Why Ralph Nader Runs

(The Nation)  This column was written by William Greider.

---

Ralph Nader is a man of political substance trapped in an era of easy lies. He pierces the fog of propaganda with hard facts and reason, but the smoke rolls over him and he disappears from public view. A lesser man might go crazy or get the message and give it up. Nader instead runs for president again, as he is doing this year, campaigning in fifty states and addressing crowds wherever he finds them, smaller crowds this time but still eager to feed on his idealism. Ralph is not delusional. He knows the story. He is stubborn about the facts and honest with himself.

"I believe in I.F. Stone's dictum that in all social justice movements, you've got to be ready to lose. And lose and lose and lose. It's not very pleasant, but you have to accept this if you believe in what you're doing," Nader explained.

He was conducting a "newsmaker" press conference at the National Press Club in Washington on Friday before moving on to Massachussetts, where he planned to deliver more than twenty speeches in one day, in hopes of earning a place in the Guinness Book of World Records. Five or six reporters showed up at the Press Club event (including several old admirers). The only camera was a documentary film maker. Nader stood at the podium and read from a lengthy speech describing the corporate dominance of politics, the stranglehold exercised on dissent by the two-party system, the presidential candidates packaged like soap and cars, the failure of left-liberal progressives (including The Nation) to demand conditions on their support for the Democratic candidate.

"The hypocrisy of liberals, which may in some ways be unconscious, is empowering the forces that are destroying our nation," Nader asserted in an even-tempered voice. "The left in this country has been successfully cowed by the Democratic Party," he continued. "The votes of progressives are taken for granted by Democrats.... By allowing ourselves to be manipulated, we have demonstrated that we have no moral substance. We have no line that can be never be crossed, no stance so sacred and important that we are willing to stand up and fight back."

So long as progressives are willing to settle for the "least worst" alternative, they will remain ignored and excluded from power, he suggested.

This kind of talk from Nader drives some people to rage against him. He returns the favor by discussing "the rage that many in our nation feel towards liberals." Barack Obama, he insists, does not intend to alter anything fundamental about the causes. "This rage is a legitimate expression of very real betrayal," Nader explained. "The working class, most of whom do not vote, watch Democratic candidate after Democratic candidate run for office promising to support labor and protect jobs and then, once elected, trot off to Washington to pass the corporate-friendly legislation drawn up by the 35,000 lobbyists who work for our shadow government."

Whatever you might think of Nader's jeremiad, it is exceedingly timely. Democrats are on the brink of losing their old excuses for timidity and retreat. If the election produces stronger majorities in Congress and a new president who has promised big change, Nader's analysis will be tested in the clearest terms. For the first time in thirty years, the Dems will have nobody else left to blame. If Obama does not turn the page as he promised, if the Congressional majority does not step up forcefully, then we may fairly conclude Nader was right. The decay of democracy is deeper than we wished to believe.

The hard warning Nader poses is not about himself but about how the left and other elements of the old Democratic coalition will respond to their new situation. Nader is not optimistic. "I see a lot of anger around the country, but I don't see it organized," he said. "Anger that's unorganized has no power." The rationale behind his serial campaigns for president was always about this vacuum in politics. His conviction was that third-party campaigns could help mobilize a popular counter-force to leverage the Democrats and break up the two-party monopoly. For many reasons, he failed in this, as he frankly acknowledges.

"The question usually asked," he said, "is, 'Has there been a pull or a push on either political party?' I'm sorry to say there hasn't been any indicator of that, which to me means people's resignation to politics-as-usual has deepened further." Both major parties are deeply skewed in their allegiances to corporate power, and Nader believes this unnatural condition must be altered to reverse the decline and decay of society. He thinks this will happen sooner or later, but probably not in the way he has approached it. "My personal preference is a grassroots movement," he said, "but more likely it's going to be some billionaire--a progressive or liberal billionaire who makes it a three-way race. If people get used to voting outside the two parties, then things can change."

