http://www.tbwt.com/views/rd/rd_11-22-00.asp The Black World Today November 22, 2000 In Defense Of Ralph Nader: People Have A Right To Vote For What They Believe By Ron Daniels <ronmae@aol.com> The frightening prospect of a George W. Bush presidency has many within the liberal progressive movement angry with Ralph Nader and the Green Party. Nader and the Greens are being blamed and condemned for blocking Al Gore from a clear victory over George W. Bush. The bitterness towards Nader and the Greens may well create an irreparable chasm on the left as some liberals and progressives are threatening to punish Nader and the Greens for being reckless and irresponsible. In my view this would be a tragic and debilitating outcome. In America people who have the courage of their convictions should not be punished for voting for what they believe in. There is certainly an argument to be made that had it not been for the militant campaigns of Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas, where hundreds of thousands of people voted their convictions, some of the modest reforms of the New Deal would not have been forthcoming. By marching on ballot boxes and in the streets, the left compelled the Democratic Party and the ruling elite to grant more concessions than they would have otherwise. The liberal progressive movement and its constituencies owe a great deal to those who had the courage to vote and fight for their convictions, at the ballot box and in the streets. This is not at all to dismiss the critical nature of the moment in terms of the 2000 election. While I have been a leading proponent of independent politics for years, I pointed out that the differences between Gore and Bush were incremental not fundamental. I also argued that those differences were not inconsequential. Without question, Black people, people of color and poor and working people have suffered under the rightwing onslaught of the Republican Party. However, in my judgment, that onslaught has been aided and abetted by the cowardice and capitulations of the Democratic Party, particularly under the rise to hegemony within the Party of the "centrist" Democratic Leadership Conference led by people like Bill Clinton and Al Gore. I firmly believe the Nader campaign was not only important it was essential to advance the progressive cause. At some point in history progressives have to take a stand and break out of the "lesser evil" mold that has bound us to the Democrats despite their considerable transgressions against key constituencies within the progressive movement. Though the Nader campaign had some obvious weaknesses as it relates to people of color, Nader was unquestionably the most progressive candidate among the major candidates. His relentless exposure of and opposition to corporate power and the suffocation of the American political process by big money was clearly a stance that neither of the establishment candidates was willing to take. As a result of Nader's anti-corporate crusade, hundreds of thousands of people, particularly young people, went to the polls for the first time because finally there was a candidate who articulated their deepest convictions about the crisis in American democracy and prescriptions for creating a more authentic democracy in this country. Though it is true that a sizeable segment of the Nader vote would have gone to Gore, thousands of others would not have voted at all, and Nader must be credited for giving thousands of people a reason to vote. The real villain in American politics is not Nader, but a relatively closed electoral system, which discourages rather than encourages participation. For all of the hoopla about turnout, the fact is that a little more than 50% of the total eligible electorate actually bothered to vote in election 2000. The biggest political party in America is still non-voters. The second major problem is that Black people, people of color, labor and the poor do not have a party that uncompromisingly promotes and defends their interests. The Democratic Party can no longer claim to be the unquestioned champion of poor and working people, let alone a party which articulates anything resembling a vision for social transformation and real political and economic democracy. But in the crunch, the Democrats were forced to appeal to the very constituencies they have so woefully neglected, Blacks, people of color and labor, to rescue an embattled leader of the DLC. Recognizing the incremental but consequential differences between Bush and Gore, the majority of these constituencies heeded the call. But those who elected to pursue the interest of the progressive movement by refusing to embrace a Republicrat should not be excommunicated from the movement. Whatever the ultimate outcome of this election the Democratic party, if it is intelligent, will have to look leftward in the coming elections if it hopes to remain a force in American politics. The Nader-Green voters must now be factored into the political calculations and equations for the foreseeable future. The challenge on the left is to avoid acrimony, bitterness and permanent splits. Given our professed belief in the politics of social transformation, neither a Bush or Gore presidency will meet our expectations; neither candidate nor party is committed to creating the kind of new society we believe in. Therefore, rather than blame Nader, progressives should use the Nader campaign as the spark to ignite a serious pro-democracy offensive in this nation, in the courts, the corridors of power and in the streets. Now more than ever it is time to come together to discuss our differences and explore ways and means of advancing our vision for a new America. Copyright (c) 2000 The Black World Today. All Rights Reserved.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/02/00 EST