Let's Talk Aboot Nader

[hobo8675309]

Ralph Nader is one of my personal role models. Whether he is demanding the rights of the people from greedy CEOs or running against a corrupt bipartisan kleptocracy, Nader will always defend the people of the working world against the people of the buisiness world. In fact, my comrades would even tell you that I worship him as a diety. We have and inside joke that Ralph Nader is my Lord and Savior and he died for our sins.

Nader, in my opinion, is obviously not a capitalist. In 2004, he even went as far as running with former socialist presidential politician Peter Camejo. He has openly denounced and entire Communist system of government, but based on his far leftist approach to the issues, he can be identified as a Social Democrat like myself.

Bottom line: does the revleft community appreciate Nader as much as I do?

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

No, we're leftists.

[Burn A Flag]

Ralph Nader and the Green Party are basically just liberals on steroids.

[Widerstand]

Ralph Nader?

I love Ralph Nader!

[Kassad]

Ralph Nader is rabidly anti-immigrant and he supports the "securing of our borders," which means nothing short of either putting up a wall or militarizing it. Either way, he demonizes immigrants and is a rabid racist. If he's your kind of idol, I don't like to think what kind of reflection that is on you. At the end of the day, Nader will always serve capitalism and he will always uphold it as a legitimate system.

He was one of the main organizers behind protests of the Wall Street bailout. Yet, at his protest, there was a giant banner saying "socialism saves capitalism." Does he really think a multi-trillion dollar bailout is socialism? It's socialism for the rich.

So basically, if you want to pretend to care about workers and not really do it in practice, support Ralph Nader.

[Rakhmetov]

Ralph Nader is a pinko not a red. He is not a radical but some of his proposals like more co-ops, universal single payer health care, no corporate welfare can be supported by radicals. The liberals hate him as much as the conservatives hate him.

:blink:

[RadioRaheem84]

He is just a Euro style Soc Dem.

[Sosa]

There are some things that leftists can support that he expouses, but he is not radical nor leftist.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Ralph Nader is rabidly anti-immigrant and he supports the "securing of our borders," which means nothing short of either putting up a wall or militarizing it.

“Immigration is a challenging issue that must be addressed in a more cohesive way. We need to address economic justice in the US and the world and recognize the basic human rights of all people,” Nader says. “The long term solution to immigration is reducing the rich poor divide between the United States and other nations by peacefully supporting democratic movements.”

"We need work permits for people who come in this country and do work, as in farm areas, instead of criminalizing the process. Second, a foreign policy that sides with workers and peasants for a change in democracy, instead of dictatorships and oligarchies, will reduce enormously the pressure of people under economic pressure and political repression from coming across the border. Most people don’t want to leave their native land. But there’s another immigration issue, which is the brain drain. Silicon Valley, trying to get more computer specialists, and others trying to get physicians from other countries in the Third World that desperately need them."


Either way, he demonizes immigrants and is a rabid racist. If he's your kind of idol, I don't like to think what kind of reflection that is on you.

From the Green Party Platform (that Nader ran on....): "We oppose those who seek to divide us for political gain by raising ethnic and racial hatreds, blaming immigrants for social and economic problems."

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Ralph_Nader_Immigration.htm

So yeh, I call bullshit.

[RadioRaheem84]

I was wondering where Kassad got the anti-immigration stuff from?:confused:

[shaderabbit85]

The PSL box of nonsense? The same one in which they keep finding "redeeming" features of "socialist" (throws up) china?

I love how anyone who doesn't support "free" immigration is a racist...

[Kassad]

“Immigration is a challenging issue that must be addressed in a more cohesive way. We need to address economic justice in the US and the world and recognize the basic human rights of all people,” Nader says. “The long term solution to immigration is reducing the rich poor divide between the United States and other nations by peacefully supporting democratic movements.”

"We need work permits for people who come in this country and do work, as in farm areas, instead of criminalizing the process. Second, a foreign policy that sides with workers and peasants for a change in democracy, instead of dictatorships and oligarchies, will reduce enormously the pressure of people under economic pressure and political repression from coming across the border. Most people don’t want to leave their native land. But there’s another immigration issue, which is the brain drain. Silicon Valley, trying to get more computer specialists, and others trying to get physicians from other countries in the Third World that desperately need them."

