Green Party: Improving the Shit Holes of the World

Published by

Clarissa

May 9, 2016

So I decided to learn more about the Green Party, and here is an explanation given by one of its supporters as to why people should vote Green in this election:

Trump is right about one thing that the electorate has grasped: illegal immigration is a labor issue. If you’re against immigration for undermining labor conditions, pundits insist you’re a racist. I fully support everyone’s right not to live in a shit hole, but it is possible to improve the quality of life in foreign countries to a standard they find in America and to do so without invading them. Making the adoption of Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations and an Environmental Protection Act international law with strict enforcement a requirement for free trade agreements might do quite a lot to raise quality of life globally.

This is truly priceless, people. I can just imagine this earnest Greenie traveling to Syria, Mexico, Palestine, or Ukraine, and telling people there, “Sheesh, this is such a shit hole. I will now totally improve your life by making you adopt Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations and an Environmental Protection Act. This will so make your shit hole just like the perfect country I come from!”

The only thing I don’t get is why the voters who want to support self-involved, condescending, American-centrist prickdom don’t all go straight to Trump.

Rate this:

5 responses to “Green Party: Improving the Shit Holes of the World”

J. Otto Pohl

May 9, 2016

Environmental regulations if enforced would help here in Ghana. We have very bad air pollution mostly from tro tros (marshrutkas) given to Ghana by Europeans after they no longer meet EU regulations. As a result of this pollution I and a huge number of Ghanaians have developed asthma. I won’t even mention how bad the problems related to properly disposing of human waste are in some parts of greater Accra.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  May 9, 2016
  
  I’m all for environmental regulations. It’s the condescending, self-congratulating tone that I object to. The same message could be delivered the way you just did: in a respectful, reasonable way.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Z

May 9, 2016

The actual Green position, I believe, would be that US should adopt international environmental protocols it currently refuses, e.g. Kyoto.

This is a summary of what the party is for: http://www.gp.org/120591/the_real_difference

LikeLike

Reply
Hattie

May 9, 2016

I stopped taking the Greens seriously years ago.

LikeLike

Reply
cliff arroyo

May 10, 2016

While some number of people have always moved about, I’m not really a big fan of mass emigration/immigration for a number of reasons.

One of those is that it’s too easy for bad governments to use it as a safety valve, encouraging troublemakers who want better policy and better, more accountable government to move on and leave them alone.

If moving to the US weren’t so easy for Latinos who chafe under the perpetual, criminal mismanagement of their countries then maybe they could help organize to make their countries better. What possible motivations do Latin American politicians have for improving their countries?

If Poland had easily crossable borders at the beginning of 1989 then it would probably still be communist today (the current government’s power base are losers who miss the safety of government control).

Of course individuals should be able to leave situations they find personally intolerable but what’s best for isolated individuals and countries as a whole aren’t necessarily the same thing.

LikeLike

Reply