The problem is and was that labor has to connect/re-connect with broader constituencies. Like the environmental and the consumer. If this is the direction that Nader was pushing you in the early 80's, as you indicate, he was giving you good direction!!!
I'm not one to dismiss conspiracy theories out of hand. Matter of fact Penn State published an interesting little conspiracy theory book on the destruction of the steel industry, the Mon Valley and American industry in general.
Even if conspiracies are true and they involve the elite in high places in our government---they can be overcome if our political base is broad enough.
Tom Lehman
TRox51 at aol.com wrote:
> Sawicky wrote:
> Your response is not very responsive to my response to you. I said Nader's inner essence is not as much at issue as you make out. It is where important social forces are in relation to RN that matters. I noted my view that the RN candidacy has some major problems, and you reduce the argument to binary issues, albeit important ones. Even litmus tests have shadings.
> Left politics is not properly a search for virtuous leaders.
> mbs
>
> A brilliant thought, Max. But how about principled leaders?
>
> Glad to hear there's a union at EPI, I was unaware of that. At least there's a collective bargaining process in place. Negotiations are rarely fun; I had my fill of them while prez of a CWA local at the Journal of Commerce in the '90s.
>
> Actually I'm not talking about Nader's 'inner essence,' which is best left to gossip. I'm more interested in his actual practice. Working for him in the '80s, at the height of the Cold War and Reaganism, I found he was an incredible coward towards the right. Once the rightist newspaper Human Events wrote an article attacking Nader for his links to the 'far left,' meaning IPS, and used a press conference I had organized (with Nader's approval) with the anti-CIA magazine Counterspy to underscore their argument. I defended my writing and Counterspy to HE. Next article in HE, Nader had 'disavowed' my views (without even talking to me) and told HE he had no connection to MM, which was not true (he signed my checks). Nor did he defend IPS. I almost quit over that, but was convinced by numerous people to stay on.
>
> Later, when I began writing about multinationals in the US - like in the Mon Valley, where tens of thousands of US steelworkers were losing jobs - he got very angry and said I should stick to consumer issues. 'MM is too much a Labor Monitor,' he told me. He didn't like articles linking multinationals and US foreign policy or the CIA.
>
> Now he sings a different tune - its much safer after the Cold War. But his lack of a systemic critique of US foreign policy is very obvious now - and should send warning signals to those of us concerned about the militaristic direction of US policy.
>
> That said, I mean no disrespect for people who decide to cast a protest vote for this man, as long as they do it with their eyes wide open. From messages I've received from some Greens about Nader's workplace record, I think most of them want to keep their eyes and ears closed very tight.
> TS