>On the other hand, there is never a good time to do strategy #1,
>so to invoke the lesser argument is tantamount to perpetual
>reconciliation with the status quo.
The conclusion to the "endorsement" edit in this week's Nation:
>In another season, when our insurgent values have accumulated more
>momentum and self-confidence, we might see things differently. This
>time around, we believe the practical priority of keeping the Bush
>squad from winning power takes precedence, while we also urge that,
>if possible, progressives help Nader score a blow to the status quo.
>For the larger progressive community, the tension can be resolved by
>following the logic of Texas columnist Molly Ivins. Her rule: Vote
>with your heart where you can, and vote with your head where you
>must. In states where either Gore or Bush has a commanding lead,
>vote Nader. In the states too close to call, vote Gore. In either
>case, the imperative is to end Republican control in Congress by
>electing Democrats, also vital to the prospects for progressive
>change.
>
>The question Election 2000 poses for the ranks of
>left-labor-liberal-progressive outsiders is: Despite occasional
>clashes over their different directions, can the radical-to-moderate
>critics of the decayed status quo learn how to pursue a politics in
>which radical idealism coexists with heads-up pragmatism? As Nader
>has said, "There are millions of progressives in this country--the
>problem is, they've never met each other." That captures the larger,
>long-term challenge, regardless of the election's outcome. If the
>fragmented progressive community can begin working together,
>developing inside-outside electoral strategies, doing the hard work
>of engaging alienated citizens in the conversation, things will look
>very much better four years from now. Despite its disappointments,
>Election 2000 might yet turn out to be the progressive moment--when
>we stopped backing up and started moving forward.
Four questions: 1) when is it the right season, 2) how might we acquire "momentum and confidence" by acting sometime in the indefinite future rather than today, 3) who are moderate critics of the status quo, and 4) the status quo looks pretty strong, why is it "decayed"?
Doug