What rubbish. There seems to be no rock the less-left won't try to heave in RN's direction.
Beal acknowledges that RN's proposals "would ensure that the winner-take-all schemes prevalent in each state could enhance the voices of Black America, particularly in the South." But this isn't good enough.
Beal wants RN to tail the Democrats, who get no criticism in this column, in making an issue of efforts to thwart African American voting. I guess I'm the only one who sees this as grossly opportunistic and hypocritical, in view of the fact that the Dem protest is solely premised on helping to put Al Gore over the top in FL. Beal says:
"Even amid one of the most egregious attempts to disenfranchise Black voters in Florida and elsewhere . . . "
Really? Is it more egregious than 1996 or 1992, and how do we know? Or is it egregious because Al Gore is behind by less than a thousand votes in FL?
Who thinks Dems will do anything about this after this year's presidential election is resolved?
Bottom line for all the semi-radicals who are muttering into their beer about RN is he has the most significant grip on popular left politics in the U.S. today, while they have newspaper columns, mailing lists, web sites, groupuscules, and Al Gore.
I agree with the need to make the Ralph Platform more responsive to race and gender demands, as well as more focused and less preoccupied with wonky micro-ideas. As that develops, the Ralph Party will get less pale.
In part, the strength of Nader's message is founded on its rejection of sandbox-left rhetoric about race and gender. If he satisfied his critics re: race he would be just another left Democrat, albeit one outside of the Democratic Party.
mbs
By Frances M. Beal
While lawyers and political gurus tussle over pregnant dimples