I got this email in my inbox a few days ago . . .Dear Friend,
Six months have passed since the 2004 presidential elections. While it is still early to fully analyze the meaning of Ralph Nader’s candidacy for president, it has occurred to me that certain fundamental themes are now easier to see than at the time of the campaign.
Fundamentally what separates Ralph Nader from the progressives who opposed his running is Nader’s deep belief in the people themselves being able to change society. That is, Nader really believes democracy is possible. Those who opposed Nader and capitulated by calling for a vote for a candidate who opposed everything they claim to support reflect a hopelessness that there is no way to overcome the control of money over people. Deep down they do not really believe the people could ever rise up and take control of their lives, their country and institute democracy.
Never in the history of our nation has there been such a massive campaign to try and prevent ballot access by an individual running for Presidential office so that those who agreed with him could actually vote for him.
The anti-Nader campaign was a totalitarian effort against free elections aimed at the people’s right to choose and specifically aimed at those who will not surrender their commitment to democracy. Not a single elected Democrat in the United States spoke out against their party’s campaign not to allow the voters to choose. Not one. This alone shows the utter political and moral bankruptcy of that Party.
The Nation, the Progressive, Mother Jones, MoveOn.org, all the leaders of the Progressive Democrats of America not only did not oppose the campaign against democracy but in most cases participated and promoted it.
I can think of only one similar historical event. The early abolitionist movement believed slavery could only be ended if the slave owners could be convinced to free their slaves. Like today they believed you had to accept the political system, you could not go outside the framework and challenge the two pro-slavery parties. You could only lobby, petition, beg but not challenge directly who should rule.
Then in 1840 James G. Birney ran for president on behalf of a newly formed party, the abolitionist Liberty Party. Many of the abolitionists, like progressives today, opposed Birney’s daring to run. It was not realistic. But in fact Birney’s campaign was the opening shot of what was to change America forever and lead to the collapse of the political framework that had allowed slavery to remain unchallenged.
The Liberty Party supporters were called fanatics, self-isolating, unrealistic, and even crazy, as Michael Moore called Nader for daring to run for peace, democracy and pro labor.
But Birney and Nader are not alone in American history. General James B. Weaver ran in 1880 for president for the Greenback Labor Party and campaigned in the South after the crushing of the reconstruction government defending the rights of African Americans. Weaver’s campaign helped set the background for the great rise of the Populist movement and later the rise of another champion of the people - Eugene V. Debs.
There has been a long history of efforts to break the control of money over people and to establish a political movement to fight for democracy in the United States. Nader’s whole life has been rooted in his belief that the people through their own actions can make a difference. His appeals have always been to mobilize from the bottom up.
Nader’s efforts have resulted in so many important victories. While many know of Nader having made their cars safer they do not realize that his efforts have been instrumental in protecting our air, and water, including the establishment of the EPA and OSHA in the early Seventies.
He helped win rights for passengers on airlines, fought for national health care, living wage, freedom of information, against nuclear power, against all kinds of corporate abuses, manipulation, false advertising, and fraudulent practices. He has fought to protect our national resources and public assets. He has defended workers in the mines, auto factories and throughout America and fought against WTO and corporate globalization. He advocated for the use of industrial hemp early, fought discrimination against women and minorities and the rise of monopolies.
As an incorruptible symbol of the rights of the people Nader is a threat to a world based on the corrupting power of money. In time Nader’s campaigns in 2000 and 2004 will be seen as the beginning of what may become a new wave in the battle for democracy. There are now so many signs world wide of the beginning of another radicalizing wave, waves that appear about once every 30 years. We can see it in the events in Latin America, the recent rise of the Maori people in New Zealand, and the massive world opposition to the war in Iraq and globalization. Unlike the radicalizations of the 1930s and 60s, the need to break with the two parties of money is in the air. Twenty five percent of our people are not registered in the two major parties and 38% answer they are independent in polls.
Six months after the election we see Nader fighting at rally after rally for peace as the Democrats declare their loyalty to Bush’s war. Even Howard Dean has dropped his anti-war rhetoric as the Democrats gave George Bush thirty-nine standing ovations at his 2005 State of the Union address.
Nader stands on the side of all the mass social movements. His call for the need to break with the political duopoly will resound as the next wave develops.
As I speak at meetings here in California since the elections I notice how no one but absolutely no one gets up to defend John Kerry. Even those who voted for him feel a bit embarrassed. The winds are starting to shift.
It was a great honor for me to be part of Nader’s historic challenge as his vice presidential associate. As I traveled throughout our nation speaking to audiences, primarily of young people, I knew I was looking into the eyes of those in the future who will be the leaders of our nation. We know not yet what our nation owes Nader for the seeds he has planted among the minds of our people, especially our youth.
Sincerely,
Peter Miguel Camejo
