What we have here is a perfect example that although we are USUALLY allies, "greens" and "lefts" are not precisely fighting for the same things.

Now few (if any) radical environmentalists believe that solutions to our environmental problems exist within capitalism and this can be (mis)taken for direct opposition to capitalism. But it really isn't, and many of these same people would perhaps be willing to accept a capitalist solution IF ONE EXISTED. In other words, being "green" doesn't make one "left" per se, though many people who care about the environment ALSO care about human justice.

From the other direction, there is little or no reason the greens should expect randomly selected members of the "left" to be at all concerned about the environment. Again there presumably are many people who are concerned both for human justice AND for the (non-human) environment.

What I am being critical of here is NOT the call to attack the mayor in this venue (ie: "leftists" should not have to forebear just because this is the venue of an erstwhile ally). But that's no reason to attack the "greens" for being false GREENS for inviting an anti-left speaker. They are false greens only if his environmental credentials are lacking. Or to proceed directly from the title you used, what's his position with regard to NEWTS (and what's yours that you think yourself more fit as an ENVIRONMENTAL speaker).

Pledge here for the guess the day ken dies lottery.Prize pool all goes directly to person or persons unknown that comes closest to predicting time of demise.(my 0.02p)