Interview with Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry, Green Party Presidential Candidate

Show Premise: On E Pluribus Unum’s Fireside Chats I usually go over political news, . Though I will also do the occasional interview with a politician such as when I interviewed John Wolfe Jr, a minor Democratic Party candidate for President in 2012 and 2018 Senate Campaign, two times actually. Then I interviewed Green Party Presidential Candidate, Ian Schlakman. Today I interview another Green Party Presidential Hopeful Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry.

About the Guest: Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry is a Green Party member known for founding the Green Party Black Caucus, Running for the Green Party Vice Presidential Nomination in 2008, but most prominently running for the Green Party Presidential Nomination in 2016. In the interview we discuss her history with the Green Party, her thoughts on the 2016 Green Party Primaries, and her plans to grow the Green Party in 2020.

Her Website:
Her Facebook:
Her Twitter:

10 thoughts on “Interview with Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry, Green Party Presidential Candidate

  1. Jared

    TL;DL version: “I’ve had my heart set on running for president since I was a little girl. White supremacy, whiteness itself, and ‘the fakeness of whiteness’ are destroying the ecological balance of the earth. My own Green Party is contaminated by white privilege. It’s none of your damned business whether I voted for Jill Stein in 2016 after losing the nomination to that rich, white bitch. FEC filing is no big deal. I didn’t win the primary because I was up against a fraudulent apartheid system. Either the Declaration of Independence has been formally amended, or the Constitution was written in 1776? I’m willing to talk to people of all different political persuasions. And if I don’t get the nomination this time, I’ll retire from electoral politics.”

    Strange thing is, despite her offensive racial views, Curry doesn’t come off as a hostile or racist person; despite her over-the-top conspiracy theories for why she lost the 2016 nomination to Stein, she doesn’t strike me as narcissistic or paranoid either. A mild-mannered Libertarian could actually have a polite conversation with her about third-party politics. Based on the few stories I had previously read about Curry’s antics, I wasn’t expecting to come away with that impression.

  2. Fernando Mercado Post author

    I understand some of the controversy surrounding Sedinam and the 2016 Primary Process, I tried to challenge her in some areas but I didn’t know all aspects of her situation with the Green Party Primary Process.

    From what I gathered saying White Supremacy caused her treatment is an exaggeration, there may have been favoritism in regards to the Stein Campaign but if McKinney announced a run tomorrow there’d be favoritism as Third Parties tend to like when a previous candidate runs again.

    Although if I had been the Chairman of the Green Party I would’ve had a fairer Primary Process under the impression of “Guys we’re a Minor Party anyways, do we really need all these arbitrary rules?” And the only major Candidate I would not have formally recognized would be Elijah (With the option of having his supporters petition to have him invited to the debates)

  3. Jim

    She’s right. With the Democrats taking all the Green ideas – the Green New Deal, universal basic income, ending the electoral college – it’s time for the Greens to take it to the next level. The Greens should marry the ideas of ending white privilege and saving the planet from human use by calling for a whites-only one child policy. At least for white men. White women would have the freedom to have 2 children if at least one of the children was fathered by a person of color. Maybe white men would be allowed the freedom to have 2 children if they donate 100% of their annual income for 3 years to a person of color. Democrats probably wouldn’t touch that one until 2024.

    It’s only justice. Overpopulation is a serious problem. And the more people there are, the worse it is for the planet. Every additional person just means more C02 emissions. And whites, being generally of higher income, have a greater carbon footprint than people of color. For the good of the planet, that privilege has to end. If we don’t get CO2 emissions under control within 12 years, we’re all going to die. Whites have trampled on people of color for too long. Who exterminated the native Americans? Whites. Who caused two World Wars? Whites. Who subjugated all of Africa and Southeast Asia? Whites. Who polluted the planet to the point that it is undergoing a 6th mass extinction? Whites. Social justice demands that whites atone for those historical wrongs by voluntarily voting for politicians who will address those problems by setting limits on the reproduction of whites. For the good of the entire planet, and especially the children and the Monteverde Harlequin Frog, we all have to sacrifice a little bit. But, justice demands that those who have done the most damage and who are in the most privileged position must sacrifice a little bit more.

  4. Fernando Mercado Post author

    I’m looking to get a lot more politicians on my show.

    Some you may know, some not, some Major Party, some Third Party. (I’ve been sitting on one for almost a year now)

  5. Jim

    I swear I was only joking when I made that post a few weeks ago. I didn’t realize it was already starting.

    A facebook group started in January 2019 called BirthStrike which states “We, the undersigned, declare our decision not to bear children due to the severity of the ecological crisis and the current inaction of governing forces in the face if this existential threat.”

    A Business Insider poll from March 1-2 found “Nearly 38% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 agreed that climate change should be a factor in a couple’s decision about whether to have children.”

    The web site Conceivable Future says they are dedicated to “bringing awareness to the threat climate change poses to reproductive justice” and “In the United States alone, the reproductive rights of Indigenous women and women of color have been repressed by many governmental and non-governmental actors and by implicit and explicit policies for hundreds of years. For many, reproductive justice is a path to healing from this legacy. … We’d also like to note a harmful and common false argument: many western people join the population conversation just to point fingers at developing countries, and low-income groups, whose populations are growing, rather than at western countries, and middle class groups, where populations tend to be static, or in some cases slightly shrinking. Population corresponds to climate harm only to the degree that individuals consume resources and emit carbon. No one emits more per capita than the United States. If everyone on earth consumed the way middle-class and wealthy Americans consume, we would need an additional 4.5-6 earths worth of resources to sustain ourselves.”

    Marie Claire did an article in January 2018 about anti-natalists – those who believe the optimal human population of the earth is zero, typically for tree hugger reasons. They also generally go vegan because of its lower climate impact.

    And, of course, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said on February 24, 2019 “Our planet is going to be a disaster if we don’t turn this ship around. And so it’s basically like, there’s scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult. And it does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question, you know, should – is it OK to still have children? And, I mean, not only just financially because people are graduating with 20, 30, 100 thousand in student loan debt and so they can’t even afford to have kids in the house. But, also, just this basic moral question, like what do we do? And even if you don’t have kids, there are still children here in the world and we have a moral obligation to them. And leave a better world for them. And this idea that, you know, ‘I’ve been working on this for x number of years’, it’s like, not good enough. We need a universal sense of urgency. And people are trying to introduce, like, watered down proposals that are frankly going to kill us. A lack of urgency is going to kill us. It doesn’t matter if you agree that climate change is an important issue. At this point it doesn’t matter if you believe climate change is a problem. That’s not even the issue. The issue is how urgently you feel we need to fix it. And if you do not have a sense of urgency to turn this around in ten years, how is that different than a person who’s just – ”

    All of these concerned environmentalists are careful to say they want people (especially middle class white Americans) to voluntarily stop having kids right now, but given that they believe that climate change is a life and death issue and they are on a moral crusade to save the world, it’s only a matter of time before they are radicalized into advocating a mandatory policy.

    The Green Party has a limited window to get out in front of this before the Democrats adopt it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *