Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe conscientious quest for turning around our fragile democracy can usefully turn its attention to a widespread but sub-visible phenomenon that can be called "The Next Step Not Taken."
Let's look at three areas needing fundamental reforms where the people who can get them in place are not taking the next step.
1. Call them small investors, savers or shareholders - corporate crimes, frauds and abuses have battered them in the past decade. Think Enron, Worldcom, Wall Street's brokerage and investment giants and now the big shaky banks. Trillions of dollars have been drained or looted by these corporate bosses while they pay themselves handsomely with other people's money.
Speaking, writing and testifying against these massive unregulated rip-offs of defenseless Americans are two former chairmen of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) - Arthur Levitt and William Donaldson. Openly sharing their urgent pleas for reform are John Bogle, founder of mutual fund indexing and severe critic of excessive, often hidden, mutual fund fees, and Lynn Turner former chief accountant of the SEC.
These men are well known and respected in their fields, have ready access to the mass business media, possess great rolodexes of supportive people all over the country and could raise substantial sums of money. They are part of the monied classes themselves.
And for what? To start a large investor protection and action organization to represent the 60 million powerless and individual investors in our country. Individual investors really have no organized voice, either in Washington, D.C., or the state and local level where public sentiment and demand for action generates the rumble for change.
These experienced, superbly connected men, who have respected each other for years and are frustrated over inaction by those in authority, are not taking the next step.
To demonstrate their credentials, see their books Take on the Street: How to Fight Your Financial Future and Take on the Street: What Wall Street and Corporate America Don't Want You to Know by Arthur Levitt, and The Little Book of Common Sense Investing and The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism by John Bogle. To document the broader urgency of their concerns, see veteran shareholder rights leader, Robert Monks' new book Corpocracy.
2. It would not take you very long, searching the Internet, to come up with scores of retired high military officers, from Generals and Admirals on down, high-ranking former diplomats and national security officials, who have spoken and written against the invasion of Iraq and the continuing quagmire and casualties that have cost our country so much and destroyed so much of Iraq and its people.
These outspoken, stand-up Americans, include former cabinet secretaries, agency chiefs, and White House special assistants, who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
No one can question the experience and service of these straight-talk, former public officials. They have seen it all. Wealthy, like-minded funders would return their calls.
Organized together into a powerful, well funded advocacy organization, these Americans can have a decisive impact on Congress and the White House, because they would be able to reach the American people through the mass media with the truth, and the strategies for peace and justice.
Although active in their pursuit of a sound foreign and military policy that does not jeopardize and bankrupt America, they have not taken this next step.
3. Can you possibly count all the progressives-elected, academic, authors and columnists-who are tearing into the Democratic Party for how often they caved in Congress this year to George W. Bush and his minority Republicans in the Senate and House?
There is nothing new about their complaints. Whether on foreign or domestic policy, whether on the domination of giant corporations over elections, legislatures, regulatory agencies and mass media, whether on the destructive results and portents of corporate globalization and autocratic trade regimes (WTO and NAFTA), progressives have been criticizing the Democrats for years now.
Hear it from Bob Herbert of the New York Times, John Nichols of The Nation magazine, the duos of James Carville and Paul Begala, Mark Crispin Miller and Jim Hightower, Bill Moyers and Anthony Lewis, Senators Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown, and Congressman John Conyers and Ed Markey - to name just a very few of the grossly disappointed and outraged critics of the establishment Democrats, and their Democratic Leadership Council and their corporate financiers.
But they do not take the next step. Or steps. Either organize into a powerful counter-weight inside the Democratic Party to make progressive demands that cannot be shrugged off, or move to a progressive third party that can either lever its messages to the Democrats or compete with them?
How many years can the bad Republicans and their corporatist allies keep pulling the mainstream Democratic Party toward them and leave progressives with the futility of the least worst form of disastrous corporate government?
There are many influential and knowledgeable people in our country who know what causes are critical to pursue, what redirections are necessary for present and future generations, what assets of persuasion and change to amass. But they are stalled in this state of the next step not taken.
Taking the next step is the difference between talking and acting, between promise and performance, between autocracy and democracy!
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions.
56 Comments so far
Show AllImagine that, Nader says make the Democratic Party progressive! I agree with you Awaken, Edwards is the pick.
Let's see what happens thursday night in Iowa.
One of the things I respect so much about Nader is his belief in and determination to make the best of a system based (sometimes ostensibly) on law, constitutional, civil, and otherwise.
It seems he has insight into what is in store for the people of a country where law breaks down, because it is abused and rewritten to serve interests of the powerful.
I taught in Eastern Europe in the late 80s and early 90s and spoke to many people there who gave me some of their firsthand experience of what it was like to deal with those in power abusing the legal system against its own people to pursue their own corrupt agenda.
I am appalled at what the U.S. government is engaged in overseas, and sanctioning. And we are starting I think to slowly come to terms with what is happening, and has been happening within our own borders, due to our government's refusal to respect the true intentions of its own legal system.
What we have more and more is America's tragic loss, undramatized by the media, brought about by the fools who have taken over our quote unquote leadership.
A civil society can be just that, in the best possible sense. But it requires we do everything we can uphold the integrity of our legal system, with a sense of that purpose in mind. If we don't do this we end up with a nation where the powerful act with impunity, and there is widespread cynicism, which equates to helplessness among the general population.