So what has his presidential candidacy accomplished in the meantime? Nader offered a modest list. His presence encouraged others to run independently for public office and showed them ways to do it. He identified the many barriers to ballot access for third-party candidates as an important issue of civil liberties as meaningful as access to voting. He brought young people into clean politics and helped them develop their skills. What else? "We kept the progressive agenda alive for the future."
By William Greider
Reprinted with permission from The Nation

[mc2012]

Critics of Ralph Nader often seem to resort to personal attacks. If you''re interested in learning about his stance on substantive issues and commenting on those, you can find them here:
http://votenader2008.blogspot.com/

[vanmungo]

Ausus--
You''re a crank and a bad-faith interlocutor because I''ve raised at least half a dozen serious facts and issues in my responses to you, and you ignore them all and keep reciting your personal credentials like some demented parrot. You''re worse than a crank--you''re a loon--and a paranoid one at that, who thinks that one man can destroy an entire industry. I cite long-term economic trends and managerial mistakes by Detroit automakers, and you cite two or three conversations you have with your European friends as a counterargument. You can''t be serious. You''re having a joke on all of us, right? Either that or you''re nuts.

[danie87]

Hello,
I am a student, studying in the U.K, and I am actually writing a dissertation on Ralph Nader, the types of voters that he appeals to, and why Americans will continue to vote for him, despite the unfairness behind the two-party system. I would be unbelievably grateful to contact some of you Nader supporters (via email) to gain some more information for my work. If anyone would be at all interested in sharing their views with me, (I promise it would not take long at all) could you please email me on [e-mail] -Thank you very much.
Danie

[xynorama]

We have witnessed some pretty strange events over these recent years. I think they appear strange because we don''t have the truth about them so their strangeness is pickling them. It is silly to suggest that Nader ''destroyed'' the car industry. The car people in this country have been making the wrong choices. They have made cars more complex than they need to be.

I don''t recognize the Republican Party anymore. I am not sure what it is.
I am disappointed in the Democratic Party too, because they did not stand up against the Republicans. When two oppositions occur they tend to compromise and I have not seen compromise. Mostly surrendering, rather than debate that would lead to some enlightenment, maybe even worthy actions.

When I saw this happening It finally dawned on me that maybe what I thought both Parties stood for no longer defined who they were. That along the road of their experience they both changed to something else.

They could adopt new names and I would understand them better as something different and I could compartmentalize them as just what they call themselves. So far it has not happened.

I think we need a new names for both Democrats and Republicans.

[ausus-2009]

vanmungo,

I have postgraduate qualifications from one of the world''s great universities, I have edited and written books, edited magazines and newspapers. I am an award-winning writer. My motoring articles have been published in newspapers and magazines and on the internet (professional motoring sites) in several countries.

What basic arguments do you want? Quality of cars. I have addressed that. Nader''s crackpot economic ideas?
I have addressed that.

To call me a right-wing crank, shows that you are judgmental and probably have a much narrower education and world experience than I do. You have no idea on what I believe in a whole range of issues. Name-calling just shows your immaturity.

[mynalee]

Ralph Nader is a gift to America and the World.
When I want to form an opinion on something I am not certain about, I tune in to what Ralph has to say.
He is our mentor.
He seems to know it all and has a way to say it truthfully and simply.
As a feminist, I see him as the only feminist in the elections and the the overall US political scene.

[vanmungo]

ausus--
You''re a right-wing crank who relies on anecdotal evidence and irrelevant personal data--I suppose that the fact that you were once a "motoring writer" grants you infallibility on every political judgment? Laughable. And the "Latin" is a term of basic logic known to any half-educated person. I guess you don''t qualify--either on the level of education or on the use of logic. You haven''t addressed any of my facts or arguments. Just keep telling me you''re a "motoring writer" and I''ll skulk away, oh so impressed despite your inability to command facts or logic. Have a nice life.

[ausus-2009]

vanmungo,

Cut the Latin. I took Latin in school but I don''t talk in dead languages.

Your attack on me conveniently overlooks the fact that I have worked as a motoring writer. It was not just a few anecdotes. I will throw in another inconvenient fact for you. Sweden which manufactures Nader''s favorite Volvos, has the highest per capita rate of quadriplegia from traffic accidents in the world. I got this from a close acquaintance who was editor of an international publication for and about quadriplegics.

Your praise of Nader''s "Medicare for all, living-wage legislation, public funding of elections, rescinding WTO/NAFTA, repeal of the antiworker Taft-Hartley Act, etc." shows that you don''t care if America has double digit unemployment, soul-destroying taxation and runaway inflation. I take it you haven''t visited Europe lately.

[vanmungo]

gig15--I think YOU''RE stupid because you can''t discuss issues--just personalities. Read some of the comments below on the issues and educate yourself so that you don''t come off sounding like an illiterate yahoo in the future.

[gig15]

RN runs because he''s in love with himself. He is just purely stupid and needs to do something green instead of run and waste time and money for a useless cause, himself that very few people like with exception of antiGore people. Traders to the max.