Proposal for a third run and Dennis Kucinich’s response
Nov 24, 2025
My position concerning running for public office in the United States has not changed since the debacle known popularly as the 2024 election. I hold that the United States, and the global system that it is baked into, demands a revolutionary change and that such a change cannot possibly be achieved through elections in the United States. It is more important to declare, and then to act as a population, on the basis of a general declaration that draws a line in the sand, saying that the federal government as it is run now is not constitutional and is thus not a government, that the multinational corporations, banks, and private equity that buy up land and assets using counterfeit money produced by the Federal Reserve, or other shady means like derivatives or defense budgets, do not own that land or assets; that is especially true if they have been involved in state crimes that demand compensation on a massive scale.
Nevertheless, it would be dishonest to say that I have not thought about running for president in 2028 as a means to articulate a position publicly that other politicians are incapable of doing. Doing so, at a minimum, can help direct the political debate in a healthy direction.
Others have urged me to consider this possibility, although none of them were willing to request publicly that I do so. It would obviously have been my preference to have a third party ask me to run.
Two recent developments however, forced me to rethink my position. These two developments suggested that a rapid collapse of not only the institutions of government of the United States of America, not only of the political culture, not only of the principles of science and moral philosophy that undergird the nation, but of the very civilization that our nation is made from is well underway.
Such a collapse is what allows private equity to dress up as “Mr. AI” and to seize control of the means of production, distribution, sales, to take over money, information, education and culture, and to dictate the rules for the use of deadly force. Working people are confused by this mess and there is a desperate need to make these shifts in the structure of the economy and politics the focus for political attention, and not taboo subjects to avoid.
The first incident was the meeting of Donald Trump with newly-elected New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani at the White House on November 21. Millions across the country, and around the world, believed (as I most certainly never did) that Mamdani would lead the charge against fascism and bravely call out the deep criminality that has wrapped its tentacles around Washington DC. Instead, Mamdani rushed to kiss the ring of the self-crowned king, and pledged to work together with a man that most of his supporters expected he would try to impeach. So contrived and forced was that meeting of plastic smiles that I felt sick to my stomach just watching it.
The entire Mamdani crew gave its cards away immediately, without even waiting to take office, revealing that it had never been anything more than the equivalent of the Fifth Avenue Christmas Walk.
Those looking for accountability, for institutional and structural change, for a response to the radical concentration of wealth, and to the militarization of American society were left drowning in the frothy rhetoric pouring from the mouths of those two false prophets.
The other incident was Trump’s demand that the retired military and intelligence officers (now congressmen) who urged active members of the military and intelligence not to follow illegal and unconstitutional orders be arrested, subject to prosecution, and even hanged. As much of what starts as extreme rhetoric floated by Trump develops over the months into official national policy, there is no reason to doubt that those writing Trump’s speeches were serious when they threatened even more concretely political opponents with jail and death.
The video featured Senator Elissa Slotkin (Michigan), a former CIA officer; Senator Mark Kelley (Arizona), a former Navy captain; Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander (New Hampshire), an intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve from 2010 to 2022; Representative Chris DeLuzio (Pennsylvania), a former Navy surface warfare officer; Representative Jason Crow (Colorado), a former Army Ranger and paratrooper; and Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan (Pennsylvania).
The request that government personnel, military and intelligence officers, not follow illegal or unconstitutional orders is welcome and absolutely necessary. But these politicians posed as if the Democratic Party was standing in opposition to the Trump administration when it refuses to take a stand on any substantial issues, and supports most of Trump’s policies without hesitation. These congressmen asked military officers to not follow illegal orders, but they refused to do their job as congressmen and demand Trump’s resignation, or prepare for impeachment, let alone lead a general strike.
Although the message that refusal of illegal orders is a duty is sound and welcome, these officers turned politicians did not denounce the illegal orders given to the military and intelligence during the COVID reign of terror under Biden, or the recent actions of ICE for that matter.
The action of these politicians seems to be setting up a scenario, much in line with what the bankers want, in which those in opposition to Trump have no choice but to select a military response, and one organized by a military that is controlled by Democratic operatives reporting to global finance.
These two developments led me to believe that, at the very least, it is worth considering a presidential campaign as a means of drawing the public’s attention to the grinning hole in our entire ideological system, whose collapse guarantees we will be brought to our knees in the next few years, whether through a failed war, a massive industrial accident, a famine, or such a radical concentration of wealth that the economy ceases to function.
I took the first step yesterday to move from abstraction to action. That meant, concretely, that I wrote a short email to former congressman Dennis Kucinich.
I worked on Dennis Kucinich’s presidential campaign in 2003, back when there was still some honesty in the Democratic Party, and I have interacted with him on occasion over the years. He met with me in his office when he was still a congressman and asked, most considerately, “What can I do for you?” We both knew there was not much he could to then, in the fall of 2006, in the days before I was forced to give up on working in Washington DC and move to South Korea. Dennis was one of only two members of congress willing to meet with me in person during those dark two years.
Dennis agreed to give a talk to Green Liberty last year, but, ultimately, we were unable to set a date because of his busy schedule. For these reasons, and others, I decided to reach out to him first about the possibility of another presidential campaign.
I came to the conclusion in light of recent developments in the United States that as limited as my actions are these days, nevertheless, such a campaign, or even just the preparations for such a campaign, could serve to get the ball rolling for real political action in the United States. Of course, until the American media is allowed to cover me, I cannot play a visible role like Mamdani or Trump.
I take the liberty of including Dennis’ short response below, along with my original email.
From: Dennis Kucinich <(xxx)@gmail.com>
Date: On Sunday, November 23rd, 2025 at 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: Short note from Emanuel
To: Emanuel Pastreich <epastreich@protonmail.com>
Dear Emanuel,
Your civic mindedness is to be admired, and at this critical juncture encouraged.
I am not currently involved regarding 2028. Let’s stay in touch, nevertheless.
With every best wish.
Dennis
On Nov 22, 2025, at 9:55 PM, Emanuel Pastreich <epastreich@protonmail.com> wrote:
Dear Dennis
I hope this note finds you well at this most critical moment in our history. I am writing you, in light of this crisis that surpasses even 2001, to ask your help. I am in Tokyo now but the effort we are involved will obviously be for the sake of the United States.
I would like you to consider making a statement supporting the possibility that I could run for president in 2028 on the platform that I ran on in the Green Party in 2024. I do not need to run in the Green Party, and I do not ultimately need to be the candidate. But I can start the effort here.
For my former platform, see here
Policy – The Center for Truth Politics
(from former Pastreich for President 2024 site)
I can modify the platform, and of course I am flexible as to what party, or what format, it is used as part of a national campaign. I can discuss with you why I believe, and so do many others, that such a campaign would have a positive impact on American politics even if I cannot actually be elected granted the high walls that have been set up. We can get the ball rolling here and someone else can pick up the torch ultimately if I cannot play the role.
Thank you for your kind attention and let us work to reestablish a government for the people, by the people and of the people.
Most respectfully,
Emanuel Pastreich
