Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:29:33 +0100
From: Iain McKay <iain.mckay-AT-zetnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Nader must pull out of the election!!


hello all

Chuck0 wrote:
> 
> The main problem I have with most Greens and pro-Naderites in terms of
> Ralph's campaign is that they take it too seriously. There is tremendous
> value in what he is doing if you think about it in terms of "politics as
> theater." Ralph campaign can be valuable in that he raises issues that
> the Republicrats want everybody to ignore. His exclusion from the
> debates is radicalizing because it helps people see that even Third
> Party candidates are excluded from this so-called democracy.

Perhaps the opposite is the case -- it is *de*-radicalising as it gives
a reformist conclusion. All we need to do is get third party candidates
into the debates and Americans will have a *real* choice at last.

Similarly, he raises important issues but the logic of his presentation
is "Vote Nader and he will do it for us"

Ultimately, Nader does, as the ISO argue, give us a choice this
election.
This means that the US political system *does* work, we just need to
reform it a bit... hardly revolutionary conclusions but its the logic
of the ISO arguments.
 
> I also have problems with Green who are serious about getting Federal
> matching funds. Getting your hands on that money is just going to
> attract every Left nutcase in the United States to your party. We've
> already seen on "revolutionary" socialist group, the ISO, squander all
> of their time and resources on Nader's campaign, in direct contradiction
> of their "basic principles."

Its somewhat ironic -- vote capitalist without illusions? 

or how about: Vote capitalist, but building a fighting 
		state capitalist alternative!
			
They compare Nader to Henry George in the 1890s -- 100 years
and the US labour movement is back were it started *and*
nothing has been learned in between, quite amazing. 

> In my opinion, if you want to be part of the Green Party and still be an
> effective activist for social change, you have to look at the party as a
> form of social hacking that will help bring up issues that aren't
> addressed by the corporate party. Getting Greens is a dead-end goal. We
> only have to look at what happened to the German greens, or the social
> ecologists who ran for office in Montreal.

very true -- all these arguments for electioneering totally ignore
history.
 
> Electoralism is a release valve for capitalism. If we want to get rid of
> capitalism, we have to play by our rules, on our terms, on our
> ballcourt.

yes -- thats exactly the argument we should use.
 
> I sincerely hope that all the pro-Nader people get back to
> trouble-making after the election. Unfortunately, more than a few will
> waste lots of time in coming years in attempts to "build" the Green
> Party into some credible alternative.

the more votes he gets the more likely the movement will become
increasingly electoral -- If Nader gets 10% of the vote then we
need to boost it to 15% and get into the debates....
 
> I think we need more window-smashing, crop-pulling, pirate radio
> broadcasting, and less ballot stuffing.

direct action is the key -- after all, its Seattle we have to thank
for Nader, without that his campaign wouldn't be as strong.

election time, the mad house begins again.

Iain