came up with the usage independently.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:05, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

-Eco-Fascism?
That bit on eco-fascism in the history section is a bit out of place and kinda of an afterthought. Most Green Parties (especially the German Greens) are ardently anti-fascist. It does not seem like a piece of significant history, can we delete it or move it to a different place in the article and maybe provide some context? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.48.141 (talk) 10:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, its article says that it's just a pejorative term, and it's not really covered in the article. Removed for now. --Aquillion (talk) 13:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Green politics (environmentalist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081010175959/http://www.greens.org.nz/about/history.htm to http://www.greens.org.nz/about/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:06, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Green politics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140702121432/http://greenparty.ie/assets/docs/Green%20Party%20Irish%20Language%20Policy%20in%20English%20(2014)-3.pdf to http://www.greenparty.ie/assets/docs/Green%20Party%20Irish%20Language%20Policy%20in%20English%20(2014)-3.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030402095954/http://www.greenparties.hpg.ig.com.br/virtual.html to http://greenparties.hpg.ig.com.br/virtual.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Seeing Green
Shouldn't the "Further reading" section include reference to the book "Seeing Green" by Jonathan Poritt?17:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:46, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Murray Bookchin in Burlington.jpg

No mentions of Green Anarchism
On this page I can't find any good references to Green/Ecological Anarchism, while I do view it relevant to this topic. 89.205.132.18 (talk) 15:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)