The Local Wing of Politics: Progressivism isn't national left wing and conservatism isn't national right wing, both are local or nothing at all
This is only a good example how the seat of any concern over human rights, health, ecology, and economy isn't an ideological issue. It is a geographic issue that appeals to particular geographies, instead of parties. Note in the article below that the organized frameworks here that are for these issues are entirely local. We should reconceptulize the whole basis of politics here, to take into account the Local Wing versus the National Wing. In the National Wing, they use whatever flavor of the month ideology to gatekeep against the Local Wing.
The Local Wing is why called 'left' environmentalist and so called 'right' gun rights organizations are working together on the local level to create local conservation corridors for wildlife in the Rocky Mountains--while these ideological groups on the national level pretend these issues are enemies of each other. They aren't. The ideologies are. The issues aren't. Another good example of 'right-wing environmentalism'--and a serious critique of how misleading it is to frame it as a left issue--is the book Deeper Shades of Green:
The Rise of Blue Collar and Minority Environmentalism in America.[link]
A new merger of movements is aborning. African-Americans, who had largely ignored much of the environmental movement as irrelevant to their primary social and economic concerns, became increasingly aware that racial discrimination can take the form of environmental injustice. Workers, long accustomed to the adage that jobs are more important than preserving the environment, have discovered that they were often sold a bill of goods....In the process, these groups have found each other. They have become America's newest, most radical, and most committed environmentalists. Radical, not because they adhere to esoteric theories about humankind's ecological crimes against the biosphere, but because they have discovered a mother's passion for true family values when her child's life or health is in danger. Committed, not because they believe deeply in a particular political philosophy, for most come from fairly unremarkable backgrounds, but because they are America's real communitarians. They believe that neighborhoods matter and that government should be in the business of protecting, not destroying, our sense of community.
And that is why the Local Wing--full of people on the left and right--are totally opposed to the neocons and their health destroying, economic destroying, and environmntal destroying policies.
Just goes to show you that the Local Wing knows how to run society much better than the criminals on the national level. Finally, someone came out and said it in Congress: Bush is a criminal syndicate.
This is of course why the criminals at the national level enjoy keeping the Local Wing divided up on irrelevant and superfluous divisions. These ideologcial divisions are only constructed from the national level, instead of presuming that the national parties are something from the local that is reflected on the national level. On the contrary, the national parties of the Republicans and Democrats, as mentioned throughout Toward A Bioregional State, are increasingly without any grass roots support at all! More that shows it:
California Senate voted 23-10 in favor of Senate Joint Resolution 10 relative to the USA PATRIOT Act, making California the 404th government entity and the largest of eight states to have done so. The other seven are Alaska, Colorado, Hawai’i, Idaho, Maine, Montana, and Vermont. Beginning in 2002, eleven California counties and 53 cities have passed resolutions. The combined populations of states and communities that have enacted resolutions is now nearly 87 million—roughly one in three U.S. residents. The California Assembly passed the resolution on January 3, 2006.
The bioregional state recommendations in the book would help to bring out the Local Wing, by removing national parties capacities to gatekeept and divide it as a political power, by allowing local politics to frame its own local concerns before being clientelistically driven to support the hydra-headed DemocratTM-RepublicanTM police state that only wants to totally remove the Local Wing.
There's some interesting graphs in this article about the scale of the misapplied funding in the U.S. right now. The U.S. is without any enemies or military competitors. A total of half or more U.S. budget is being swallowed each year by contractors for one building of government--The Pentagon. However, there really is nothing in the way of support for this fantasy world that the neocons promote of a dangerous world. It's only empty air(waves) and rigged ballot boxes that both parties support the rigging.
That is why you should support your Local Wing parties instead of any of the national left parties or national right parties. Perhaps you should join a watershed based organization before supporting a National political party?
Both Democrats and Republican parties in the U.S. are totally corrupted. 87 million people of the Local Wing say that the RepubliDems are corrupt and wrong.... Which is more than Bush dupes or Clinton dupes ever got to vote for them. Think about that.
Remember, the Local Wing is the majority. Bioregional state motifs would bring about its institutionalization.
California Enacts Resolution Critical of PATRIOT Act
SACRAMENTO, California - February 17 - On Thursday, February 16, the California Senate voted 23-10 in favor of Senate Joint Resolution 10 relative to the USA PATRIOT Act, making California the 404th government entity and the largest of eight states to have done so. The other seven are Alaska, Colorado, Hawai’i, Idaho, Maine, Montana, and Vermont. Beginning in 2002, eleven California counties and 53 cities have passed resolutions. The combined populations of states and communities that have enacted resolutions is now nearly 87 million—roughly one in three U.S. residents. The California Assembly passed the resolution on January 3, 2006.
The Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC) commends State Senator Liz Figueroa, who introduced the resolution last year, and her colleagues in the Senate and Legislature for their principled stand in defense of Californians’ civil liberties. Republicans Tom McClintock and Sam Aanestad were among those who voted for the resolution.
Said BORDC’s director, Nancy Talanian, “The California resolution sets a standard we hope Congress will follow as it considers reauthorizing several controversial sections of the PATRIOT Act and the administration’s approval of warrantless wiretaps. The resolution states that no state resources will be used to collect information based on residents’ activities that are protected by the First Amendment, or to scoop up personal records without a direct connection between the records sought and suspected criminal activity.”
California’s resolution also observes that government security measures “should be carefully designed and employed to enhance public safety without infringing on the civil liberties and rights of innocent persons in the State of California and the nation.”
The BORDC congratulates Hazem Kira of the California Civil Rights Alliance, which spearheaded the California effort, and its 23 member groups such as California’s three ACLU chapters, the Green Party and Libertarian Party of California, peace and justice groups, several interfaith organizations and local Bill of Rights Defense groups throughout California.
The passage of the California resolution has the potential to affect the PATRIOT Act debate well beyond California’s borders, as Congress considers the PATRIOT Act reauthorization.
Congress members with more civil liberties resolutions in their districts tend to be willing to take a strong stand in defense of civil liberties. BORDC data show that the 174 representatives who opposed a PATRIOT Act reauthorization compromise bill on December 14, 2005, were four and a half times as likely to have one or more resolutions passed in their districts as the 251 members who voted in favor. The Senate filibustered over that compromise bill’s inadequate civil liberties safeguards. Talanian explains, “If you go further, and compare the vote of the House of Representatives in October 2001, when only 66 representatives voted against the PATRIOT Act, to December 2005, when 174 representatives voted against the reauthorization, it is clear we’re making progress in turning our government’s attention towards our fundamental liberties. So we expect continued positive results now that the most populous state in the union has come to the defense of the Bill of Rights.”
California resolution text
List of resolutions by state (PDF) at