Exclusively in the new print issue of CounterPunch
MARX: A HERO FOR OUR TIME? — Suddenly, everyone from the Wall Street Journal to Rolling Stone seems to be talking about Karl Marx. Louis Proyect delves into this mysterious resurgence, giving a vivid assessment of Marx’s relevance in the era of globalized capitalism. THE MEANING OF MANDELA: Longtime civil rights organizer Kevin Alexander Gray gives in intimate portrait of Nelson Mandela and the global struggle of racial justice. FALLOUT OVER FUKUSHIMA: Peter Lee investigates the scandalous exposure of sailors on board the USS Reagan to radioactive fallout from Fukushima. SOUTHERN DISCOMFORT: Kim Nicolini charts the rise of Matthew McConaughey. PLUS: Mike Whitney on the coming crash of the housing market. JoAnn Wypijewski on slavery, torture and revolt. Chris Floyd on the stupidity of US policy in Ukraine. Kristin Kolb on musicians and health care. And Jeffrey St. Clair on life and death on the mean streets of an America in decline
Stop Blaming Nader for the Failures of Gore and Kerry

Why Democrats Are At Least Half of the Problem

by JOZEF HAND-BONIAKOWSKI

In a recent give and take email with a liberal, "progressive" Democrat in Vermont, I discovered what Democrats really feel about people who vote for third party candidates, and especially what they feel about Ralph Nader. 2006 is, after all, an election year, and we, the people, must elect Democrats to "take our country back". No? The talk-show hosts say so, especially Air America Radio, so it must be important. The exact line from the email that I received is,

I feel it is because people voted for Nader who not only have I lost all respect for, but I think he has a huge ego and now I honestly hate him as much as I hate Bush.

There you have it. Liberal, "progressive" Democrats hate Ralph Nader as much as they hate George W. Bush. Perhaps, some therapy is in order, as hate is a self-destructive emotion if left unchecked. It also does not win elections. I’m not, however, surprised at this outpouring of Democratic venom, as liberals and so-called progressives prefer to blame the loss of elections on everybody and everything, except that is, on the lackluster, uninspiring, boring, bumbling, stumbling, and problematic campaigns of their own candidates. Democrats prefer to blame their presidential candidates’ ineptitude on others, such as Ralph Nader and the people who voted for him and his platform. Liberal, "progressive", Democrats fail to place the responsibility for getting G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney elected where it belongs, that is, onto the people who actually voted for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney at the polls. The elections of 2000 and 2004 were both the Democrats to lose. And, they lost them both. The reality of the Democratic Party’s electoral losses are compounded by its inability to accept responsibility for them. Democrats prefer the blindness of hatred over the reality of their own failures. It was not Ralph Nader’s fault that 62,040,606 people voted for Bush and Cheney in 2004. But, damn you Ralph, anyway!

I have some advice for liberal, "progressive", Democrats. Stop blaming Ralph Nader for John Kerry’s crappy performance at the 2004 polls. Stop blaming third parties. Stop blaming the people who voted in step with their conscience for 3rd parties. Stop blaming people who did not vote, believing that elections are fixed or manipulated by big money. They are. Start working for democracy instead! Imagine! The educated, wealthy, well-healed, Heinz ketchup fortune, two-time Purple Heart recipient, candidate John Kerry, was unable to defeat a candidate who stumbled over his own words, and who could not prove participating in his military service. John Kerry lost to a candidate that had his inept lines supposedly pumped into his ear via a hidden radio device during the "debates". Way to go John! I am sorry, but I have no sympathy for liberal, "progressive", Democrats whose candidates do not enthuse and whose ideas are much like their opponent. Ralph Nader was not the problem in the 2000 election. It was Al Gore who won the election and then rolled over and played dead, and the Democratic Party played dead along with him for seven years. Ralph Nader was not the problem in 2004 either. John Kerry was. And Ralph Nader is not the problem now. The problem was, and is, the Democratic Party, and its candidates, like John Kerry, who try to out-Bush George Bush. John Kerry voted for the Iraq war. That makes him no better than his opponent. John Kerry turned his back on his antiwar veteran comrades. He smote his buddies, the Winter Soldiers, in an attempt to win the election. Shame on you John. Democrats prefer practicality, and it doesn’t matter much if it comes in the form of betrayal. How does such betrayal make John Kerry any different than George W. Bush? Brian S. Willson states it clearly in his "Dear John" letter to John Kerry. See: See also a pictorial comparison of Kerry and Bush at my website. And the Democrats will do it again with Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Dear Democrats, If you hate Ralph Nader or third parties, then I suggest you have a whopping big problem. The problem is not going away. Your inability to build coalitions and your casting blame for your electoral losses reinforces my contempt for those who call yourselves "progressive" and liberal. You fail to pursue the real problem which is neo-liberalism. Nor do you care much to investigate the root causes of our systemic problems, vis-à-vis class consciousness. That is why I am no longer much interested in the charade of your electoral politics, nor of your cult-like campaigns, nor Bernie Sanders. I am not interested in Howard Dean, who publicly repeatedly favored war but somehow was painted in your own minds as "the anti-war candidate". I am sickened by the disgusting attitude liberal, "progressive" Democrats have toward Ralph Nader, third parties, and free thinkers. As for Ralph Nader having an ego? This is the kettle calling the pot black. Give me a break. Democrats would like us to believe that Ralph Nader has a BIG ego, but that John Kerry does not. Or, that Bernie Sanders does not. It’s as if Democratic candidates and those they support are somehow immune to the ego exigencies of political campaigning and candidacy. Hillary Clinton has no ego? If Hillary Clinton becomes the Democratic Party candidate for president in 2008, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell I will be voting for her.

