In the 1962 Massachusetts Senate election, I supported the SOCIALIST peace candidate, Prof Hughes, not Ted Kennedy.  2 years later, in Berkeley, I campaigned for DEMOCRAT LBJ who represented himself as the peace and freedom candidate. 2 years later, I was very active in Bob Scheer's campaign to unseat the incumbent pro-war DEMOCRAT. 2 years later, I made a brief run for Congress in the start-up PEACE AND FREEDOM party. After that, in the 1970s, I became a "declines to state," for nearly 20 years.

By 1990, I was again a DEMOCRAT, encouraged by liberal representations of then-Congressman Vic Fazio. I worked hard to get Bill Clinton elected in 1992. I was appalled by Clinton's breaking faith with Democrat policies in 1995-96, so did not support him in 1996. I supported Bill Bradley, then Ralph Nader in 2000.

I moved to Oregon in 2000, where I was well represented by Peter DeFazio, the Eugene Democrat. I had no problems with Democrats until I moved back to California 2 years later.

I wrote and spoke extensively against the Iraq War in 2002. I implored many Democratic representatives to oppose this war, but they backed George W Bush instead. I supported Howard Dean right from his speech to the California Democratic convention in January, 2003. Finally, after voting for Dean in the March, 2004 primary, I went to Woodland and became "declines to state" once again.

In 2002, I made a public pledge not to support any candidate who voted for the Iraq War. I don't, and I won't.

What have I learned from this sordid history?

I am not, and never have been, a conservative. In today's America, I am a radical misfit. That's because I hold certain political ideas that are out of favor. Some of these ideas used to be popular in the 1960s.

I think the labels that most nearly apply to my political thinking are "democratic" and "socialist." "Democratic" because I have always been a believer in the Bill of Rights, Civil Rights and the ideals of Lady Liberty. "Socialist" because I believe in the rights of man, which can only be implemented and protected by a strong, enlightened government.

It interests me that my views would be considered only slightly left of center in most European countries today. My views are not unusual among our close neighbors, Canadians. I think the governments in Sweden, Germany and France are doing roughly what governments ought to do. I often wonder why I am living in the United States, where I am reviled not only by conservatives but by so-called centrists as well.

This year, Democrats had the chance to make their party like European center-left parties.  They could have put up Dr Dean or Rep Kucinich. That was not what happened; instead, we have the very conservative "Washington Establishment" - party insiders - running the show. There might be a chance to reform the Democratic party, if Sen Kerry loses next November, but not otherwise. (That does not mean I am for Sen Kerry's loss, even if I cannot in good conscience support or vote for him.) As it stands, Democrats are now a party of the right-center, not a party of the left. That's why I am not one of them.

I am not a Green. I don't agree with some of their important positions. Some Green views could be interpreted as ultra-conservative, while others are just naively utopian.  I think the Greens are a party of and for some upper middle class citizens, which does not represent the laboring classes very well. I am definitely for policies that help the poor, but neither the Democrats or Greens are often on my side of the barricades.

A Party of the Left

I want a new, democratic socialist party; maybe a revitalization of Henry Wallace's old name, the Progressive Party. (How about the People's Party?) There are core beliefs I must have in such a party: