Peter Camejo honored by Nader, others at UC Berkeley tribute
Sean Maher
Oakland Tribune

— Hundreds gathered Sunday to honor the memory of Peter Camejo, champion of the Green Party, at the university from which he was expelled years ago.

"Peter was expelled from Berkeley for unauthorized use of a bullhorn," Camejo's former running mate Ralph Nader said, to the laughter and applause of a 400-person crowd in the International House auditorium on the UC Berkeley campus. Nearly 20 of Camejo's friends, family members, collaborators and comrades spoke at the event, including Richmond Mayor Gayle McLaughlin, former San Francisco Supervisor Matt Gonzalez and Camejo's widow, Morella Camejo.

"You've all brought pieces of him with you," Camejo said to the crowd. Then she thanked them, "because I just can't imagine life without Peter. ... He couldn't stop coming up with new ideas. His mind was restless, forever making plans for the future."

Peter Camejo died in September after a second battle with cancer. He led a prominent public life as a major figure in the Green Party, an author and a spokesman for all manner of humanitarian and progressive causes.

Gus Horowitz, a colleague of Camejo's in the Socialist Workers Party, described attending MIT with Camejo 50 years ago, and taking physics class together. After a test one day, Horowitz and several other students stood together puzzling over a particularly difficult problem and consulting the textbook, which explained a complex solution.

"But Peter, it turned out, had completely bypassed the text and solved the problem by a simple appeal to symmetry," Horowitz said, adding that the experience was telling of Camejo's future efforts.

Horowitz went on to tell of a time Camejo convinced a group of friends to go skinny dipping. All went well until the police spotlight hit the group.

"And then it hit home that he was our candidate for the United States Senate," Horowitz said, as the crowd cheered and laughed again.

Many of the speakers praised Camejo for his passionate dedication to social justice issues of all kinds.

"He always fought for the rights of working people, minorities, women, immigrants, children and the elderly," McLaughlin said. "He spurred me to join the Green Party and to run for City Council and then for mayor. I was honored to have his support then, and his advice in my capacity as mayor. ... Peter's life left us with a profound foundation to build on."

Kalman Stein, CEO of the environmental organization EarthShare, said the memorial was like the story of the blind men and the elephant.

"The blind man holding its tail thought it was a thin rope, the man holding its side thought it was a huge wall, and so on," he said. "I'm amazed to find out I was only touching part of the elephant; it's a joy to find out about all the parts of Peter I didn't know."

Stein said Camejo played a crucial role in making the green movement more diverse."And he was so amused when Ronald Reagan named him one of the 10 most dangerous people in California," Stein said, to still more laughs from the crowd.

Antonio Camejo, Peter's brother, described his late brother as a fiery personality from childhood, an aggressive thinker who sometimes became so lost in thought, "he had absolutely no idea what clothes he was wearing. To him it was irrelevant. We used to joke, 'Peter would give you the shirt off his back, even if it wasn't a shirt.'"

Martin Sanchez, a spokesman from Camejo's native country of Venezuela, apologized for the absence of the Venezuelan ambassador, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, who was expelled from the United States in September. He read a statement from Herrera.

Nader spoke at length about Camejo's different qualities, calling him "multidimensional ... a many splendored human being," as well as courageous, principled and resilient.

"He always renewed himself," Nader said. "Some people learn until they're about 30 and then run on the fumes for 30 or 40 years. Peter was always learning.''

"His public philosophy was not ideological, it wasn't dogmatic. It was a broad framework of what is fair and what isn't. To say we will miss Peter Camejo is to engage in a cliché. I hope by what we continue doing in his spirit, wherever he is, he will say to us, 'I miss you all, too.'"

-------------------

Ralph Nader Comments on the Passing of Peter Camejo, a Sentinel Force for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, and Expander of Democracy

Peter Miguel Camejo, a civil rights leader, socially responsible investment pioneer, and magnanimo caballero for third party politics in the US, peacefully passed away early Saturday morning at his home in Folsom, CA with his wife Morella at his side -- only days after completing his autobiography.

The 68-year-old justice fighter had been battling a reoccurrence of lymphoma cancer, and his condition had rapidly deteriorated over the past few days.

Peter was a student leader, civil rights advocate, leader in the socially responsible investment industry with his own investment firm, Progressive Asset Management, Inc., and author of books on investment and history including Racism, Revolution, Reaction, 1861-1877, The Rise and Fall of Radical Reconstruction, California Under Corporate Rule, and his recent book, The SRI Advantage: Why Socially Responsible Investing Has Outperformed Financially.

Peter used his eloquence, sharp wit, and barnstorming bravado to blaze a trail for 21st century third party politics in the US. He was a third party candidate for state and national office, making three gubernatorial runs in California as a Green, including one in the 2002 election when he earned 5.3 percent of the vote. In the 2003 recall election, he debated Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gray Davis, and in the 2004 Presidential election, he was my running mate on our Independent Ticket.

Among the many causes Peter forcefully championed were a living wage, healthcare for all, and making the US the world leader in renewable energy. He was also a passionate advocate for electoral reform, pressing for proportional representation and instant run-off voting (allows voters to rank their top choices) in an effort to overturn the "200-year-old dysfunctional money-dominated winner take-all system that disrespects the will of the people."

Peter was a friend, colleague and politically courageous champion of the downtrodden and mistreated of the entire Western Hemisphere. Everyone who met Peter, talked with Peter, worked with Peter, or argued with Peter, will miss the passing of a great American.

Peter Camejo is survived by his wife Morella, his father Daniel, his daughter Alexandra, his son Victor, three brothers Antonio, Daniel, and Danny, and three grandchildren Andrew, Daniel, and Oliver.

When his autobiography (with the working title Northstar) is published, we will all be able to get a vivid sense of the great measure of Peter Camejo as a sentinel force for civil rights and civil liberties, and expander of democracy. His lifework will inspire the political and economic future for a long time.

-------------------

Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

Even though I had steeled myself in anticipation of Peter Camejo’s death, I was still shaken by the news that he was gone. For a period of time between 1981 and 1987, I considered Peter to be a very good friend. More importantly, he was the one person who helped me understand a revolution could be made in the U.S. notwithstanding American Trotskyism’s tendency to create all sorts of obstacles in the way to that understanding. Despite his long-time membership in a group that he would eventually regard as an obstacle to the creation of genuine revolutionary movement, Peter always had an ability to transcend sectarian frameworks.

In early 1970, I was in the New York branch of the SWP and kicking around the idea of going back to graduate school and putting this organization behind me. After 3 years I felt alienated from the membership and many of the arbitrary norms and was ready to pack it in. When I broached the subject with the SWP organizer in New York, he told me that the party was about to ask me to move up to Boston and work with Peter to overcome dogmatic objections in the branch to working in a “petty bourgeois” antiwar movement. I felt flattered that the higher ups would see any value in my skills and agreed to move there in a few weeks.

As some of you know, I have been working on a comic book memoir for the past few months and Peter looms large throughout the story. Here’s what I wrote about one branch meeting:

In early 1970 a memorable fight broke out at a branch meeting over what position to take on the “Shea Bill”. The 31 year old James Shea, a state legislator, had proposed that Massachusetts authorize residents to refuse combat duty in wars that were undeclared by Congress, including Vietnam. It would also authorize the state Attorney General Robert Quinn to use the powers of his office to defend soldiers who challenged the military and indeed Quinn filed suit against the war on February 12, 1970 on behalf of 12 local soldiers who refused orders to go to Vietnam.

Someone took the floor and spoke against the Shea Bill:

“Comrades, it puts undue faith in the bourgeois state to back such a law. It fosters pacifist illusions about the war ending through legislation. We know that it will take the power of the working class to end the war, not the Shea bill. We all know that Shea is only interested in getting people off the streets and supporting the Democratic Party.”

Peter got up next to reply. I remember his comments vividly now after 36 years, just like it was yesterday.

Comrades, Lenin used to stay up late at night reading the Czarist law codes to look for a loophole that would allow workers to go out on strike legally. We must take advantage of any opening that would make it more difficult for the war to continue. If the ruling class is divided over the war, we want to deepen that divide. The Shea Bill should not be seen as opposed to antiwar demonstrations, but complementary to them.

Peter’s motion to support the Shea Bill carried that evening, but in the end it was academic since the courts ruled it unconstitutional. In any case, the notion that James Shea was some kind of Machiavellian schemer trying to defuse the antiwar movement was belied by subsequent events. On May 8, 1970, in deep despair over the war, he went upstairs to his bedroom. His wife, who was worried about his depressed state, opened the door to see him raise a gun and fire a bullet into his head. He died immediately.

For the two years Peter was branch organizer, I felt that there was no better way to live one’s life than as a revolutionary socialist, which meant as a member of the SWP.

I have to confess that I developed a kind of hero worship for Peter and he probably knew it. He was five years older than me and seemed to enjoy my company. When we were up in Boston, we used to play squash together at the Cambridge Y. And when conventions or conferences were held in Oberlin, Peter and I always found time to spend on the courts. Besides his acute political intelligence, Peter was one of the funniest people I ever knew in my life. Although I don’t put myself in his league politically, I did feel that my own sense of humor helped sustain our friendship.

In late 1978, I decided to quit the SWP. I felt that the party was still going to lead the working class to socialism, but I was too burned out by the “turn” to stick around. I was going to go back to N.Y. and write the Great American Novel. (That’s my sense of humor kicking in again.)

For a couple of years I read the Militant with a mounting sense that the SWP was not really involved with actions against the U.S. war in Central America even though the paper was filled with articles about the growing conflict. After a N.Y. Times article written by Leslie Gelb predicting a new Vietnam in the region appeared in 1981, I called an old friend who was still in the party to demand an explanation. How could the party that I joined in 1967 largely on the basis of its antiwar activity sit on the sidelines, even if in the name of looming trade union struggles (that never materialized, I should add.)

In 1980 I ran into a guy named Ray Markey in a pizza parlor across from my building on the Upper East Side and asked him if he could explain the party’s abstention. I had no idea what he thought of the “turn” to industry but I always remembered Ray as a straight shooter. Ray was a colorful Irish-American with a temper worse than mine and a long-time leader of the librarian’s union in N.Y. I would eventually learn that he refused to work in a New Jersey auto plant that the party was colonizing, understanding that his leadership in the librarian’s union counted for a lot more, even if the party brass disagreed.

He told me that Peter Camejo had written something that would answer my questions. It was titled appropriately enough “Against Sectarianism“. He would send me a copy even though that broke party rules. Ray understood that he would be booted out before long himself and really didn’t care about the consequences.

“Against Sectarianism” hit me like a bolt of lightning. Peter used the same brilliant political analysis that I saw at work in Boston and applied to the party that he had belonged to for more than 20 years. It was powerfully argued and used the rapier like wit that defined him. Here is a passage that had hit home for me as an unreconstructed “petty bourgeois” element who had failed to make the turn to industry.

Barnes continued: “That is without doubt what is happening on the U.S. left as the blows against the working class come down, as the polarization deepens, and as the imperialist war pressure mounts. The difference between conditions and consciousness borne of being a worker and that produced by being immersed in a petty-bourgeois milieu is widening. And the ranks of the North American marielitos- with Susan Sontag and her ilk leading the scramble for the boats-are growing.”

At an earlier date, Barnes used the example of Jerry Rubin as an example of the marielito phenomena. Rubin, a colorful protester during the anti-Vietnam war period who was associated with the “Yippies,” took a job on Wall Street and argued in defense of capitalism. The New York Times made a great deal of Rubin’s new job and gave him plenty of space to explain his views. The New York Times was overjoyed to find at least one figure from the radicalization of the ’60s who would speak in favor of capitalism. The Times’ campaign around Rubin fooled only a few people, probably because the Times did not follow up with other examples or any comments supporting or endorsing Rubin’s outlook by other well-known leaders of the ’60s.

The radicals of the ’60s have not, as a whole, turned to the right. Caught in the beginnings of a class polarization, the generation of the ’60s has gone in various directions. Some, under the pressures of bourgeois society and without any clear orientation, have abandoned political activity or become conservatized. Others have not, and their views cover the spectrum of positions existing at this stage of the radicalization in North American society.