Dear Democrats: How dare liberal, "progressive", Democrats call someone like Ralph Nader a spoiler? What do you have against democracy? Yet when Bernie Sanders ran his early campaigns, the arguments against him being called a "spoiler" were aplenty. Shame on liberals. Shame on "progressives". Shame on you for giving Democrats the credibility they do not deserve. The Democrats are part of the same corrupt, wealthy, corporate cabal, the same gangsters that have taken over the country. They are the ones that empowered the executive branch to launch an illegal war, even though aware of the many lies and pretenses presented to the world. The rich, ruling elite always have their way at the expense of the working class. When was it ever any other way? Howard Zinn reveals the corruption well in his book, "The People’s History of the United States." To believe that Democrats offer anything other than more corruption is buying into the lie.

Dear Democrats: I’ll tell you this. If liberals and "progressives" continue to alienate the disenfranchised by continuing to blame Ralph Nader, or some other 3rd party candidate or party, or my vote for them, or for not kissing Bernie Sanders’, or some Democrats’ behind, I will respond by working harder for the alternative parties. Let us remember, that it was the Democrats that gave G.W. Bush and the Republicans everything they wanted. It was the Democrats who let the impostors into the White House. It was the Democrats who allowed and approved lying to Congress and the nation. It was the Democrats who sanctioned subverting the Constitution. It was the Democrats who voted for the misnamed USA PATRIOT Act. Ralph Nader didn’t do any of this.

Here in Vermont, representative Bernie Sanders, the darling pseudo-Democrat, is running for the US Senate. Vermont’s "independent" and "progressive" had to be shamed into supporting representative John Conyers’ resolution on impeachment hearings. Recently, Bernie Sanders imported Democratic Senator Barack Obama to give his campaign a boost. Way to go Bernie, as Barack Obama is already supporting Bush’s next war in Iran.

Shame on Bernie Sanders for his comments on impeachment. His comments the day after four Vermont towns voted for impeachment implied that impeachment talk is "impractical" with the Republicans in control of House and Senate. By choosing practicality over justice, Bernie, and his fellow Democrats, are saying that prosecution for breaking the law must wait for the jury to be gerrymandered. What system of justice is this? The Democrats could have filibustered the Supreme Court nominations, but they chose not to take a stand. And now, they choose to let their colleague, Senator Russ Feingold, wither on the vine with his censure motion, even though they know that there is more than ample evidence for censuring George W. Bush. The people of the United State are ahead of the Democrats on censure and impeachment. The Statesman.com reports that, "

A poll by the nonpartisan American Research Group found that 46 percent of Americans support censuring Bush for authorizing wiretaps of Americans without obtaining court orders, as part of the administration’s effort to fight terrorism. (Poll dates: March 13-15, 2006).

A Zogby International poll conducted Jan 9-12, 2006, found that 52% agreed with the following statement:

If president Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment.

The Democrats are projecting themselves as saviors in the elections of 2006 and 2008. Hardly. Watch for more Nader-like bashing. It’s one of the few things Democrats do well.

Yes, I will vote for Ralph Nader, or someone else whose views and ideology are like my own, if the Democrats offer me no viable option. I will vote for third parties again if their issues are my issues, and if they speak what needs to be said. That is what democracy is all about. Or are Democrats that in name only?

Once again, an electoral cycle us upon us and the peace and social justice movements are being co-opted by the diversion called elections. And once again, Democrats will dish out and get more of the same. And, should their candidate(s) not win, they will blame everyone and everything except themselves. We are in this sad state of affairs today because election after election we succumb to the fraud of duopoly politics, i.e., a two party system that will always be the same if we keep playing the same game over and over again. And Democrats are one-half of that problem.

JOZEF HAND-BONIAKOWSKI is co-editor and co-publisher of Metaphoria along with his life partner and wife, JeanneE. He is 30-year veteran retired teacher and a member of Veterans For Peace. He can be reached at: jozef@metaphoria.org