Nader, Greens should join fight against the ultraright (Reprinted from the People's Weekly World
By Rick Nagin
The presidential campaign of Ralph Nader is a reflection of the growing anti-corporate sentiment in the United States which erupted so dramatically in the Battle of Seattle. It is also a reflection of the growing desire among many voters for independence from the two major parties, which they see as parties controlled by the corporations. Many of Nader's supporters are involved in struggles to preserve the environment, for peace, women's rights, civil liberties, human rights and other important issues. They support Nader because of his anti-corporate stance.
However, the great irony of Nader's campaign is that by taking votes and resources from the Democrats, it could actually result in strengthening corporate power, split the unity that emerged in Seattle and undermine the forces of anti-corporate political independence. The fundamental reality of the this year's elections is that if Bush and Cheney are elected, the balance of power will shift in a decidedly negative direction in favor of the most reactionary, anti-labor, racist, warlike, anti-democratic sections of big business.
The Christian Coalition, the gun lobby, the pharmaceutical lobby, the tobacco lobby, the military-industrial complex and other right-wing corporate groups are pouring money and troops into the Republican campaign in the expectation that a Bush victory will greatly extend their influence. This will be especially true if the Republicans also retain control of the Congress.
On the other hand, labor and other people's movements recognize that if they can build a strong enough political coalition they can defeat the right-wing and be able to defend rights now under attack like Social Security, public education, Medicare and the right to choose. They will also be in a better position to win advances supported by the Democrats, including labor law reform, a higher minimum wage and expanding Medicare to include prescription drug coverage to seniors. They also know that with the greater strength and unity resulting from the ability to elect their candidates, they will be in a better position to win demands not yet or not fully supported by Gore such as protection for labor, environmental and human rights in trade legislation, blocking a national missile defense system and national health care. It is for all these reasons that organized labor, civil rights groups, organizations of women, seniors and environmentalists overwhelmingly support the Democratic Party ticket. They are doing this with eyes wide open, knowing that on many issues they agree more with Nader than with Gore.
The main point, however, is that a Gore victory would be a victory for this coalition, which would emerge with greater independent political clout and expand the possibility for moving in the direction of a new labor-led, anti-corporate people's party. The need for such a party is widely recognized but it can only emerge and be viable when it has consolidated a sufficient social base capable of seriously challenging corporate power. This process is underway, including through the AFL-CIO campaign to elect 2,000 trade unionists this year and other independent initiatives, but in the main the process is unfolding within the framework of the Gore campaign which alone i s capable of defeating the right-wing danger.
The progressive intellectuals and professionals that are the main base of the Nader campaign are an important part of the coalition needed for real political independence but by themselves do not have anywhere near the necessary strength and resources. Without major participation by organized labor and its allies among minorities, women and seniors, there can be no real political independence.
Nader could play a very positive role if he used his national prestige and candidacy to rally voters against the right-wing danger, but the sad fact is the main thrust of his campaign is directed against Gore and Lieberman. Nader claims his goal is to move Gore to the left, but whether Gore moves to the left before Nov. 7 is not that important. The only real issue now is how to prevent a right-wing takeover of the federal government.
Nader has told his followers who might otherwise vote for the Democratic ticket that there is no difference between Bush and Gore and that he does no t care which of them is elected. Nader says very little about Bush and Cheney and reserves his sharpest criticism for Gore and Lieberman.
Certainly there are weaknesses in the record and program of the Democrats and these must be dealt with but only after the right-wing danger is out of the way. In the current situation Nader's tactics play directly into the hands of the Republicans and could be decisive in undermining support for Gore in key states like California.
Nader and the Greens are hoping to get the 5 percent of the vote needed to qualify for federal matching funds but evidently do not seem to care if this comes at the expense of a right-wing victory in November and a major setback to labor and the people. But, if this is the outcome, how will labor and the people view Nader and the Greens? How will they judge political forces willing to sacrifice the well-being of the people for narrow partisan gain? This year's elections provide a real opportunity to build the labor-led people's coalition to defeat the right-wing danger and set the stage for a new wave of social progress and a deeper level of political independence. But if the unity of this coalition is split because of the Nader campaign, this important opportunity could be lost.
Rick Nagin is a city council aide in Cleveland, Ohio