Nader on Nader

Do you think the Green Party is much stronger since the election?

Yes--but not as strong as I’d hoped. They won 25 percent of their seats last November, out of 280 candidates. But it needs more candidates. More local candidates. There are 2.5 million elective offices in the U.S., and that’s not just City Councilmen and State Legislature. If you want to really start a local party you’ve got to have lots of local candidates. You can’t beat somebody with nobody.

I always thought the Green Party had a branding problem.

You’re right. It does.

Maybe it just the name--Green--it doesn’t seem to resonant well with Americans, like it’s associated with tree-hugging, or something.

I think it’s because people like Rush Limbaugh, who stereotype it again and again. And the pictures at the conventions…they normal pick out the guy with the ponytail and the nose ring. [laughs] So, I think you’re right. And that’s not a trivial issue for the Greens.

Should it be?

In the best of all worlds, yes. Branding is a problem.

Have you ever flirted with a new name for the party?

I had a few great names, let me think . . . Oh, yeah! The American Party.

Well, it’s simple, I guess, to the point.

The others would be, The Sovereignty of People Party, or the Independent Party.

When the pundits were screaming "spoiler" and blaming you for "tossing the election" to Bush, did that ever hurt you, personally?

No.

Really?

After all these years, you don’t take these things personally. Everything is a functional reaction. I was trying to refocus the media on why we were doing this.

How do you think the war on terrorism will effect the future of third-party candidates?

Well, you know what happens with any kind of war. The president’s polls go way up. There’s not much tolerance for dissent. The government gets few inputs because a lack of robust disagreement--and as government gets less and less input, it’s more prone to making more mistakes, blunders, it procrastinates revisions in policy--and that’s what we’re getting to see now in Afghanistan.

What we’ve also seen is massive bombing, lots of civilians killed, injured, and lots of refugees, death by disease, starvation, and the rest, and the country is now overtaken by the old warlords. Very unsavory and brutal creatures. There’s chaos, and the interim government hardly controls Kabul. We’ve succeeded in burning down the haystack in order to find the needle, but we haven’t found the needle.

Does the lack of dissent, or the absence of a visible anti-war movement, surprise you?

It does. It’s now three, four months. This is the time when we should speak up, and speak out more then ever. That’s the only way the government can gauge the best array of proposals and caveats.

In the book, you write, "The corporate quest for sovereignty over the sovereignty of the people is an affront to our Constitution and our Democracy." Isn’t that corporate quest just capitalism in action? Do you really think real democracy can exist under the capitalist model?

It’s corporate capitalism. Big time corporate capitalism that doesn’t have an allegiance to any country or community, other then to control them as they walk or stride the world, unchallenged, and use governments as puppets.

The Constitution didn’t talk about corporations; it talked about people. That’s why I say it’s become an "affront" to the Constitution because corporations have become constitutionally protected powers, never envisioned by the Constitution. The preamble starts out "We the People." It doesn’t start out, "We the People, and Corporations."

Will there be a breaking point?

Yes. There’s always is a breaking point. One thing you can rely on, commercial interests always push the envelope too far. Greed has no self-restraint to it, as we’ve seen, with Enron.

Have you ever thought about when that "breaking point" will be?

It’s a function of two movements. The Greed Movement, and how far it’s in your face, how far it extends over abuses. The second is the degree to which the citizenry mobilizes to counter, and to reassert their sovereignty.

2004?

Too early to say. I’m Focusing on 2002. Getting thousands of more Green candidates on the local and state level. That’s so critical, in fleshing out The Green Party into fifty states and getting a whole new crew of leaders.

You’ve been in Washington nearly half a decade. Ralph Nader is not going to be around forever. Do you ever think about who's going to fill your void?

A lot of that is up to the media, isn’t it? There’s a lot of valiant people whose name nobody knows.


Related Article:

Rick Perlstein on Ralph Nader's Crashing the Party: How to Tell the Truth and Still Run for President

« Previous Page
 |
 
1
 
2
 
All
 
My Voice Nation Help
0 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
 

Around The Web

Loading...