From the Green Party Platform (that Nader ran on....): "We oppose those who seek to divide us for political gain by raising ethnic and racial hatreds, blaming immigrants for social and economic problems."

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Ralph_Nader_Immigration.htm

So yeh, I call bullshit.


From www.VoteNader.org:

"Regarding deportation, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the INS may not deport someone without a hearing that satisfies due process. According to the ACLU, most people facing deportation are entitled to:

- a hearing before an immigration judge, and review, in most cases, by a federal court;
- representation by a lawyer (but not at government expense);
- reasonable notice of charges, and of a hearing's time and place;
- a reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence and the government's witnesses;
- competent interpretation for non-English speaking immigrants, and
- clear and convincing proof that the government's grounds for deportation are valid.

We have to control our immigration and our borders. We have to limit the number of people who come into this country illegally and see if a Canadian-type temporary permit system can work for seasonal jobs."

So not only is he justifying deportations, but he is supporting a temporary permit system, which is just ridiculous. He is not calling for amnesty and he is demonizing workers as detrimental to the economy of the United States. He is also saying people who cross the border are "illegal." So I call bullshit. Nice research, bud.

[Widerstand]

"We have to control our immigration and our borders. We have to limit the number of people who come into this country illegally and see if a Canadian-type temporary permit system can work for seasonal jobs."

Typical "useful/unuseful immigrants" bullshit along with all it's shitty facets such as illegalizing people.

[Kassad]

Also, no one even acknowledged Nader's claim that the corporate bailout was socialism. I don't understand this rabid defense of a capitalist who doesn't call for amnesty, defends deportations and calls immigrants illegal. He also is rabidly anti-communist, so I don't get why everyone is so stunned to hear this stuff. Apparently it's my rabid Stalinist tendencies, since I'm a PSL member. :rolleyes:

[graymouser]

In 1984, Nader fired employees of one of his magazines for attempting to form a union. (Link. (http://lists.village.virginia.edu/lists_archive/sixties-l/1288.html)) So he's a union buster, and I don't see how anyone trying to win leadership of the labor movement can seriously advocate a protest vote for him.

Solidarity, the International Socialist Organization and Socialist Alternative (CWI) all supported Nader in 2000, 2004 and 2008, although Solidarity in '04 and '08 did support him among other candidates. Most of the rest of the organized US left has stayed away from his candidacies. Nader has never run on a socialist or pro-worker's party platform, and has never had a significant labor following. His Green Party candidacy in 2000 was the closest to a mass third-party run since the '40s, so there was sort of an excuse then, but the GP has gone sharply downhill since and Nader has continued with running outside of any organizational framework.

I do agree that he is totally not worth supporting. Although I have to say I'm surprised Kassad is so harsh toward the guy, as the last time I heard from Nader he was on the stage at the ANSWER rally in DC this year.

[shaderabbit85]

Graymouser, have you come across any other information on the incident described in your link? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I didn't see any mention in the link you posted of the guy filing a complaint with the NLRB, which makes me a little dubious of the claim. I find it very hard to believe, but if there was some more documentation of union busting by Nader, it would totally turn me (and probably others here) against him. I'm going to do some research, but if you have any information other than that link (the link that guy had in his post is dead), please share it. Thanks.

[graymouser]

Graymouser, have you come across any other information on the incident described in your link? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I didn't see any mention in the link you posted of the guy filing a complaint with the NLRB, which makes me a little dubious of the claim. I find it very hard to believe, but if there was some more documentation of union busting by Nader, it would totally turn me (and probably others here) against him. I'm going to do some research, but if you have any information other than that link (the link that guy had in his post is dead), please share it. Thanks.
It took a bit of wrangling to find, in the sense that I had to use Google Cache to actually find the text and can't give a direct link, but this is an article from the June 28, 1984 Washington Post.


Editors Claim Firing by Nader Based on Unionization Attempt
By Peter Perl

Three editors fired by consumer advocate Ralph Nader's organization have filed charges of unfair labor practice against him, claiming he fired them primarily for trying to form a union.

In a bitter dispute at the Nader publication Multinational Monitor, Nader's group has changed the locks on the office door and attempted unsuccessfully to have the chief editor arrested, alleging he took away files on a crucial story.

Nader, in an interview, said the charges filed against him last month with the National Labor Relations Board are a 'ploy,' and that the reason for the firings was that the editors disobeyed his strict orders by publishing a highly controversial story about alleged bribery by Bechtel Corp. before Nader had a chance to read the final version.

