<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV class=columnbyline>Question: Is Eric Alterman the most reprehensible human
ever?</DIV>
<DIV class=columnbyline> </DIV>
<DIV class=columnbyline>ERIC ALTERMAN <A
href="http://www.thenation.com/directory/view.mhtml?handle=alterman_eric"></A>
</DIV>
<H1>Left in Shambles</H1>
<P></P>
<P>Providence put me on a panel debating the Gore/Nader choice with Cornel West
at New York University in late October. Most of the audience was for Nader, and
the lineup on stage did nothing to improve those odds. </P>
<P>Before the debate began, its organizers took a few moments to speak on behalf
of the university's graduate students' struggle for unionization. So did West,
who had been handed a flier about it from the floor. And as a man about to lose
a debate (and a longtime grad student as well as an occasional NYU adjunct
faculty member), I was happy for the interruption. Days later, the National
Labor Relations Board set an important precedent by ruling in favor of the
students. But here's what I don't understand. How can the student union
supporters also be Nader supporters? Nonsensical "Tweedledee/Tweedledum"
assertions to the contrary, only one party appoints people to the NLRB who
approve of graduate student unions, and only one appoints people to the Supreme
Court who approve of such NLRB decisions. No Democrat in the White House, no
graduate student union; it's that simple. An honest Nader campaign slogan might
have read, "Vote your conscience and lose your union...or your reproductive
freedom...your wildlife refuge, etc., etc." </P>
<TABLE align=right border=0 cellPadding=10 cellSpacing=0 hspace="5"
vspace="5"><TBODY>
<TR>
<TD>
<SCRIPT language=JAVASCRIPT>
var EmailArticleWindow;
function email_article_popup (uri) {
if (!uri) { uri = window.location; }
var url = 'email.mhtml?i=20001127&s=alterman&type=column';
if ((EmailArticleWindow) && (EmailArticleWindow.closed != true)) {
EmailArticleWindow.location.href = url;
} else {
EmailArticleWindow = window.open(url,'EmailArticleWindow','height=370,width=300');
}
}
</SCRIPT>
<TABLE bgColor=#eeeeee cellPadding=2 cellSpacing=0 width=200>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD align=left bgColor=#003399 class=boxtitle>INTERACT </TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD>
<TABLE cellPadding=5 cellSpacing=0 width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD>
<P><A
href="http://www.thenation.com/docPrint.mhtml?i=20001127&s=alterman">Print
this article</A><BR><A
href="javascript:email_article_popup()">Email this
Article</A><BR><A href="mailto:letters@thenation.com">Write to
the Editors</A>
</P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR clear=all>
<TABLE bgColor=#eeeeee cellPadding=2 cellSpacing=0 width=200>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD align=left bgColor=#003399 class=boxtitle>MORE ABOUT...</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD>
<TABLE cellPadding=5 cellSpacing=0 width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD>
<LI><A
href="http://www.thenation.com/directory/view.mhtml?handle=alterman_eric">Eric
Alterman</A>
<LI><A
href="http://www.thenation.com/directory/view.mhtml?handle=electoral_pol">Electoral
Politics</A>
<LI><A
href="http://www.thenation.com/directory/view.mhtml?handle=ralphnader">Ralph
Nader</A>
<LI><A
href="http://www.thenation.com/directory/view.mhtml?handle=media_analysis">Media
Analysis</A> </LI></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR
clear=all></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P>Well, Nader's support collapsed, but not far or fast enough. In the future,
it will be difficult to heal the rift that Nader's costly war on even the most
progressive Democrats has opened. Speaking to <I>In These Times</I>'s David
Moberg, Nader promised, "After November, we're going to go after the Congress in
a very detailed way, district by district. If [Democratic candidates] are
winning 51 to 49 percent, we're going to go in and beat them with Green votes.
