Why I'm voting Green

Next week, for the first time ever in a national election, I'll be voting Green. My main reasons for doing so are:

 - The Greens are opposed to fiscal austerity. Labour's promise to "cut the deficit every year" unconditional on the state of the economy is a capitulation to mediamacro deficit obsession. Granted, they might well be insincere in this - but there's a danger that lies become the truth.

 - The Greens (pdf) are more liberal on immigration. Sure they fall short of wanting open borders. But they don't celebrate their desire to condemn people to a lifetime of poverty merely because of an accident of birth, as Labour did with that notorious mug.

 - I support the Greens wish to cancel Trident's replacement. I reckon £100bn could be better spent.

 - I share the Greens' desire for a citizens basic income; I appreciate this isn't a manifesto commitment, but it should be the direction of travel.

 - The Greens' support for a maximum wage is well worth discussion, not least because it recognizes that a more redistributive tax system isn't sufficient to reduce inequality.

 - I suspect that the Greens are instinctively keener on civil liberties than Labour, and more antipathetic to managerialism.

All that said, there are some massive caveats. For example, I'm sceptical about some green policies; need more convincing (to say the least) about its attitude to banking reform and  intellectual property; and don't like at all the party's instinctive antipathy towards free markets, as signaled by its desire for government spending to approach 50% of GDP*. Nor have I been impressed by Natalie Bennett's inability to sell even good policies.

There is, though, a bigger caveat. If I lived in a marginal, I would support Labour. For one thing, I very much want Ed Miliband to be our next PM, not just because this might rid our nation of the blight that is Katie Hopkins, but also because it would be a poke in the eye to the class-haters who have questioned whether he is prime ministerial enough. And for another, whilst Labour is hugely flawed, it is better than the Tories on, for example,  on fiscal policy and benefit cuts.

However, I don't live in a marginal but in a massively safe Tory seat. My vote therefore has only expressive value, if only to myself. And I shall use it to express my disdain for how Labour has kowtowed too much to economic illiteracy and reactionary prejudice.

* Green policies might be described as "macro OK, micro bad" - but as James Tobin said, it takes a heap of Harberger triangles to fill an Okun gap.

Comments

[Matt Moore]

Don't vote. It's a complete waste of an hour, of which you'll only have about 657,450

It's a particularly effective waste of time if you are voting Green in a safe Tory seat.

Read a book, phone a friend, sit in a park. All better uses of that hour.

[Bob]

Hahaha. Hahahaha!!!!!

*wipes tear away from eye*

Thanks Chris, I needed a good laugh!

[Metatone]

Contra Matt Moore, just the exercise you'll get walking to the polling station probably makes it time well spent...

[Metatone]

I'm voting Green in a tactical swap with someone in a marginal. They say they will vote Labour.

(I'm also in a very safe Tory seat.)

No verification, so it's all on trust and may not work out.
But we do the best we can with the electoral system we have.

[Luke]

"need more convincing (to say the least) about its attitude to...intellectual property;"

FWIW, I had you down as someone who might be interested in the idea of reducing a form of rent-seeking, if not the precise Green proposals. I even expected a slightly tongue in cheek endorsement as one of your reasons. Shows what I know.

[Graham]

The Greens are screaming in outrage that the water given to the Nepalese victims is in plastic bottles.

The horror.

[Sandalwood]

Hi metatone

I might be the person you're vote swapping with, as I live in a labour/ Tory marginal and I'm signed up to that site too.

[Phil Beesley]

I'm a liberal so I will vote LibDem following my liberal principles. There is only one liberal party so I'm voting for them.

Chris Dillow presumes that the Green Party are non-managerialist. What?

[BCFG]

"I'm a liberal so I will vote LibDem following my liberal principles. There is only one liberal party so I'm voting for them."

The liberals are what I call austerity enablers, Tory enablers. Without the so called liberals none of the hard right policies of the last 5 years would have been possible. So Phil Beasley is no liberal but hard right, no matter what the name on the tin says.

I am in a safe Labour seat so will vote TUSC.

[Phil Beesley]

According to your politics, BCFG, vote whatever.

Personally, I think that austerity is bonkers. I've read enough to comprehend Keynes.

BCFG: So Phil Beasley is no liberal but hard right..."

My name is Beesley and I am not from the right.

[Magnus]

I share your convictions Chris.

I live in a not quite marginal, but not quite safe Tory seat. (Labour are 2nd.) What is the critical threshold of current Tory majority?

[Ralph Musgrave]

Re the Green Party, Chris says he needs “more convincing (to say the least) about its attitude to banking reform..”. I like it.

The Green Party has essentially adopted Positive Money’s ideas on bank reform which basically consist of banning private money printing or private money “creation”. I.e. only the state would issue money under that reform. And note that Milton Friedman backed that idea.

So Chris, who claims to be a Marxist isn't sure about preventing private banks creating the nation’s money, plus his views seem to be to the right of Milton Friedman’s. If anyone reading this is confused, I don’t blame them.

[Clive King]

Many of the same arguments for voting Green also hold for those of us west of Offa's dyke in terms of voting for Plaid, even if like me you are not a Nationalist but attempt to be a pragmatist.

Who is Katie Hopkins and why does she matter ?

[Chris Williams]

Chris, do you fancy coming along to a Leicester Green Party meeting some time in the medium term, so as to tell us what you don't agree with about the economic policy? It could be a worthwhile conversation for us to have with you, since I suspect that you know more about economics than any of us, but share enough of our vision to make it useful. Alternatively, some of us head out to Wing once in a while and would probably be happy to have the same conversation in a pub, with us buying. If you're still living in Rutland, that is.

[PatJ]

Thanks Chris.
I thought hard about this too and have made the same decision as you for much the same reasons.
I live in a Tory safe seat and can only therefore express my conscience to myself (I suppose even a hope that enough votes might encourage a more proportional representation system is wasted after the last attempt at PR).
I would also add a caveat of my own: an opposition to nuclear power as a "fossil fuel" alternative is infeasible in the short-medium term.
P.S. Sorry to disappoint, Matt Moore, but it only took me about three minutes as I postal voted.

[Keith]

So if Ian Duncan Natzi is still running the DWP on 8th of May we will know who to blame for the deaths of the disabled that will follow... all the hipsters unwilling to vote for the main opposition party. Plus all the parents with less money to spend on their children can thank them too when Child benefit is cut.

I am amused that people think the Lib Dem party is liberal in some way after empowering the Eton mess and ditching keynes and modern macroeconomics; and I will observe that the green opposition to managerialism sits oddly with the idea of abolishing private banking for a state monopoly system. That was the policy of Hitler after 1933 in his centrally plannned natzi war based economic plan. Very libertarian I am sure.

Political labels seem rather meaningless today.

[davidjc]

Green Party is anti-growth. Can anyone think of a society in human, and probably primate, history where declining resources led to a happy outcome?

As fromarsetoelbow argued recently, those mildly social democrat policies listed, in a minus-growth world, must come from a massive, on going, appropriation of private wealth. If that's the aim, the first thing the Green Party needs is an armed wing.

[Matthew Maloney]

I thought the green's were the best match for me in terms of just policy. I heartily support renationalising the rail system and a carbon tax and a mansion/property tax.

Unfortunately from a practical perspective, labour needs every vote it can get and a green government just isnt possible. I also feel labour have moved to the left which is very welcome although Ed Milliband strikes me as a weak leader.

The bigger question is why there are so many left wing parties splitting the vote. Between voters for the lib dems, SNP, greens and labour there would be more than enough for a left wing coalition to put the UK back on a sustainable humane track.

[Greg]

"...but also because it would be a poke in the eye to the class-haters...".

Yeah, it's great the way Ed has overcome the stigma and socio-economic disadvantages of growing up in Primrose Hill the son of a professor. He's a real beacon of hope to those languishing in Belsize Park and Southend Green.

[James]

You will also be voting for a party led by your fellow veteran of the great blogging years, Natalie Bennett, Chris.

[K J]

I live in a labour seat and I am very proud to be voting for the common sense policies of UKIP.

[Chris Carter]

You cannot possibly believe that the Greens are not highly managerialist, indeed authoritarian, not to mention (for all their talk of anti-austerity) anti-growth!

[K J]

The greens are idiologically opposed to economic expansion as this uses up the earth's resources too fast, and so a policy of opposing economic expansion is required.

Opposing economic expansion inevitably leads to economic contraction.

The other word for this is recession.

Having a deliberate policy of on-going permanent recession leads to an economic depression.

An Economic depression will entail tax revenues reducing dramatically and government spending rising dramatically.

This will inevitably and unavoidably lead to the Government quickly becoming bankrupt.

[Realist]

I think the Greens should run the Government, then let in 100 million people from Africa, 100 million people from the middle east, 100 million people from Asia & 100 million people from eastern Europe.
Then we can watch Britain grind to a halt whilst being all caring about every person in the world.

[Mike Walker]

I read the Green Manifesto In detail.

Anyone who votes Green based on that Manifesto is either:
- economically illiterate (if implemented it would cut GDP by between 10-20% in 5 years)
- or wants to go back to be a peasant farmer.. - - or thinks that the forecast 70 million population is too low and wants it to increase a Lot more.

Money may be green but in does not grow on trees. The Green Manifesto assumes it does grow on trees and they are self seeding...

[John]

The greens want to cause deforestation in Northern USA by their support of clear felling to create pellets from the wood to be transferred to the UK for burning. They support deforestation in Indonesia and S. America by their support for Palm oil plantations for Biodiesel. They want 700 million Africans to continue to cook over wood fires, causing major environmental impacts by refusing to back coal fired power stations. The greens are NOT interested in conservation.

[Mrs Crewe]

And the Green Party being a bunch of antisemitics is just a bonus?

[reason]

"There is, though, a bigger caveat. If I lived in a marginal, I would support Labour."

So you support preferential voting?