Ralph, incorporate We the People so we can compete with the corporate rulers. We'll take our dividends of equal, non-transferable shares of stock in our trillions worth of our public treasure and assets in money, peace, renewable energy, universal health care, free education, a healthy environment, no WOD and so on, as the public wants our corporate administration to perform or be replaced in yearly shareholder's meetings.
Y es, the dems & repub's are pretty much the same.
I believe in lesser evils though. Shoot me, but after bush i'm gonna vote. For the first time in my life. Not for. But Against the republicans, just me, but I think they are more horrible.
Awaken, do you plan to vote for Edwards?
Best '08. To CD and all threaders.
Gore, Lieberman, Kerry, Clinton. Do these names ring a bell?
Of these, do any of them represent honesty, courage or real change? No, unless you think a change of name means real change.
Al Gore has made himself some good money (to afford that huge house of his) and into a popular (at least on the fringe left) "hero" by chatting up climate change.
But remember his lockstep agreements with George Bush in the "debates"? He is a charlatan and a fool insofar as he believes his own little stories about the environment.
As a leader he is a total failure because he cannot be other than what he is -- a product of a failed system that he did his utmost to support.
As for the rest of the Democratic "party" they are so locked into the phony myth of America that they will gladly suffer 8 years of Romney-insanity and scold the rest of us who don't want Bill Clinton's democracy-destruction machine back with his "wife" in charge.
Of all of the candidates with a chance to win it looks like Edwards is the best choice. Google that!
Okay. Thank You.
I am not talking about a march on D.C. but rather coming together with your neighbors, coworkers and others. How many people actually talk with other people about meaningful things? It is mostly small talk, as if everything will work out fine, if we just ignore the big stuff.
People seem to think that they need not worry about the big stuff, because their leaders are talking care of it and after all, what can one person do? Our leaders have other agendas and
if anyone is going to change things for the better it is us. But most people do not think in those terms.
sjc_1 I agree. I live in a small northern california town, I would start here. Get myself & a few others to DC. Could/would you?
sjc_1 If 1000 people walked to DC, co-ordinated to arrive as one using one name, protesting this govt., how many would join us, we beckoning as we progressed?
Speaking in terms of a future for the U.S.A. is delusional. There has never been a country in the history of the world which has been more hated than the U.S., and that is saying something because the Romans were truly historic scumbags. Although most would not credit it, there is an animosity against the U.S. which will not be satisfied until the U.S.A. ceases to exist.
The flag of the U.S.A. is the most vile representation of evil in history and it will assume it's despised place under which it's only immediate subordinates will be the swastica flag of Nazism and the Israeli state flag.
We can write, read and form groups all we want, but until we mobilize 1 million people towards solutions, we are standing still. This is what leadership and followership are for, but when we are frozen like deer in the headlights, we go nowhere.
P.S. People, this stuff is easily verifiable. For God's sake, do some fact checking before you buy into shit.
'i still remember seeing his campaign ads on the television and at the bottom of the screen it read,"paid for by the republican party"'
You're either hiding the truth that the ads were in fact not paid for by the Republican Party, or you're hiding the truth that the Reps created some ads about Nader and put their imprimatur on them. Either way, you're clueless as to what the whole Green movement was/is about. Most importantly (and dangerously), you're ignorant as to what corporate money has done to the Democratic Party and to the people of this world.
"A new advertising campaign satirizing the Republican financial support of Ralph Nader's independent campaign for the presidency sums up the effort this way: Bush-Nader '04."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CEEDF153EF937A1575BC0A...
"Thenaderfactor.com -- an anti-Nader group staffed by former Dean, Clark, and Gephardt campaigners -- released a new radio ad July 13 saying Nader is getting help from Republicans in three key states in hopes of stripping votes away from Kerry."
http://www.factcheck.org/radio_ad_attacks_nader_over_gop_support.html
" Hoping to siphon votes from Vice President Al Gore, Republicans in three closely contested states prepared to broadcast a television commercial featuring Ralph Nader, as the candidate himself campaigned here tonight and continued to aim his sharpest barbs at the Democratic ticket.
Speaking to a capacity crowd at Iowa Memorial Union hall on the University of Iowa campus, Mr. Nader painted Mr. Gore as ''unbelievably subservient'' to corporations and described Mr. Gore's running mate, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, as ''the quintessential hermaphrodite of American politics -- a Republicrat.''
And Mr. Nader continued to press his case for a third-party movement, describing the two major parties as equally beholden to big business interests."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C00E4DB1630F93BA15753C1A...
I agree with greenerthanthou that the solution is one of economic pooling of some kind. The bottom line is economics and the Republicans and Democrats are as one in this and are both tools of corporate America. Until we recognize this and begin to think in a larger frame, we will be stuck hoping against hope that somehow the Democrats will change and listen to progressives. I think too it is important to keep the flame alive per Langston Hughes, in spite of all the betrayals to democracy.
Jaded Prole, good morning. It is vexing, infuriating, horriffic-so many of us, certainly Mr. Nader included, want real change, progress, but are stymied by the democrats, republicans and their handlers-Concentrated Wealth. Such Power.
Might anyone have a vision of something we could do-some way to use the mainstream media?
Could it start on a CD thread? A million of us at the gates of the white house at the exact same moment demanding impeachment would have impact. I would go...but alone I am powerless my fellow threaders.
The Nader haters are once again blinded by their misplaced animosity to what Nader is saying. He is absolutely right. We need an alternative to the DLC/corporate leadership BOTH inside and outside of the Democratic party. We have great minds and great leaders. Now is the time for "the next step" if anyone is listening. Nader is doing what he can to initiate this but because of his own baggage (as shown here by the pseudo-liberal Nader haters) he is not the one to head such an effort.
The Republican Party gathered and submitted 40,000 signatures in one week in Michigan to get Mr. Nader on the ballot in'04. What does that make him?
Nayoibi, 'google ralph nader republican party' The above FACT is just one example of his close ties to the republicans.
My thanks to CD. And to Left of Left, okay, I have no integrity, thank you. Maybe I can learn from you.
And for Mr. Naders investments-I take the silence to mean no divestiture-He is still-still-heavily invested in weapons manufacturors-When Raytheon & General Dynamics missiles incinerate civilians, it is only a scratch on the frame of the Mona Lisa to those who do not care about the death & suffering of distant brown skinned people.
To Ralph-explain the integrity of your investments in the 'defense esablishment'
Although Mr. Nader resisted disclosure of his investments for years-his mandated filings to the FEC detailed them. Facts which have the integrtiy of truth.
left of left,you confirmed what i already felt was true.it is not nader-bashing to investigate if his money is invested where his mouth is.if what left says is true,nader is an economic-extension of the corporate war machine and i just recognized the aroma.i still remember seeing his campaign ads on the television and at the bottom of the screen it read,"paid for by the republican party"
I'm not one to gratuitously quote folks anonymously, but feel compelled to after suffering yet another clot of denial and delusional Nader bashing. This all really has much less to do with Nader or the Greens or man-in-the-moon marigolds, than it does about an absolute unwillingness for a large number of people to look into the mirror and see that they are the very problem they harangue others about.
So, Daniel David, et al - without further adieu:
-----
Fellow progressives:
Concerns about voter fraud are no doubt genuine. That said, we should not ignore the fact that they are also a convenient tool of the Democratic spin machine. The widely-held belief that the last two presidential elections were stolen has some disturbing ramifications. The Democratic Party has never really taken any responsibility or engaged in any constructive self-criticism, nor has it changed it soul-selling ways. The typical pattern has been to blame voter fraud, the Supreme Court and/or Ralph Nader, rather than confront more painful truths. Since 1992, the Democratic Party has veered ever-rightward on so-called "national security" issues (even when those policies are unpopular with the general public), as well as most issues that pit workers and the environment against large global corporations. We have taken up arms in the culture wars (going to the mat for stems-cell research, for example), while ignoring the most basic needs and interests of working class folks who never got a degree in political correctness from a fancy liberal arts college. As the Party panders to the most fashionable and gentrified Democrats among us, and does its utmost to avoid causing any offense to our corporate masters – who could care less about our stance on social issues, but do care about their bottom line – we continue to alienate tens of millions of ordinary Americans.
You can be sure that the Democratic spin machine is already gearing up for explaining a loss in 2008, in a manner that conceals the truth. If Hillary gets the nomination and loses the general election (a very likely outcome, given how completely out-of-touch and delusional so many millions of rank-and-file Democrats appear to be right now), you can be certain that voter fraud will be the #1 reason spoon fed to the angry left by the DNC, DLC and party elites. With great success in both 2001 and 2005, the Democratic establishment was able to channel outrage on the left in the direction of the "evil" Republicans, or, alternatively, toward what I call the "non-partisan" left – those pesky idealists and "soul-keepers" who voted for Nader. The genius behind the obsessive focus on voter fraud is that it has an irresistible appeal to those on the far left of the Democratic Party—i.e., those radical progressives who would otherwise be the most likely supporters of a wholesale revolution within the Party.
I am not trying to downplay the concerns about voter-fraud, and the need to make sure that all necessary steps be taken – inside and outside the system – to safeguard the integrity of the electoral process. Instead, I am reminding all of us (including myself) to beware the red herring that, every two or four years, seeks to diffuse revolutionary tendencies within a Democratic Party increasingly at odds with the most basic interests of the American public and the other inhabitants of planet earth.
to ramsey,
Every year our local Green Party reads the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights at the Town Square on Fouth of July.
But, just so people don't think we are wishing for a country that never was, we read this poem by Langston Hughes:
Let America Be America Again
by Langston Hughes
Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.
(America never was America to me.)
Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.
(It never was America to me.)
O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.
(There's never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.")
Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?
I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.
I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!
I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.
Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."
The free?
Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.
O, let America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.
Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!
O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!
Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!
© Langston Hughes
Langston Hughes (1902-1967) achieved fame as a poet during the burgeoning of the arts known as the Harlem Renaissance. In addition to his work as a poet, Hughes was an influential novelist, columnist, playwright, lecturer, and essayist.
"mikepeters December 29th, 2007 5:41 pm
Oh boy-let's get the nader lovers going.
By definition these "superbly connected men" are just that: superbly connected to a system that lines their pockets and pre-empts any motivation they might have to organize against the system. Any other analysis is infantile.
Speaking of investments: Mr. Nader Sir, have you divested your portfolio of your Raytheon & General Dynamics & McDonalds holdings yet? (Fidelity).
Is your money still in FMR-Khartoum & Darfour helping with the genocide like it most definitely was?
Or did that bad p.r. finally make the profitability less attractive?
PS: Anyone wants details google ralph nader investments and do thirty minutes of research on this hero-that was all I could take.
So now naderlovers, time for personal attacks! So remember, personalities before principles!"
__________________
If the Mona Lisa's frame had a scratch on it you'd use the painting as kindling.
