Philosopher views
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Implications for Debate
Objections to NaderTo answer Ralph Nader's underlying political philosophy is difficult. One must assert and prove not only that capitalism is desirable, but also that elitism is desirable. It is much more fruitful to concentrate on the pragmatic implications of Nader’s beliefs than to question whether democracy and citizen empowerment are good things. To begin with, many people are angry that Nader’s dogmatic and “purist” run for the presidency in 2000 supposedly cost the Democrats the White House. This is because those people believe that, while Gore and the Democrats may not have been as faithful to Nader’s ideals as the Greens were, they were still comparatively closer to those ideals than were the Republicans and George W. Bush. This is an ongoing argument, as recent events demonstrate: The Capital Times (5/21, Steverman) reports, " Ralph Nader's 2000 Green Party presidential run angered many Democrats, but the Green Party's current plans, if successful, could frustrate Democrats in Wisconsin and around the country even more. Green Party activists say they have learned a lot since 2000, and they are planning to run a candidate for every statewide office in Wisconsin, including candidate Jim Young for governor. Democrats, especially liberal Democrats, say Greens end up hurting the very causes that they support by playing the spoiler in many races." In Wisconsin, "the Green Party has a dozen chapters around the state, only four of which existed before the 2000 election." (The Bulletin's Frontrunner, May 21, 2002) The argument is that we must be willing to compromise, to accept some of what we want; if we hold out for “everything,” we end up with nothing (or, as some would say in reference to Bush, worse than nothing!). The problem here is not merely one election. It places in question Nader’s whole philosophy of stubborn and dogmatic insistence that only his platform is viable and democratic. Democrats respond that, at a time when many citizens seem to be drifting to the right, we should settle for checks on that drift rather than try to get everything. Of course, Nader supporters responded that the Democrats had themselves to blame for the election loss, since they alienated the voters who ended up either not voting at all, or voting for Nader: Sam Smith is right when he points out that the liberal establishment in the Democratic Party--which includes the current congressional leaders of the party--''yawned as the Clintons disassembled their own cause and became incensed when Ralph Nader dared to defend it.'' (VILLAGE VOICE, May 7, 2002) Another source of objection to Nader’s ideas is found in libertarian philosophies. Libertarians generally believe that regulation of the market never yields the results intended, and often makes things considerably worse. Although Nader is not simply a pro-government liberal, his ideas clearly include tougher regulations, higher taxes for corporations, and more restrictions on what people can do with their money. Regulations fail, libertarians claim, because people respond better to self-management than hierarchical management. Even many non-libertarians favor measures such as tax incentives rather than regulatory schemes to make corporations behave better. Along the same lines, many people advocate pollution trading permits rather than strong regulations against pollution. The idea is that people respond favorably to carrots (rewards), but if they are threatened with punishment, they simply find ways around the tough regulations rather than ways to comply with them. Overall, most of the objections to Nader’s ideas work well within the general framework of libertarianism and belief in a minimal state. However, it remains to be seen whether advocates of Nader’s ideas can articulate the sense in which citizen empowerment differs from traditional advocacy of government intervention. Implications for DebateIn my mind, Ralph Nader inspires three main ideas with immediate and far-reaching implications on value debate: Capitalism can exist with checks and balances: Traditional value debates about capitalism and its alternatives tend to be very black-and-white, either-or. One side argues that capitalism is necessary because it maximizes individual freedom, while the other side emphasizes the problems of selfishness, exploitation and imperialism. Nader is no fan of capitalism, but he argues that, since it’s what we have, we should keep it in check. Debaters may even be able to argue that the ideas of people like Nader are essential to capitalism’s survival, since such ideas prevent the excesses that fuel the anti-capitalism movement. Alternatives to capitalism and globalization can be explored through a widening of the political arena: Conversely, debaters might argue that political and economic alternatives exist, and that we should explore those alternatives by broadening the political arena. Greater participation by third parties and citizens’ movements can help this happen. Democracy must be participatory: More than any other idea, Ralph Nader advocates the notion of citizen participation and a breaking down of the distinctions between government and people. After all, in the strongest democratic traditions, government is the people. Nader eschews elitism, not merely philosophically, but with many historical examples of the disasterous effects of unchecked power among governments and corporations. Conclusion Ralph Nader is currently America’s loudest and most passionate advocate of citizen participation and greater corporate accountability. He might also open the door to more radical alternatives to the kind of politics and economics we seem destined to accept in the status quo. At the same time, his stubborn insistence that the people not compromise with those in power cost him a great deal of credibility in 2000, and that lesson might itself serve as a reminder that alternatives must be pragmatic, and not just theoretically attractive. Writing about a living person is a lot different than writing about a long-dead philosopher. Debaters wishing to explore more about Ralph Nader can do many things: read his books, read commentary about him, and even update their files with the daily news reports about Nader and his movement. Unlike so many of our sources, Ralph Nader continues to make news every day. Were it up to him, it would be citizens making the news instead of corporate news agencies. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|