|
|
|
June 2, 2002
REVIEWS: Honest man among politicians
When Green parties emerged in Europe several decades ago, they were not taken seriously as a political force. They were viewed as an impractical, radical fringe or, at best environmentalist pressure groups of mostly young idealists who had little chance of making an impact on the political scene where the establishment parties reigned supreme. But there they are now, members of ruling coalitions in Germany and Belgium and serious contenders for power as holders of the balance of power in Europe.
The European Greens had a message that resonated with the people of a continent keenly aware of the ravages of acid rain and toxic waste. Despite the fact that the United States is recognized as the principal polluter in the world with responsibility for a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions, the ecological lobbies of the US seem to be younger and relatively weaker. The American Green Party is just about twenty years old in California, the first state in which it was organized. In other parts of America chapters were formed some ten years ago.
But the American Greens have an asset that the European parties lacked. They are led by an eminent personality with a scintillating record of championing causes and people’s rights, Ralph Nader. He led the campaign for automobile safety and stood firm against the powerful industry led by General Motors (“What is good for General Motors is good for America!”) which went to the extent of subjecting him to surveillance and harassment by private detectives but was unable to uncover anything unsavoury in his life. Would that a Pakistani public figure of whatever rank had such personal integrity!
When the Greens first entered American politics in the 1996 election, they had no proper national organization — each State chapter put up a candidate for Nader’s running mate. The emphasis then was on getting enough signatures to be able to contest at all. The two establishment parties could afford to ignore them. Four years later Democrats sent urgent messages to Nader not to run because he would take votes away from Gore, particularly in California and some other states, and lead to a Bush victory. Their argument was that given the close race between the mainstream candidates, the liberal vote should not be split.
According to Greens, there was little to choose between Bush and Gore. The Democrats were welcome to steal the Greens programme if they wanted their support. With little ammunition to defend their record on civic causes against the charge that Clinton-Gore had surrendered to corporate interests and reneged on their promises, the Democrats could only argue that “Gore was the lesser evil”. A Nader supporter pithily retorted, “the lesser evil is still an evil”. When persuasion failed — Nader replied that it “was Gore’s election to lose” — he was viciously attacked, not only by the Democratic establishment but also by friends and former associates in public causes.
So visceral did Democratic anger become that the party spent as much energy on criticizing Nader than it did combating Bush. Even today Democrats insist that Nader contributed to Gore’s loss; which is a transparent attempt to refuse to face the problems of establishment politics identified by Nader and the Greens. Crashing the party is about Nader’s election campaign but more interestingly, for Pakistanis, it is about the ills that plague American democracy, ills that owe their origins to the stranglehold on politics by the two main parties and their alliance with big business. Nader points out that “a working, deliberative democracy has few champions in the Republican or Democratic parties [who] see their self-perpetuation in the narrowest of dimensions — largely by allowing business interests too great a say in local, state and national agendas”.
The parties fatten on corporate funding, and corporations are well aware of the need to pay up. Thus, “Congressman Delay became a veritable talent agent offering lobbyists packages starting at $15000 to 100000 in terms of how exclusive one’s meeting could be with elected bigwigs”. Reading the book it becomes clear why, in all American and western propaganda, democracy and capitalism are always conjoined as if one cannot exist without the other.
We are also told that democracy is all about choice but, Nader points out, “In 90 per cent of Congressional districts, there is one party rule.” The freedom of press and access to information is another virtue touted for American democracy. Nader recounts how this “free press”, owned and run by huge baronetcies with corporate interests, refused to cover Nader’s campaign even when he was drawing huge crowds. Journalists were usually not sent to cover his rallies or press conferences and some of those who were, seemed interested in more personal matters.
Then there is the “spit and polish” reflex that we are so familiar with in our country and that amounts to robbing the poor and the weak so that the sensitivities of the rich and powerful are not hurt. Thus, “Camden NJ spent $50 million to smarten up the waterfront for welcoming ceremonies of the [Republican] convention but the homeless shelter did not get the $300,000 it had requested for its needs.” Camden, by the way, is one of the poorest cities in New Jersey.
Nader was refused the opportunity to debate his opponents by the Commission on Presidential Debates which determines the format and rules of the televized “confrontations” between the candidates. Controlled by the two main parties, its decisions reflect the views of their representatives who are interested in magnifying the strengths and hiding the weaknesses of their respective candidates. Originally founded by the League of Women Voters it was taken over by the two parties after the League proved to have a mind of its own. The rules are weighted against participation of third party candidates.
On a personal note: having watched the Presidential debates in 2000 and having heard Nader more recently, I am certain that had Nader been allowed to debate, he would have exposed the two principal candidates as bumbling nonentities.
Crashing the party allows the reader a glimpse into a species that one had come to believe was going extinct — an honest person. Politics, of course, is an arena that decent people have always known should be avoided like the plague. But that is exactly why Nader chose to run. “We must”, he tells us, “be good ancestors.” That, of course, means working to ensure a future for the coming generations. How many in Pakistan, the land of descendants, have ever thought of that?
Crashing the party: how to tell the truth and still run for president
By Ralph Nader
Thomas Dunne Books
ISBN 0-312-28433-0
318pp. $24.95
|
|
|
|