If only you weighed ALL on your Nader scale and if you were honest (you're not) you'd vote for nobody.....ever
"Fucking Jesus hangin out with a hooker ! What a scumbag"
In a battle of integrity Mr. Peters, you are unarmed
Thank you Ralph, for all you have done, and all that you are doing. This is an interesting article, and points out the fact, that the current power structure lacks a counter paradigm.
Unfortunately, the Democrats are complicit, and the choice must be made whether to reform or abandon the party. Abandonment is the wilderness, and reform will require a gargantuan struggle, against powerful interests. It's not an easy choice.
I've seen in your recent writings that you are still struggling, to reconcile the myth of America, versus the reality of America past and present. It's hard to let go of the dream, and the journey into conciousness, is akin to overcoming an addiction. Painful, sobering, yet ultimately achieving an inner tranquility.
"The next step" is actually called "Sticking your neck out". And you are asking people, with a lot to lose, to risk losing it all. They have seen countless examples of other Americans who, did take the risk, and who had their necks chopped.
Their is no counter balance, no ideology, no leader, no figure, no movement, to give cover to those who privately agree, to publicly disagree. When you come out on the other side, maybe then you will realize that, the enemy that pretends to be your friend, is much more dangerous, than the enemy you know. The Democratic Party is the people's worst enemy.
Ramsay
i looked and listened to him when he ran for prez.i listen to him now and ,he has always and still seems like a republican, without the arsenal.
never expected and still not expecting nader to save anyone,agreed he gives sound advice,writes nice papers. i totally believe we need to build bottom-up.thinking about all the trail-blazing young men that used to have fire in their bellies. all those young men are old men worried more about 401's and who's knocking boots on wall street.might vote for greenerthanthou,because i like his campain slogan,"a solar panel factory for every community !"when nader ran for prez. i didnt understand his platform or just exactly what he stood for.it seemed to be mired down in thinly disguised more of the same-oldboy economics. my fault,completely.
Yes, why hasn't Ralph Nader done enough to save us? Why hasn't he started organizations to help average Americans? Why hasn't he spent years writing to influence public opinion? Why hasn't he tried to run for office to save us? Oh, yeah. He has.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I have 2 pension plans that went private in the 1990s. One just switched and then informed me. One gave me the choice of cashing out my vested interest. ($9,000. Whoo-hoo. I'll retire in luxury) The thing was, the US government pretty much forced the roll=over into the 401K by charging a penalty for actually taking my money. (As Bush would say, it's my money. I should have the choice of where to put it after they forcibly take it).
So now I have two 401Ks with Vanguard. Coincidentally, the two workplaces, 2,000 miles apart, both chose the same financial institution.
Vanguard lets me "choose" my investments. I can pick the percentage of stocks or bonds they buy. But I have NO idea what they invest in. I have no choice of corporations.
But now I hear that private pension plans have been investing in hedge funds. Could the billions of private pension dollars handed over in the 90s have something to do with the stock market going up and the insane salaries of the financiers?
So, what I want to know is, why can't all of us who are coerced by the tax system to stash away money for our retirement choose to pool our funds and say, invest in a solar panel factory for our local community. That would provide jobs. Our small town gives millions to big corporations to come here and "give us jobs". They are shitty jobs in WalMart and McDonalds, or destructive jobs, like the assembling of depleted uranium bombs in our local national wildlife refuge. (Oh, yeah. It's true)
It would provide jobs, and a decent product. All America makes anymore is weapons. The promise of capitalism I learned as a child (they gave up on this propaganda when it became ridiculously outdated) was that people invested in companies they believed in, and when that company sold its products and made a profit, the shareholders got a share of the profits.
Remember that? Now capitalism is basically a big casino, and we make nothing of value.
We have to build a new society from the bottom and I know that there are billions of dollars out there that could be used productively.
None of us (I assume) has extra cash to invest, but most of us have 401Ks. Individually, they are pathetic, but together we could build a better community and therefore a better world.
"#1) Elect! #2) Demand!"
A list? With only two things on it? I think that's a little too simplistic. Maybe a lot. Vote for Democrats that are good (there are some, and I don't mean perfect), don't vote for ones that are bad (there are some, and I don't mean just less than perfect), but rather than just demand the party reform, join it and reform it yourself. I don't believe we're going to get anywhere just voting and e-mailing our representatives. Or just blogging and marching with placards, for that matter. Especially if we only do one at a time.
let's add Normon Solomon to list #3 of loyal Democratic party whiners.
blah,blah,blah.i remember when nader was mainstream,all over the networks and such.i have waited years to actually see him use those connections,in a way that is really compatible with real change.i was appreciative of his consumer reports and alerts,but that has also seemed to fall by the wayside of commercialism.nader seems to always play it m.o.r. safe.not exactly the mover or the shaker we had hoped he would aspire to.he still cranks out some fairly good articles.but where is the risk ?there isn't any that i can see,maybe i am missing something or it zipped by me,but all i got out of this was,blah,blah,blah.
If you have some money, don't lend it out at interest. Give it to someone from whom you won't get it back. -- Jesus
And there's Wendell Berry, who said: If you find you have more money than you need, it's better to burn it than feed it back into this system.
Adele (7:38 pm) - Of COURSE the Democratic Party is owned by Corporate America. You may be "tired" of hearing it, and you may call it "pissing and moaning." Those things, however, don't affect the objective truth of the matter.
Just for you, here is a short lesson in how society works. There is an upper layer of society that controls everything. This is called the "capitalist class." There are no societal institutions with any real power or influence that they don't make it their business to control. They control the media, and both political parties, and all the big businesses.
We would not have a 2-party system if the capitalist class didn't approve of it. They approve of it because they control both parties. They don't want any possible challenges from a real "people's party," or workers' party. So they've decreed that we make do with just the 2 parties -- both of which are subordinate to them.
Therefore, as unpleasant as it may seem to you, and as "tired" of hearing it as you may be, the fact remains that the DP & the RP are both controlled by Corporate America. It is naive & silly to imagine that with so much at stake, that the ruling class would have overlooked the necessity of controlling the political process. You may be absolutely certain that they have considered this problem with the utmost care -- and that our 2-party system is what they see as an ideal way of imposing their will on the rest of us, while preserving the useful veneer of (pseudo-)democracy.
This is all so disspiriting. We're all over the map here. This reminds me of what Molly said just before she died after the '06 elections. Something to the effect that she was SO happy about the Dimm's election results, but she figured they could even screw that up. This looks a lot like trying to herd cats. We can't seem to get going in one direction.
So here's my deal....The only thing that matters at this point is the Constitution. Ya know, that ol' protect and defend thing? By, of , and for the people stuff? If we can't rally every American around that banner than we are dead in the water. A number of people that Ralph mentioned, particularly Moyers and Nicols, have done just that. So, where is the movement? Where is the outrage about your stolen freedoms? Have you given Dodd or Kucinich or Wexler some love for their stands on the Consitution? How about dollars and support?
Look folks, it's not the responsibility for any of the persons named by Ralph to be our standard barers. It's up to us. Maybe a leader will emerge that can really get us united, but I don't see that person yet. In the meantime, we are going to have to get focused and slog on into the darkness. I am so grateful for the internet that we can at least still get together and try to figure out what to do. It is horribly frustrating for me that we just can't instantly all get together and move in one direction. But that's life.
The thing that concerns me the most is that we are pretty far along the path of self destruction. I don't know how much more time we have to get our act together. I will continue to work for the reinstatement of our Constitution. I also am pretty resigned to the fact that I am probably spitting in the wind.
Thanks for being on this journey with me. I don't feel so all alone.
Remember Eric Berne's book, "Games People Play?" One of the favorite "games" was dubbed "Ain't it Awful!" That would be a good title for this thread.
I'm tired of reading all these piss-and-moan paragraphs insisting that nothing progressives can do will break the backs of the Big Bad Bullies in the GOP, and that the ENTIRE Democratic Party is owned lock, stock and barrel by Corporate America and is therefore hopeless (gee, someone forgot to send John Edwards and Dennis K the memo!). C'mon, what's to be gained by insulting the true progressives in the party?
And say what you will about Ralph, he NEVER gives up his belief in people power. Paco [above] hit the nail on the head when he wrote, "Nothing will happen before it is visualized first." I like what Ralph is visualizing here, even though it's somewhat inchoate as yet.
Nader is a great american who has done much for the country.
The democrats and their supporters are corrupt cowards and fools.
The democrats lackeys whine: "Dont vote for what you want or need, vote for what might be a bit less worse than what you could get."
The solution was a third party which represents the working class, call it a Labour Party or whatever. The Democrats and Republicans are both members of the Corporate Party. Unfortunately, it's too late. Even if they get elected President, if they do not do the bidding of our leaders as President, well, think JFK.
I think guys like Nader and Chomsky are members of the establishment, or at least they are acceptable anti-establishment figures so long as they do not cross the line. Don't get me wrong, I think they are good guys, but for whatever reason, their own beliefs, or other control, they stop short of that line. So we have controlled anti-establishment figures, controlled MSM (so called liberal CNN, conservative Fox, liberal NY Times, conservative Washington Times), controlled 2 party system, etc. The illusion of Democracy. Perhaps call it a Controlled Democracy, like in Iran. Hitler said he was not a Dictator, he just simplified Democracy.
Maybe we are a Simplified Democracy, under control.
Heavyrunner was right above about the 2000 election. It should have been Gore/Nader. Ralph could not get elected on his own, but he could have made a heck of an impact for progressives from the Vice Presidency, just as Cheney has done for his conservatives. Too bad.
Ralph is further CORRECT about possibly reforming the Democrats from within. First, you elect them. Then you make DEMANDS on them and that is when you need and can actually use all those heavyweight voices he is naming in the article. #1) Elect! #2) Demand!
Some say, No, No, No. You must hold them accountable before you vote for them. All fine except for reality.
Ralph or Dennis CANNOT defeat all the corporatists presently aligned with Republicans and Democrats. It does not happen. I "think" Ralph is beginning to "get" this reality and is now going another direction, and that could be a very, very good thing from him. We'll see. He has a LOT to offer, and yet always is capable of a LOT of accidental damage too if he decides to run again and fracture liberals (again.)
To Pacplyer:
"We need an "Honest Abe" more now than ever."
Honest Abe? Really? Watch this recent speech by Judge Andrew Napolitano and I doubt you'll ever refer to President Abraham Lincoln as "Honest Abe" again:
http://reason.tv/video/show/178.html
Plus, for everyone else, this is an AWESOME SPEECH!! on our current state of affairs...better than watching any dumb ol' football game!
I don't have any sort of emotional need to have folks agree with me.
But you seem like a decent sort.
When the rubes and boobs agree with me I start to worry that maybe I am full of shit.
"Ralph,
Timing is everything.
