It is rare in recent years for mainstream media to cover the political parties in the U.S. that hold themselves out as socialist. But Politico has this major story about those parties, and the Green Party, and how they react to Bernie Sanders’ candidacy.
The Green Party does not represent itself as (and is not) a socialist party. It should be discussed separately from the other organizations named in the article.
This is confusing to many people (including, I think, Bill Sher) because a number of prominent GP leaders are socialists who believe in building a common organization with non-socialist radicals, rather than building alliances between organizations. I don’t agree with that strategy but I understand that it is a legitimate point of view.
Partly as a result of this, Sher’s article doesn’t make clear the real difference between Sanders and the socialist left. Sanders believes that it is enough to campaign as an individual for a specific office and to “build a movement” around one candidacy. We, on the other hand, believe that a lasting movement can only be build around slates of candidates running on a common platform, and a party organization. While you can read this issue into the article, it’s not explicit.
The post doesn’t say the Green Party holds itself out as socialist. The post says the article is about parties that hold themselves out as socialist, and the article is also about the Green Party. I agree that the Green Party does not hold itself out as socialist.
Jill Stein’s candidacy is closely linked to many socialist groups; for example, the International Socialist Organization has endorsed the campaign. Stein has also spoken at several socialist conferences. I can understand why they’d include Jill Stein.