The Bechtel story, which drew nationwide publicity in April, revealed that federal authorities were investigating whether the giant California-based multinational firm paid bribes to win approval of nuclear power plants in Korea during the time when Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger and Secretary of State George P. Shultz were top officials of Bechtel.

The firings have sparked numerous petitions and letters of protest to Nader from the Monitor's small but loyal liberal readership and have prompted threats of legal action on both sides.
So they did file a ULP, although I've found no follow-up to it as yet. Socialist groups endorsing Nader have tended to ignore the issue as if it didn't exist, which I think is opportunist in the extreme. Nader's view is definitely not that of a leftist.

[RadioRaheem84]

Kassad and Co. really nailed him for what he is; a standard hypocritical liberal.

[Nolan]

No, we don't support centrist social democrats.

[hobo8675309]

So is Nader. He beleives that the true Leftists are a gigantic minority, as the conservative special interest groups have pushed them way to the right.

[hobo8675309]

Finally!

[Apoi_Viitor]

He is not calling for amnesty and he is demonizing workers as detrimental to the economy of the United States.

He is also saying people who cross the border are "illegal."

So I call bullshit. Nice research, bud.

I wasn't trying to allege Nader was a revolutionary socialist, I was just arguing he isn't a racist... Sure, he is disagreeable politically, but I have yet to see an instance where he "demonizes immigrants" or makes "racist" statements.


I love how anyone who doesn't support "free" immigration is a racist...

This. Nader isn't a leftist, but he's also not a racist...

[L.A.P.]

Next time I vote, I'm voting for him. He's by no means a revolutionary leftist but at least he's the closest thing to a left-wing candidate we have and would make more progress than the rest.

[RadioRaheem84]

Heck, at this point if Nader is a viable candidate that can actually break the two party system I would vote for him.

He needs an Obama PR machine to get people to vote for him.

What's funny is that people on both the left and the right here in the States like Nader. Except for the idiot liberal democratic mainstream, he has a very favorable opinion among the people. This is probably mostly due to the fact that he simply convey's a kindly old White man look (I know he is of Lebanese descent, but most Lebanese Christians have been Anglicinized like Italians).

[ZeroNowhere]

Heck, at this point if Nader is a viable candidate that can actually break the two party system I would vote for him.
That would appear a flagrant disregard of proletarian independence. Don't get behind those bad bourgeois factions, get behind this good one instead. Perhaps you should consider going to the UK, where good ol' Clegg's already broken the two-party stranglehold, and, as we know, brought unquantifiable gain to all.

[anticap]

Nader has never run on a socialist or pro-worker's party platform....

Well, there was this, FWIW:

8mzQwKeu8Lo

I don't know whether the platform was explicitly socialist/pro-worker, but both Gloria La Riva and Brian Moore evidently approved of it.

(I'm not a Nader supporter -- though I have defended him against the empirically false claim that he cost Gore the 2000 election -- I'm just tossing this into the thread for the sake of completeness.)

[Kassad]

Well, there was this, FWIW:

8mzQwKeu8Lo

I don't know whether the platform was explicitly socialist/pro-worker, but both Gloria La Riva and Brian Moore evidently approved of it.

Gloria was running for the nomination of the Peace and Freedom Party and she was the only socialist actually vying for the nomination. She commented on Ralph Nader's nomination at a campaign speech before the election, basically acknowledging that he was a progressive, but he did not really comprehend what socialism was. That's a good summary of it, in my eyes.

Also, Brian Moore is a social-democratic scumbag, in case you haven't heard about the recent developments in Socialist Party USA.

[Crux]

Gloria was running for the nomination of the Peace and Freedom Party and she was the only socialist actually vying for the nomination. She commented on Ralph Nader's nomination at a campaign speech before the election, basically acknowledging that he was a progressive, but he did not really comprehend what socialism was. That's a good summary of it, in my eyes.
But I thought he was a racist union basher?

[Kassad]

But I thought he was a racist union basher?

He is. What does that have to do with my post?

[Crux]

He is. What does that have to do with my post?
So you believe that is consistent with describing someone as progressive?
I disagree with his position, but I would hardly describe it as racist, just limited and inadequate.

As for my opinion on Nader in general, it seems that, since the 00 presidential election he has done very little to actually advance a break with the the democrats and republicans, beyond running in elections, and this is his main weakness.

As for the alledged case of unionbashing from 84, I am not sure how usefull it is as an example to describe his policies. Nobody's claimed he is more than a left-of-center progressive, but you have to see it in context.

I am also quite tempted to say, rather him than Brian Moore.

[RadioRaheem84]

I do not think that Kassad is actually accusing Nader of being an openly hateful bigot but a peddler of inconsistent, mostly cultural and slightly nationalist type of racism. An erroneous blend of misguided presumptions about immigration that usually leads to rather racist thinking, i.e. Jobs are only for Americans, etc.

[Crux]

This is what he said just a page ago:
[Ralph Nader] demonizes immigrants and is a rabid racist.

[Tzonteyotl]

Calling him a "rabid racist" I think is extreme. "Inadequate," as Majakovskij stated, is much more the case in my opinion. There's quite a difference I believe between a neo-Nazi in Arizona who hates anyone who's not white and Ralph Nader talking about border security through "reducing the rich-poor divide between the US and other countries." Granted, I disagree with deportations, with the border wall and the militarization of the border (both sides now, with Mexican troops in Juarez), as I'm sure most people here do as well. But with Nader I think this just has to do with American nationalism, not outright racism. It'd be a rare "rabid racist" to talk about human rights and democracy. He's misguided and I don't support him, sure. But racist? Is there a nation on Earth that doesn't somehow regulate immigration into and out of its borders? Are all of them "rabid racists" as well?

[Widerstand]

Is there a nation on Earth that doesn't somehow regulate immigration into and out of its borders?

Does it matter? By the same logic you could argue against communism because there "is no nation on earth that doesn't somehow betray communist principles."

Just because there isn't doesn't mean there shouldn't, and frankly, it's perfectly possible. That immigration leads to poverty and unemployment is a myth. Illegalized immigrants are already huge part of the workforce, yet with horrible pay, horrible living conditions and no social securities at all.



Are all of them "rabid racists" as well?

They are not racist because they are anti-immigrant, they are racist when they deny immigration based on race, which is usually the case when people talk about "useful" or "unuseful" immigrants (both of which are just scapegoat terms linked to racial stereotypes, such as "Roma are lazy thieves" versus "Asians are eager workers").

Freedom of movement is everybody's right!

[Tzonteyotl]

Does it matter? By the same logic you could argue against communism because there "is no nation on earth that doesn't somehow betray communist principles."

Just because there isn't doesn't mean there shouldn't, and frankly, it's perfectly possible. That immigration leads to poverty and unemployment is a myth. Illegalized immigrants are already huge part of the workforce, yet with horrible pay, horrible living conditions and no social securities at all.

Where did I say that shouldn't be the case or that it isn't possible? And how you assume I don't already know that immigrants are a significant part of the workforce and that they don't cause mass poverty and unemployment, I don't understand.


They are not racist because they are anti-immigrant, they are racist when they deny immigration based on race, which is usually the case when people talk about "useful" or "unuseful" immigrants (both of which are just scapegoat terms linked to racial stereotypes, such as "Roma are lazy thieves" versus "Asians are eager workers").

Freedom of movement is everybody's right!

Granted. But how does this translate into Nader being a "rabid racist?" Demonstrate that he is. That's what I was addressing. He's nationalist, sure. Racist, let alone rabidly so. You've got to be kidding.

[Myrdal]

Love Nader, agree on many things with him.

Also the word racist get's thrown a lot here for the silliest reasons.
Really there is an enormous stigma on racism, but bullying with accusations of racism is hardly frowned upon.

[Drosophila]

I would vote for Nader if I had to, he's far more appealing than the other people on the ballot would be.

The problem with Ralph is that he tries to attack issues from the top-down. Back in the 60s, he was great at reforming the system through simple means. I think he's lost his touch.

[Revy]

Ralph Nader is one of my personal role models. Whether he is demanding the rights of the people from greedy CEOs or running against a corrupt bipartisan kleptocracy, Nader will always defend the people of the working world against the people of the buisiness world. In fact, my comrades would even tell you that I worship him as a diety. We have and inside joke that Ralph Nader is my Lord and Savior and he died for our sins.

Nader, in my opinion, is obviously not a capitalist. In 2004, he even went as far as running with former socialist presidential politician Peter Camejo. He has openly denounced and entire Communist system of government, but based on his far leftist approach to the issues, he can be identified as a Social Democrat like myself.

Bottom line: does the revleft community appreciate Nader as much as I do?

Ralph Nader does absolutely nothing anymore aside from running for President every 4 years. His movement will die out with his death. It's like a cult. There is no party associated with him, nor does he want one, because the party could turn against him.

He is not a socialist, obviously...

[Mather]

In fact, my comrades would even tell you that I worship him as a diety.

And thats the point when I stopped reading.

[Amphictyonis]

Heck, at this point if Nader is a viable candidate that can actually break the two party system I would vote for him.

He needs an Obama PR machine to get people to vote for him.

What's funny is that people on both the left and the right here in the States like Nader. Except for the idiot liberal democratic mainstream, he has a very favorable opinion among the people. This is probably mostly due to the fact that he simply convey's a kindly old White man look (I know he is of Lebanese descent, but most Lebanese Christians have been Anglicinized like Italians).

The Obama PR machine was Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, CitiGroup/CitiBank other Wall St banks and investment firms combined with Wall St Law firms. Obama also put on the fake presidential persona well. If Nader won the vote (not that it matters who's president/spokesman of USA corporation) it would be because he took money from the very people he criticizes. It wouldn't matter what Nader did anyhow even if by some miracle he won the presidency without compromising his 'progressive' stance. it would be a symbolic victory for progressives as nothing would change. We don't have a democracy in America. We're not going to change anything by voting. Obama should have proven that by now to any and all people who were operating under the illusion we had a democracy in America.

In our current political system whatever politician has the most money behind him/her wins. Capitalists have the most money so capitalism will always be represented in Washington. Capitalism is all about maximizing profits so....do the math. If we socialists can't even think outside the box how are we going to get the rest of the nation/world to do so? :)

There will never be some happy nice capitalism. Capitalism without concentrated wealth running the show is impossible. They'll never let themselves be voted out of power.

[Drosophila]

The Obama PR machine was Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, CitiGroup/CitiBank other Wall St banks and investment firms combined with Wall St Law firms. Obama also put on the fake presidential persona well. If Nader won the vote (not that it matters who's president/spokesman of USA corporation) it would be because he took money from the very people he criticizes. It wouldn't matter what Nader did anyhow even if by some miracle he won the presidency without compromising his 'progressive' stance. it would be a symbolic victory for progressives as nothing would change. We don't have a democracy in America. We're not going to change anything by voting. Obama should have proven that by now to any and all people who were operating under the illusion we had a democracy in America.

In our current political system whatever politician has the most money behind him/her wins. Capitalists have the most money so capitalism will always be represented in Washington. Capitalism is all about maximizing profits so....do the math. If we socialists can't even think outside the box how are we going to get the rest of the nation/world to do so? :)

There will never be some happy nice capitalism. Capitalism without concentrated wealth running the show is impossible. They'll never let themselves be voted out of power.

That's why we elect multiple people at the same time. That allows us to elect a progressive president, progressive House reps, senators, and governors.

[Amphictyonis]

That's why we elect multiple people at the same time. That allows us to elect a progressive president, progressive House reps, senators, and governors.

No.

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

That's why we elect multiple people at the same time. That allows us to elect a progressive president, progressive House reps, senators, and governors.

You are obviously unfamiliar with what the "Rev" in "RevLeft" stands for. All of the unrestricted people on here come down on the side of revolution in the question of reform or revolution. Which side are you on?

[#FF0000]

That's why we elect multiple people at the same time. That allows us to elect a progressive president, progressive House reps, senators, and governors.

Sure, sure, but you can't vote in a new socio-economic structure.

EDIT: You also can't vote a class out of power.

[kafkaesque]

Ah yes, Nader. What the fuck does that guy do besides run for president every 4 years now-a-days? anyone know?

[CAleftist]

He's a liberal "reformer" with some populist leanings.

Other than that, move on, nothing to see here...

[Mather]

He's a liberal "reformer" with some populist leanings.

Other than that, move on, nothing to see here...

Spot on.

[Omsk]

I couldn't be less interested in this man.I actually never heard anything about him.

[Ms. Max]

He's trying to do good things to reform the capitalist system, to save capitalism from itself. But what really needs to happen is to get rid of capitalism, and move on to the next stage of human development, which is communism.