They've got to lose people, whether they're good or bad." It's hard to imagine
what kind of deal can be done with a man whose angriest rhetorical assaults
appear reserved for his natural allies. (The vituperative attacks on Nader,
leveled by many of my friends and cronies on the prolabor democratic left, were
almost as counterproductive, however morally justified.) But a deal will have to
be done. Nader may have polled a pathetic 2 to 3 percent nationally, but he
still affected the race enough to tip some important balances in favor of Bush
and the Republicans. He not only amassed crucial margins in Florida, New
Hampshire and Oregon; he forced progressive Democrats like Tom Hayden, Paul
Wellstone, Ted Kennedy and the two Jesse Jacksons to focus on rear-guard action
during the final days rather than voter turnout. If this pattern repeats itself
in future elections, Naderite progressives will become very big fish in a very
tiny pond indeed. </P>
<P>Perhaps a serious Feingold or Wellstone run at the nomination with a stronger
platform on globalization issues will convince those die-hard Naderites to join
in the difficult business of building a more rational, Christian Coalition-like
bloc to counter corporate power within the party. For now, we can expect an ugly
period of payback in Washington in which Nader's valuable network of
organizations will likely be the first to pay. Democrats will no longer return
his calls. Funders will tell him to take a hike. Sadly, his life's work will be
a victim of the infantile left-wing disorder Nader developed in his quixotic
quest to elect a reactionary Republican to the American presidency. </P>
<P>* * * </P>
<P>Giving Nader a run for his money in the election hall of shame are the
mainstream media. Media portraits of both candidates were etched in stone, with
nary a fact or figure allowed to intrude upon the well-worn script. Bush was
dumb and Gore a liar; pretty much nothing else was allowed in the grand
narrative. Like Nader, reporters assumed the enormous policy differences between
Gore and Bush--on Social Security, prescription drugs, education, affirmative
action, abortion rights, the environment--to be of trivial importance, hardly
worth the time and effort to explain or investigate. The media's treatment of
this election as a popularity contest rather than a political one between two
governing ideologies was an implicit endorsement of the Bush campaign strategy,
as the issues favored Gore. But even so, Bush was usually treated like some pet
media cause. With regard to such consequential questions as his political
program, his political experience, his arrest record, his military service, his
business ethics, Bush was given a free pass by media that continued to hound
Gore about whether he was really the model for Oliver in <I>Love
Story</I>--which, by the way, he was. I guess being a Bigfoot journalist means
never having to say you're sorry. </P>
<P>* * * </P>
<TABLE align=right border=0 cellPadding=10 cellSpacing=0 hspace="5"
vspace="5"><TBODY>
<TR>
<TD><BR clear=all></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P>One election development that had to gladden <I>New Republic</I> owner Marty
Peretz's heart was how bad it was for the Arabs. I got a call one day from a
Republican Party functionary telling me that Hillary Clinton supported a
Palestinian state and took money from groups that supported terrorist
organizations "like the one that just blew up the USS Cole." I told the sorry
sonofabitch that like Israel's Prime Minister, I, too, support a Palestinian
state. And, if there was any justice in the world, Hillary's "terrorist" friends
would blow up Republican headquarters while we were still on the phone, so I
could enjoy hearing the explosion. </P>
<P>This heavy-handed bit of racist manipulation grew out of a story published,
surprisingly, not in Rupert Murdoch's <I>New York Post</I> but in the putatively
responsible and nominally liberal <I>New York Daily News</I>, owned by Mortimer
Zuckerman. It was inspired by the machinations of one Steven Emerson, a
discredited "terrorism expert" last heard trying to pin the Oklahoma City
bombing on the Arabs by noting that "inflict[ing] as many casualties as
possible...is a Middle Eastern trait." Each actor played a dishonorable role in
the tawdry drama: The <I>Daily News</I> invented the story. The Lazio campaign
brazenly exploited it. Hillary Clinton's campaign capitulated to it. Together
with the media coverage of the main event, this mini-drama will go down in
history as further evidence of that unhappy nostrum of American politics that
this year seems to have escaped everyone from the Nader die-hards to Palestinian
militants: Things can always get worse. </P></DIV></BODY></HTML>