Sensing that Peter had developed such a critique of the party, he was prevented from assuming his duties after a year long stay at his father’s ranch in Venezuela which he understood to be a leave of absence and nothing else. He went to Venezuela to read Lenin and try to figure out how the SWP had developed a caricature of what the Bolsheviks were trying to do. Peter thought that the Bolsheviks were nothing like the SWP. For one thing, they had expelled only one person in their entire history unlike the purge-happy Trotskyist movement.

When he got back to N.Y. to begin work with the party again, they told him to get lost. They actually had a beefy ex-football player from the University of Minnesota block Peter from entering a national committee meeting.

I called Peter immediately after reading the article and asked him what he had planned next since I wanted to be a part of it. It turned out that he was starting something called the North Star Network and I began to organize meetings at my house for people who were interested. More importantly, he advised me to join CISPES (the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador) since that was where the action was. Peter had a keen sense of what Karl Marx once wrote to Bracke: “Every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes.”

Eventually my involvement with Central America led me to a trip to Nicaragua in 1986 and participation in Tecnica, a radical version of the Peace Corps that played a critical role in Nicaragua and Southern Africa in the late 80s and early 90s.

Whenever I made it out to Berkeley to consult with Tecnica board members, I always would hook up with Peter and talk about where the movement was going. Those conversations were as precious to me as any that I have had in my lifetime and some can be found in my own memoir.

In a very real sense, everything that I am politically today was shaped directly by my apprenticeship/collaboration with Peter in the SWP and afterwards. I understand that Peter died with only half of the final chapter of his memoir unwritten. Thank god for that since I am quite sure that it will succeed both as politics to live by as well as great entertainment. Peter was a great person to be around when he was alive and his book will keep our memories of him alive as long as we live as well.

-----------------
Peter Miguel Camejo was born in 1939 to a wealthy Venezuelan couple. Because his mother felt more comfortable with the American standard of health care, she arranged to give birth at a New York hospital in the Bronx. Consequently, Peter was born with dual citizenship. He spent his early childhood in Venezuela, until his parents divorced when he was 7 and his mother took him to live on Long Island.

Peter earned a perfect score on the math portion of his SAT, then attended MIT for awhile but dropped out to pursue civil rights work in the American south. He marched in Selma, Alabama. Later resumed his studies at UC Berkeley, but was expelled for his vocal criticism of the Vietnam War. His official transgression was "unauthorized use of a microphone" after he used a public address system on campus as part of a Free Speech Movement demonstration. Then-governor Ronald Reagan included college student Camejo on his 1968 list of the 10 most dangerous Californians. "He had me expelled from Berkeley," Camejo said years later. "[Reagan] put one sentence down for each of the ten. For me he said, 'Present at all anti-war demonstrations.'"

Camejo ran for President of the United States in 1976 as the Socialist Workers Party candidate, and he got on the ballot in 18 states. The Progressive noted that he didn't just sit back and wait for election day: "Peter Camejo traveled 150,000 miles, crisscrossing the country twenty times, in his quest for the Presidency." But after spending all that traveling and $151,000 on campaign bills, Camejo received only 90,310 votes.

Four years later, Camejo was thrown out of the Socialist Workers Party after he criticized the party leadership for corruption. It would be another decade before the establishment of the California Green Party in 1991, and Camejo was one of its founding members. Nevertheless he always considered himself a Socialist at heart, calling himself a watermelon -- "Green on the outside, red on the inside." The watermelon went on to run for governor in 2002 as the Green Party's candidate, and again in 2003 during the recall election. He received 5% of the vote in 2002 and 3.1% in 2003.

Camejo ran for Vice President in 2004 as the bottom half of Ralph Nader's increasingly unpopular quadrennial campaign. At the press conference announcing his selection, Camejo had effusive praise for his running mate: "Ralph Nader is an historic figure in American history. And I don't think people understand who he is, yet. It may take ten, twenty years -- it may be way after he dies -- that it'll be understood."

Camejo was diagnosed with early-stage lymphoma in January of 2007. After a period of remission, he died from the disease in September 2008.