Skip to main content

The Nader Factor

Nader is a well-known name in American politics. Some people think of him as that pesky man who made Al Gore lose the American election in 2000. He is perceived to be a whacky, slightly eccentric character whose main concern is the environment, and whose main supporters are granola-crunching white kids with trust funds. His party is called the Green Party, which makes it sound like a pot-smoking, hippie fest in northern Oregon. He is considered to be a trouble-maker. So much so that the Nation magazine, that well-respected bastion of the liberal left, even told him not to run this time around. In other words, they told him to shut up and sit down.

The worst thing you can do in America is tell people to shut up. People hate that. They really hate it. They feel it infringes upon their deepest beliefs. People cannot be told not to run for President, even in a year where the margin is so tight that a few percentage of indecisive voters taken in by a good Green speech can make all the difference.

In a talk-fest entitled “Can We Do Better Than Anybody But Bush?“, speakers of all shades of the Left spoke about the binding dilemma -- George Bush may not be their top candidate to run the American economy, but neither is Kerry. Kerry has promised that he will increase troops in Iraq if he gets elected. He did not vote against the Patriot Act, a hastily passed legal behemoth that takes away many of the civil liberties that Americans take for granted. In other words, many Americans who are against the war and against the Patriot Act will be voting for somebody who will not represent them when the time comes.

The progressive movement, made up of people far more concerned about the people, their health and their labor and civil rights (and from which Nader springs) are obviously not going to accept Kerry just because he comes with a blue sticker saying “Democrat.” And they’re not going to shut up and sit down.

The dilemma is an ancient one, said the old-timers. The “lesser of two evils” argument haunts every election. Jeremy Scahill, of Democracy Now!, gave a scathing review of Kerry - including his use of the military to guard the streets during convention time, which is a legal no-no. The Democrats, who were originally pro-slavery, also have a long history of invading and bombing other countries, including Clinton’s 78 days of unsanctioned bombing in the former Yugoslavia. Children in a low-income black neighbourhood burnt an effigy that had Bush’s face on one side, and Kerry’s on another. Both of them represent corporate welfare and cronyism, Scahill said.

JoAnn Wypijewski, writer of Counterpunch, took a more moderate view. The vote, she joked, is elevated to a holy height, almost like virginity in the middle ages. It will be carefully guarded and given to the appropriate suitor, nobody else. Instead of thinking of the vote as sacred, why not think of it as a purchase: “Buying Starbucks in the airport when nothing else is available? Why not think about it as replacing a faulty appliance?“ The vote is elevated to the realm of faith, but we need to bring it down to the business of everyday and not expect a perfect candidate, she argued.

Naomi Klein, best-selling author of “No Logo: Taking aim at the Brand Bullies”, took a similar take. If Bush won, she said, there would be outrage all over the world. People would wonder how Americans could allow this to happen.

Peter Camejo, Nader’s running mate who originally came from Venezuala, gave an impassioned speech with the power to change people‘s minds. Nothing is further from the truth than the public misconceptions of Nader, he said. Nader’s base is made up of African-Americans and Hispanics. In San Fransisco, Matt Gonzalez, a Green Party candidate and a Hispanic man, was leading the Mayorial race over a Democratic candidate -- and was only defeated by 5 points after incredulous Democrats rushed in Clinton and Gore for emergency aid.

“This election is going to be dominated by fear,” says Nader’s website. “The Republicans play on the fear of terrorism and the Democrats play on the fear of Bush. One of the goals of this campaign is to free voters from fear so they can vote their conscience, their interests and their dreams.” Would you vote for Mussolini because he was running against Hitler, asks Camejo, clearly challenging the audience to rethink their assumptions.

"There can be no daily democracy without daily citizenship,” says Ralph Nader. With Kerry supporting the repressive Patriot Act, he might find out rather unpleasantly that the Nader factor is more than history.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Bitter Truth: Talat Abbasi's Bitter Gourds

The stories are small, but with a spicy aftertaste that could be from nowhere else but the subcontinent. Talat Abbasi's Bitter Gourd and Other Stories is a collection of nugget sized, delectable tales laid out, in typical desi fashion, amongst the detritus of social stratification, family ennui, economic marginalization and diaspora. Gently dousing her stories with a generous portion of irony and satire, the Karachi born writer brings to the fore the small hypocrisies and the mundane corruptions of everyday life in Pakistan. Whether dealing with a birdman or a poor relation, a rich widow or an immigrant mother, Ms. Abbasi touches the mythic heart that ticks besides all these caricatures. The ghostly narrative influence of Virginia Woolf, with a pinch of Victorian lit thrown in for good measure, is discernable, although most of the voices are centered around the "how kind, how kind" echoes of South Asia. The book starts, appropriately, with a story about a feudal patro

INTERVIEW: TOM ARENS

KHULA MANCH Tom Arens first came to Nepal in 1972 as the South Asian representative of World Neighbors, a small American INGO. He stayed for 28 years. He was one of the founding members of the Federation of NGOs. Arens talked with Sushma Joshi of the Nation Weekly about the changes he has seen in the development scene in Nepal, as well as his thoughts about the direction in which the nation should take in the coming years. What was Nepal like in 1972? When World Neighbors first started, we worked with The Nepal’s Women’s Organization and Paropakar. These were the only two established smaller NGOs. We started with small funds: $50,000-100,000 the first couple of years. The government was ambivalent about smaller non-profits, so we couldn’t get registered until 7 years later, when the Social Service Welfare Council was established. The Queen was the chair. The Council helped to give status to smaller non-profits and to facilitate our work. What was your first program? Our first program w

Milk and rice

Sushma Joshi I am the youngest of seven cousins. When we were little, we used to play lukamari , or hide-and-seek, games in the garden. My eldest cousin sister, taking pity on me, would allow me to be a dudh-bhat (milk and rice) during our games. A dudh-bhat is someone too young to play the game adequately, but the older children allow this young one to tag along and never be “outed” from the game because they might cry if made to leave. So this means you are endlessly in the game, even when in reality you should really be out. Of course, being the youngest means you may always retain the status of a dudh-bhat even when you do grow up. In Nepal, as we know all too well, the hierarchy of age allows the young some privileges, along with the old. It appears to me Madhav Kumar, even though he's lost the game twice in two elections, is being allowed to be the dudh-bhat by his wiser and more tolerant elders. He is allowed to be in the game endlessly even though in reality he should real