so, i flipped through this, and it's pretty much the same document they've been kicking around since the 90s. it's never been perfect, and i've always had some serious disagreements, which is a part of the reason i've largely avoided voting for them, but i know where they stand; they're a lot like bernie sanders, in that respect - they've been saying the same thing for as long as they've existed.

https://www.greenparty.ca/sites/default/files/platform_2019_en_web_update_09-16.pdf

there's questions around timeframes closing, including around elizabeth may's lifespan. and, while they deny being utopian, a lot of this stuff can't be done fast enough to make the difference it needs to make anymore. if there's a broader criticism of this document, it's that it represents an optimism to actually substantively reverse the damage that probably can't be accomplished any more. so, it needs a greater focus on mitigation and adaptation, and i would suspect that will be the theme for the party in the next few cycles.

but, i'd rather start by telling you what i want.

i'm a low-income, highly urban artist nearing the age of 40 that doesn't even have a driver's license and will probably never get one. i prefer to bicycle; when i can't bike anymore, i'll have to resort to walking or relying on public transit. this isn't some kind of exercise in zen buddhism or stoicism or something, or an unwanted consequence of poverty, but a conscious lifestyle decision that reflects the kind of world i want to actually live in. it's leadership by example, even if you might not want to follow - although i hope you do.

so, i want to live in an urban green space that is largely self-sustainable, which includes being free of both car exhaust and tobacco and marijuana smoke, and i want to live amongst educated people that have sophisticated self-interests that are not necessarily market-driven. i think that the best way to get to this endpoint is to socialize the means of production, but i recognize that my existence is finite, and i've long accepted the idea of a minimum income as a way to allow people like me to live the lifestyles they actually want to live.

but, i think that proportional representation is a bad idea - i would rather see a preferential ballot. further, there is almost no room for religion in my environmental-technological utopia, except as a veneration of the earth. i can almost tolerate a type of mystical gaia theory, so long as it is empirical, in the end. i have essentially no patience for the abrahamic faiths, and see no place for them in the future.

so, what are some specific points of contention, then? let me put these in separate posts.