Nathan and Brad have been hammering on the point that Bush really is worse when it comes to the agencies and the courts. And I agree--he's not worse with respect to everything. He seems better, if he lives up to his word, onm foreign policy in particular, the Mideast excepted (maybe). But overall, he is worse.
The question for the left is whether we must permanently submerge our hopes and line up behind a lesser evil that is growing greater over time. By "growing greater over time," I mean that the Dems have been veering sharply to the right. In 1972, Richard Nixon supported a guaranteed annual income, a national health care program; he'd founded the EPA and OSHA, he promoted affirmative action. That was Richard Nixon, a right wing Republican. Today, no Democratic would run on what Richard Nixon actually did, least of all Al Gore. But the Repugs are worse than they were under Nixon, too; and the Dems are are only marginally better than the Repugs, although they are enough better to make a real difference in people's lives.
The problem is that if use this degree of difference as the basis of our decision, we mighta s well give up on left politics. The Dems, or something like them, will always be marginally better than the Repugs, or something like them. If a progressive or left party gets rolling and wins more substantial support than the Greens have this time, it will cut into Dem support. The nore successful the left party is, the more deeply it will cut into Dem support. And such a party cannot hope to win for a long time. That means that for a long time, the role such a party could play in national elections will necessarily be that of a spoiler. If we are not willing to do that, we have indeed no business supporting a left party. But if we have no business supporting a left party, we might as well pack it in, give up on left politics, and become unhappily dissident Dems, because that is what there is.
I for one am not willing to do that--not as a matter of self-expression, but as a matter of political strategy. The strategy is to build a viable left force in US politics, one that may eventually win. Mucha s the prospect of another Prez. Bush gives me the shudders, that's the price, if not this time, then next, of building such a force. So I think I did the right thing in voting for Nader, even if it means another Prez. Bush. I expect recriminations. Meanwhile, I am actually going to join the Green Party and start going to meetings.
--jks
>
>>On Tue, 7 Nov 2000 Nathan Newman wrote:
>>> While a burgeoning movement does not have to gain the allegiance of the
>>> whole society in the beginning, deliberatly alienating the closest
>>>potential
>>> allies is disasterous over the longterm. Whatever goodwill the Greens
>>>had
>>> slowly been building at the local level has been squandered.
>>
>>Is potentially squandered, you mean. Time will tell in any case. If Gore
>>loses by a huge gap, then it'll be impossible to blame the Greens; if Gore
>>loses in a squeaker, yes, there will be hell to pay.
>
>
>And there is, and there is...
_________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.