May 12, 2016

Why I’ll never vote for the Greens

Don't believe what The Daily Telegraph tells you: there's no red in the Greens and they aren't the party of revolution many take them for.

Helen Razer — Writer and Broadcaster

Helen Razer

Writer and Broadcaster

Larissa Waters, Richard Di Natale and Scott Ludlam

There is something wrong with the ABC’s democratic novelty, Vote Compass. There must be, because since its inception, this “whom should I vote for?” quiz has whacked me in the Greens quadrant every time. This makes me sore, as I am about as likely to ever vote Green as I am to afford a life in a suburb that is full of people who name their daughters after sexually liberated French modernist writers.


Leave a comment

106 thoughts on “Why I’ll never vote for the Greens

  1. Sean

    There’s a gap in the Greens between the moderates in the parliamentary party and the true believers in the membership (not dissimilar to the ALP and the Libs, actually). So what? I can’t see how parliamentary politics under our rigid constitution would offer the structural changes you want, regardless of who you vote for. This “Nobody understands Capital like I do” act just sounds like Hitchens, or worse, Brendan O’Neill. Fine line between critic and self-involved contrarian. Get involved. There are still some old coms who never ditched their ALP membership and I’m sure would welcome you with open arms. Be sure to let me know how much structural change that gets you.

  2. rhwombat

    The other things about the neo-Greens (cf Bob Brown’s party, or the German) is the utter self-absorption – and consequent butt-hurt regarding heretics like you. Bravo HR.

  3. robert sessions

    Even if everything (bad) you say about the Greens is true, which it isn’t, it would be helpful if you could mount some arguments for voting ALP right now, which is the only alternative apart from the weak informal option for many of us.

  4. Popeye

    The ABC vote compass has also told me that I should vote Greens. It told me same thing in 2013 but in fact I’d die in the proverbial ditch before I’d vote for this this party of tree huggers, disappointed Trots and assorted political fantasists. There are a number of reasons for this opposition, but one stands out: While Greens prefer to spin arguments concerning why they effectively killed an ETS in 2009, in the end that’s precisely what they accomplished. And that has led, directly or indirectly – however you may wish to interpret history after 2010 – to the most divisive, vindictive and inept government since 1945 – perhaps since federation; as well as a climate ‘policy’ that would, if it wasn’t so serious, bring laughter. So I’ll be voting Labor.

    1. Antonny

      the greens torpedoed the rudd ets and gillards malaysian ‘solution’ for political reasons – in order to establish themselves as a third force – but it all backfired – look where we are – detention camps on manus and nauru and no credible carbon reduction reduction policy within cooee – they messed it all really badly, despite what bob brown says – as i see it, the problem is that if dont like then policies you have to join the major parties and try and effect change from within – and when that doesn’t work try accumulating wealth and buying a national (digital) newspaper

    2. Butidont Likespam

      Labor – oh you mean the party of perpetual war, torture, kidnapping, mass surveillance, offshore concentration camps, sponsored people smuggling, fossil fuel subsidies, open-cut coal mines, fracking, and so on?

      You’re too principled for me.

  5. Hoojakafoopy

    Odd that you bear a grudge against the Greens for killing off Labor’s ETS, Helen. A market-based mechanism for trading away responsibility for pollution that has been repeatedly discredited as ineffectual? Yeah, that’s really gonna stick it to the system! The Greens forced Gillard to introduce the carbon tax. Taxing polluters is a simpler and more effective means of reducing pollution. If you could get past your own stubborn myopia you would realize that they were right to reject Rudd’s cosmetic ETS. Bring back the carbon tax!

    1. Antonny

      like that’s gonna happen ffs!

      1. Hoojakafoopy

        That’s right Antonny, we’ll all burn to death first.

    2. Lachlan McCall

      Sorry Marcus I don’t think you understand how carbon pricing actually works. The ‘carbon tax’ was actually an ETS, with a three-year fixed price. Rudd’s CPRS was an ETS with a one-year fixed price. The Greens support a tougher ETS, not a radically different model altogether. Emissions trading is also hardly discredited; a trading scheme in CFC emissions effectively cut CFCs in response to the hole in the ozone layer. It worked because we had easily substitutable alternatives.

  6. Jason Murphy

    Hi Helen

    The great unaswered question I have at the end of this is who you will vote for? the ALP? Someone else? A donkey vote?
    We each have to resolve within ourself the problem that no party and no candidate matches our own preferences and find a way to measure what is least worst. Ruling things out is easy. Ruling things in is much harder! I’m always interested to see how people do that.

  7. Jane Clarke

    None of the mainstream parties want equality, since that would disturb their position within the status quo. Greens support Lib or Lab and would happily form a coalition with whichever would take them. Murdoch is now agitating against the Greens in favour of Labour, which tells me not that he is scared of the Greens getting in (tho that would be unhelpful for his business interests) by that if they do get in, their failure to do anything new at all (like Syriza in Greece) will increase working class unrest, and that might mean actual change in the future. If you want to vote for economic equality & international interests such as the environment, the voter might consider a Trotskyist candidate, since by definition, they think a one-country solution is so much nonsense. Not that there are a lot of these about, but the nationalist communist parties continue to support Labour, despite their drift to the right.

  8. adamingamells

    Hi Helen thanks for the article but I’m not convinced. Are you advocating for an informal vote?

  9. Marilyn J Shepherd

    I seriously don’t care who you vote for Helen.

    1. Helen Razer

      You must have been glad of the convenient warning to avoid this post contained in the headline, then.

  10. Deb

    Is a sort of cognitive dissonance to ignore – even get angry at – the result of a survey you have diligently completed and then turn that anger onto the logical conclusion?

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details