The question is: will you take the next step? The country needs an alternative more now than ever."
pacplyer,
Hah! And what do you suppose would happen should Nader take "the next step?" He already took the next step and the people were found wanting. Now, those who felt let down do nothing but gutter snipe.
"Maybe some of the same reasons one couldn't spark off an exponentially growing tree of Nader supporters just by wishing it?"
Nader2000,
Man, you really need to get out more.
Nader never wished anything. If anything, he exhorted us, the people, to get off our asses and work them off, not merely wish.
I voted for him and worked my ass off because I knew he was right - it was about us. Well, maybe not you.
moonraven,
I know you don't give a rat's ass, but I agree with you this time. Much of what our society is based on is myth. We're like a pyramid standing on its head, shored up by illusions.
It doesn't feel good to be here, but this is where the good fight is.
I think it is needed what Ralph Nader is saying. It is a great start. I believe goals such as the "next step" have to be stated so that we know what we are working toward. Nothing will happen before it is visualized first.
Then the previously mentioned formation of think tanks etc seems like a good notion too because once the goal is set then the details for achieving them have to be worked out.
In this planning phase I think certain questions must be answered. We need to know Who are WE? Why are our ideas better to fix the mess we are in? Why does the other side hate us so much? Why do we hate them?
Issues like safety, equitable wealth creation, peace, civil rights, environmental well being all have counter arguments from the right that actually could be as correct as the ones on the left. The problem is rooted in who we are as individuals and as a culture and I think the right does a better job of at least addressing this question than the left does. The right attempts to go through it's better than thou Christian and Puritan ideology. So I think we have to start there. Whose interests are we progressives representing anyway if we were really honest about it?
The Democrats made a huge mistake in 2000 and it cost them the election. The ticket should have been Gore/Nader.
Oh boy-let's get the nader lovers going.
By definition these "superbly connected men" are just that: superbly connected to a system that lines their pockets and pre-empts any motivation they might have to organize against the system. Any other analysis is infantile.
Speaking of investments: Mr. Nader Sir, have you divested your portfolio of your Raytheon & General Dynamics & McDonalds holdings yet? (Fidelity).
Is your money still in FMR-Khartoum & Darfour helping with the genocide like it most definitely was?
Or did that bad p.r. finally make the profitability less attractive?
PS: Anyone wants details google ralph nader investments and do thirty minutes of research on this hero-that was all I could take.
So now naderlovers, time for personal attacks! So remember, personalities before principles!
Nader2000 (3:37 pm) launches his standard attack on anything outside the 2 parties of Wall St & the military-industrial complex (MIC): "That might not seem like much more than another pipe dream, but it (ie, "working within the Dem Party") has a much better chance of success than the third-party dreams whose chance of success is zero."
What's really a pipe dream with "zero chance of success" is the idea that anything positive can result, so long as the universe of choices is limited to two parties of Wall St & the MIC. Believing such a proposition is not only anti-democratic, it's also utterly unrealistic, for the following reason:
The unfettered rule of big money is what's destroying the country. That force can't be opposed from within the Democratic Party, because the DP is itself a main pillar of the Establishment, & the Establishment's interest is maintaining its own privileges, not limiting them. No Democrat dares to confront Big Oil, the MIC, or the power of Wall St. The Party is a creature of those interests, not a potential opponent of them -- and without confronting those interests, there can be no serious change.
If any Democrat ever tried to stand up to Wall St or the MIC, he or she would be promptly slapped down by the party's dominant elements. And if by some miracle a "progressive takeover" of the party actually occurred, the media would nip it in the bud by claiming that the Dems had been taken over by "wild-eyed Communists" and people who are "anti-business;" and the party's big donors would switch to the Republican side.
The Dem Party supports corporate capitalism just as much as the Republicans. It supports it with 100% of its power, & is organically incapable of opposing it, because its entire institutional character has been shaped to serve capitalism. To look to such an institution as a means to limit the "excesses" of corporatism -- that's the real pipe dream.
The US of I has a death wish. It wants to become more like Pakistan is now. It is approaching terminal wealth inequality, resource depletion, and government failure with breakdown. Maybe this is a predetermined pattern of system growth, the result of ever larger numbers of people losing their synergistic cultural strengths as they combine in an unmanageable mess. The end results may be collapse and breakdown, and the death of millions, till the system becomes more sustainable.
What could minimize social and system breakdown? I believe the large part of it is unavoidable, given the propensity of mankind for self delusion, the necessity for ways of life to continue, so as to carry on as if it were one big party that no one wants to leave. Its a one way explosion, that like the laws of entropy, cannot be defied or reversed. Everything has developed in terms of greater complexity and growth based on the easy exploitation of plenty. Some of us think we managed it all by ourselves, because we are Gods Gift to the Universe, but its just a common delusion. Then suddenly we have run out of the cheap oil, and the agriculture support has been flogged to its limits. We cannot change quickly enough.
We could still adapt to these extremes, by going to extremes of organizational complexity, learning to live collectively with scarce resources, and changing to renewable energy, eventually from necessity, but the only real answer is drastic depopulation. The US of I behaves as if the answer is drastic depopulation everywhere else, aided by its WMD and invasions, so it may continue at least its ravenous growth. The other big powers have similar issues. Its ultimately futile, as all civilizations eventually fail and fall, and the processes have been amply documented by some great thinkers and writers. The best we can hope for is to plant the seeds of recovery for a wiser flowering of human civilization the next time, if there is a next time.
Happy New Year.
Ralph, do us all a favor. First, set up some think tanks and organizations. Second, get a progressive movement that will do plenty of long term thinking and planning. Running for president is cool and all but until we can clamp down on the system that is FUCKING AMERICA TO DEATH, it's always going to be a LOSE-LOSE !
I'll admit Ralph Nader has broad and deep knowledge of issue specifics and goes to the heart of what is important in terms of policy. But here once again he demonstrates his inability to conceptualize a realistic strategy for electoral and mass politics, which you need in order to make policy or even get into a position where you can make policy.
I recall again that in 2000 he told me personally that he believed he really could win the presidency if I would just get 10 people to support him, who would recruit 10 more, who would recruit 10 more.... It just now dawns on me that maybe old Ralph was clueless and deluded enough to imagine that this was a realistic plan for victory.
Here he wonders why "experienced, superbly connected men" of finance and "outspoken, stand-up Americans" of the military/NatSe complex are not self-organizing into strong, united, effective national organizations in opposition to the Bush gang, its wrongheaded ideas and blundering policies, and why "all the progressives-elected, academic, authors and columnists-who are tearing into the Democratic Party for how often they caved in Congress" do not "Either organize into a powerful counter-weight inside the Democratic Party to make progressive demands that cannot be shrugged off, or move to a progressive third party that can either lever its messages to the Democrats or compete with them".
Maybe some of the same reasons one couldn't spark off an exponentially growing tree of Nader supporters just by wishing it?
Maybe because it isn't so easy to get all these "experienced, superbly connected men" and "outspoken, stand-up Americans" and "progressives-elected, academic, authors and columnists" to COME TOGETHER UNDER ONE BANNER AND ONE LEADERSHIP AND AGREE ON A SINGLE AGENDA AND STRATEGY, or even a small number of banners, leaderships, agendas and strategies.
Maybe because we already have lots of little and not so little public-interest orgs - many of them founded by Ralph Nader, or by other "experienced, superbly connected men" - and they have their own struggles to attract support, attract attention, stay afloat and be relevant. It's not exactly a wide-open field.
And when it comes to electoral politics, we already have two political parties that compete for actual power, plus lots of little and littler "third parties," mostly of the Left, that compete for donations and recruits.
So, it seems to me that Ralph Nader is not much better than your average pipe smoker when it comes to talking about big dreams of bringing everyone together into one big movement, or even one for the businessmen, one for the warriors and one for the progressive politicos.
I'm glad to see that at least he's warming to the notion that a progressive front can be formed within the Democratic Party. That might not seem like much more than another pipe dream, but it has a much better chance of success than the third-party dreams whose chance of success is zero.
barely human wrote:
"Interesting. Ralph Nader suggests organizing with the Democratic party before he suggests moving to a third party."
Ralph probably really believes that the system, although broken (some believe irretrievably), can be fized and made to work.
One problem I see with that belief is it is based on the belief that the Founders were really democratic--and not the colonial elite that they obviously were.
In addition, this is more than 200 hundred years later and a lot of water--and broken promises (especially to the Native Americans) have gone under the bridge of the social contract.
"Either organize into a powerful counter-weight inside the Democratic Party to make progressive demands that cannot be shrugged off, or move to a progressive third party that can either lever its messages to the Democrats or compete with them?"
Interesting. Ralph Nader suggests organizing with the Democratic party before he suggests moving to a third party.
I predict this statement will be ignored, dismissed, minimized, or spun to mean the opposite of what it actually means by just about everyone.
Ralph, you are the perfect person to formally establish each of these groups and state their general purposes. Then invite the appropriate persons to join and set their agendas.
Creativity is the currency of the present and future so do not be put off by comments such as Rich M's, his appears to be the mindset of the 20th Century, not the 21st. It is important to be grounded as Rich M appears to be, but too much grounding is as bad as not enough. So do not wait for others to fulfill your organizational ideas, form them yourself and allow others to operate and grow them.
Dear Mr. Nader,
I agree that a little networking among the progressives in business, communication, and of course the retired military officers would go along way to swaying the power back a few notches toward the middle. The big fat cats are all so well connected in every way, and the rest of us are running every which way, except together. There is something about the momentum the gathering of progessives would create that would be a very positive movement into a better future.
I appreciate your ideas, and recognize that they are originating in a mind and heart of hope, wherein light resides. While the naysayers on this website and others just go round and round like dogs chasing their tails.
So, as the cold winds of January blow, have a house party and invite a few friends (and yes, even those you may not know personally!) for a hot toddy and some planning.
Ralph certainly has his finger on several crucial questions, here.
But there's a reason that the influential voices he mentions do not organize and "take the next step." It's because each group would only be a small dissident minority in each relevant arena. Moreover, each fight has an unspoken subtext to it, & this subtext means that the defenders of the status quo will fight to the death to get their way.
For instance, consider #2, the Iraq issue. Yes, many prominent ex-officials see clearly that it's a historic disaster. HOWEVER, military projects like Iraq are not really driven by moral considerations in the least. There are a lot of people making a ton of money on Iraq. Furthermore, an admission of failure & defeat in Iraq would cause irreversible damage to what is euphemistically termed US "credibility." It would destroy the perceived legitimacy of much of the entire US political & media Establishment, as well as the ability of US elites to undertake similar lucrative projects of aggression in the future.
So, the forces that would rise to crush a group of dissident ex-generals and ex-national security officials, is far greater than the few dozen that have the integrity to tell the truth about the disaster. That's why those dissidents don't "take the next step."
For mcpete,
Watch the video '9/11 Mysteries Part 1: Demolitions', available at Amazon.com. The official explanation still does not wash!
So, So right. So many voices flailing around, expressing disbelief, disappointment, disapproval and going nowhere. Bush/Cheney continue unimpeded, republicans continue blind support and the democrats continue wringing their hands and crying foul and nothing changes. Unless powerful and influential leaders in this country take the lead nothing will change. Religious leaders are part of the problem, don't look to them. Industry is part of the problem, don't look to them. Bankers etc. Ralph Nader is so right, the question is, will the people who can make a difference do it.
GREAT points, Ralph! A strong Organization of "heavyweights" with actual voices--that we don't seem to have--merging into a giant mass to push for a Progressive agenda would CERTAINLY have a decent chance at being heard.
I remember Zig Ziglar calling this "Cooked in the squat". In another words, squatted down to make a great leap and then...
got stuck there--NOT making the final next step into success.
This is what is needed and SOON. But...?
One thing I have observed where I live, and I would really like some feedback from others. Around here virtually any volunteer can have a strong voice in local Dem politics. Because not that many people show up for the work. The religious right and straight up Limbaugh fascists took over the republican Party this way and have made a mess that will stick in the minds of voters for many years. It wouldn't be that hard to take over the democratic party with a reform movement if we stay with some unifying themes like Ralph is mentioning. Kinda boring but better than holding out for the next Seinfeld while the world burns.
I'm not even sure I will vote -- I know it sounds very bad but I'm really not sure it makes a difference anymore. If the candidates actually sound genuine -- genuine, not "persuasive" or "well-prepared" or any other such drivel I just may vote. Otherwise I will mind my own and my closest circle's best interests, which seems difficult enough these days.
Edwards is a lawyer and very egotistical but that is part of the job for a lawyer. He seems focused on the major mainstream problem and that is the economic divide. Spiritual and esoteric matters may be more important ultimately, but economics and power takeover by the rich will be the main issue for some time to come.
Watch for the big depression, consolidate and protect what you have. It will get very ugly.
Taking the next step means getting organized to focus on progressive issues. And what might those issues be?
Ending the war in Iraq? RichM makes the point that the "progressive" ex-military leaders do not exist in sufficient numbers to resist the vested interest of powerful corporate oligarchs profiting from the war and I would add that these so-called leaders were never leaders at all, but merely obedient links in the chain of command. Though retired, they are subject to censure in any numbers of ways because they continue to live off the public dole ( generous retirement packages ). The military, active duty and retired, is a closed system, very different from the military of Smedley Butler's day. The cost of membership in the elite ranks of today's military is your soul. Don't look to these former architects of empire for any assistance in reigning in the imperial juggernaut. Their first loyalty is to the military itself, not the Constitution.
As for the media and congressional voices of dissent, one has only to look at John Conyers to recognize another lost soul whose loyalty is misplaced. He looks out for #1 and his first loyalty is to his institution, as well, not to the Constitution. The Supreme Law of the land is merely a facade. Conyers cares little for his oath of office. That should be obvious since the case for impeachment is unimpeachable, yet he closes ranks with Pelosi and spins his disloyalty to the Constitution in the name of political expediency.
You want these hot shots to take the next step, Ralph, but who, besides Bill Moyers, cares for principle? You do not achieve prominence in today's controlled media without the unspoken agreement that you will ultimately toe the line. Dissent is for show. To take the next step is to put one's career at risk. In the corporate oligarchy called the US of A, your freedom of conscience is limited according to the elevation of your position. The more elevated you are, the less freedom you have to act on principle.
You are a man of principle, Ralph, but you will not evoke a principled response from those who betray their oaths to the principles enshrined in the Constitution by praising them and gently chiding them to take the next step. Ralph, you simply don't understand the meaning of cowardice.
Our Constitution is at risk and it has been sold out by everyone of the people you praise for their leadership (with a few exceptions). The two-party system is irremediably corrupted. The media, with the internet as the only free space left in the collective mind, is controlled.
We must return to the principles espoused in the Constitution. Without that framework, there is no basis for progressive politics. That is why I am voting principle in 08. I am voting Ron Paul because he is a man of principle and because he understands the terror of the situation, the imminent loss of our Constitutional republic. I do not care whether he is pro or anti abortion. He is the only candidate who has the courage to run on the Constitution itself. He will attack the #1 problem of this country, the influence of the military industrial oligarchy. He will help return us to the primacy of the Supreme Law of the land.
I have always been a "democratic socialist", but I have come to realize that without the framework of our Constitution, no politics of a progressive nature is possible.
Ralph,
Timing is everything.
The question is: will you take the next step? The country needs an alternative more now than ever.
It's time to run again Ralph! Contact Michael Moore and other hollywood players who are sick of the decay of their country, organize them to do more short films and ads on the bungling of the Neocons and help us turn the country against them. Get yourself a professional image consultant and get rid of that rumpled old suit you always wear. Slick your hair back like regan did, and give in to some catchy bite-lines that Nascar brains can comprehend like: "The Oil barons are really sticking it to you" and point to a chart of gas prices. Wear a top hat like Lincoln did, so everyone will say your name often. Remember, if you can't be rich, be colorful.
The world is in the greatest environmental crisis it has ever faced. We need an "Honest Abe" more now than ever. But you have to develop a little quick charm school charisma for the hopeless boob-tube generation to notice you.
I am available as a free writer for the cause if you are interested.
pacplyer