Don't Tread on Me!

Chomsky on Obama Picks

A People’s History of the United States and Zinn on Third Party Politics

I recently finished reading Howard Zinn’s "A People’s History of the United States." Granted, it took me a year of off and on reading to get through it, but as of a few days ago I am officially done! It was a fantastic book; from page one Zinn is relentless in his critique of the power dynamics that played themselves out from the moment that Columbus set foot on Caribbean soil, to the Clinton era. I was most impressed by the anarchist undercurrent of Zinn’s commentary and his celebration of such notable radicals as Emma Goldman, Eugene Debs, and the Anarcho-syndicalist union The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). Zinn draws out the underlying class loyalties of the American ruling class that according to my high school history books do not exist.

But, as I listened to a KPFK broadcast the other day, Zinn was a guest. He was asked to talk about the upcoming election. He was typical in his critique of McCain as a war-monger and of Obama as being a centrist and loyal to corporate money despite the rhetoric. And then, at the end of the interview, the host asked: “What role do third party candidates like Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney play in this year’s election?” To my horror, Zinn replied: “Voting for a third party candidate is futile” and continued,

“If there is even a marginal difference between Obama and McCain, and there is, that is there is a greater possibility of change with Obama than McCain, if that even small possibility exists, and small possibilities can mean a matter of life and death for people; then I think at the moment you are in the voting booth you have to put aside the idea of a third party candidate and at that point and vote for somebody who has a possibility of change. With Obama there’s that possibility, with McCain there isn’t. I don’t think that truth telling people like McKinney and Ralph Nader have their greatest power in the in the voting booth or the electoral process.

Host: But couldn’t they serve to push Obama to the Left?

Zinn: Up to the point of the election itself maybe, but the threat of a third party candidate is so small, that the idea of voting for a third party candidate is not going to push Obama to the Left…I think that what will push him in a good direction is a movement, a citizens movement in the country, which people like Nader and McKinney can lead. And I think that kind of movement is the kind that historically has moved presidents in a good direction, just as the great movements of the 30s moved Roosevelt in the direction of domestic economic reform.”

My jaw dropped. I couldn’t believe that this was the same guy who had written a Peoples History! If anyone could understand the value of a third party candidate it is Howard Zinn, or so I thought. If the best we can hope for is a movement that will push a moderate president in a “good” direction, then how do we ever hope to achieve the kinds of things the “left” is striving for? In every category Obama has refused to take progressive stances on the issues: the war in Iraq, healthcare, taxes, etc. If we give up the idea of a third party candidate at the voting booth, then of COURSE a third party is no threat to Obama or McCain. It is that we are willing to vote for the candidate that best represents our values that make political parties accountable to us in the first place. If we see Obama as just another least-worst, then the democrats will continue to be beholden to corporations and not to us. This is why I have never been a democrat; they do not represent my values. In addition, it is precisely the third party and independent candidates like Eugene Debs who had the power to push Roosevelt in a left direction. If Debs had not received over a million votes, I don’t think Roosevelt would have paid much attention. Zinn is correct that a broad movement with good leaders will take us far, but we also need leverage. What better way push Obama to the left than with the real threat of losing our votes?

IMPLEMENT THE DRAFT, SO I CAN BURN MY DRAFT CARD!

Today on Democracy Now! (www.democracynow.org) the guest was a retired army Cornell, now a conservative university professor talking about his new book. His name is Andrew Bacevich and the book is titled The limits of Power: on the end of American Exceptionalism. He described the two major candidates for this years election as having only operational differences in their approach to the war on terror and that the debate about the US foreign policy is dangerously narrow with both candidates essentially agreeing that the war on terror must be won, varying only in where they plan to focus the military's energies after they win the election.

Bacevich notes that when Nixon ended the draft which created a professional army his motive was to deflate anti-war movement. The slew of small US interventions that followed were a result of political elites showing off a well oiled professional army. Bacevich notes that American Citizens are insulated from the costs of the war. Not only are we isolated from the war by a corporate media, but we were told after 9/11 not to sacrifice, but to get back to the malls! There are many things that must change in our country for authentic democracy to take root, a mandatory military draft might be one of them.

I know I have had conversations with people about my reaction to a reinstated draft. My usual reply is that I would go to Canada. Imagine if every time the US government wanted to invade a country they had to go through every able bodied man and woman in this country. I think it would not only make congress think twice about a preemptive war, it would also awaken many Americans to the real possibility of being sent to war, and they would then be forced to analyze their feelings about said conflict. Blind patriotic flag waving might be replaced with community councils, fact finding missions and a vibrant resistance movement. If it worked for Nixon, it could work in reverse for Iraq! Implement the draft, end the WAR!

Legalize Democracy!

Seven reforms that would make our democracy more legitimate:

Abolish the Electoral College

Implement an appropriate form of Run-off Voting

Reform state ballot access laws which obstruct third parties from running candidates

Full disclosure of private donations and full public financing for elections

No confidence option on all election ballots

Multi-party presidential debates

Make voting day a paid holiday

This is What Democracy Looks Like: A Petitioner's Manifesto

The sun is blazing down on me and sweat drips from my forehead. The West Virginia air is humid and thick as storm clouds cluster in unpredictable colonies in the sky. I have been working as a petitioner on the Ralph Nader ballot-access campaign for almost a week now and although the work is exhausting it has helped me to truly understand the role that third parties play in American politics. At first I was terrified of approaching total strangers and talking to them about their politics; but now my words are more fluid, more familiar, and my self-esteem is less attached to the many rejections, blow-offs, and rude comments that I endued on a day to day basis.

Today I am stationed in front of a super market on the outskirts of Charleston. A woman with an empty cart approaches the store front and I say “Are you registered to vote in West Virginia ma’am?” to which I hear a sharp “No thank you, I’m in a hurry.” Just one of the literally hundreds of people I have talked to today. The rejection fades as I approach another couple, rejection, and then an elderly man. He stops slowly on my left, eyes skeptical as most are, and listens as I tell him that the clipboard in my hands is filled with the signatures of registered voters like him, who believe that third party candidates have the right to be on the ballot. He signs, and nods as he slowly adds “there ought’a be more choices.”

“Sign a quick petition for me today sir?” “Who’s on it? What! You have got to be kidding me! Ralph Nader! I don’t want him on the ballot! He’ll steal votes away from the democrats!” a typical democrat reply. But, this man seems interested in my response, which I appreciate. “Well sir, don’t you think that a candidate should win an election based on their own merit and not simply because there are only two choices? And if the two major parties are losing votes to independents, doesn’t that just mean they have lost touch with their constituents? Isn’t democracy about choice and doesn’t Nader have the right to be on the ballot?” He pauses, to digest my words, nods his head and says, “I see your point…ok I’ll sign.” I think to myself: I’m getting good at this! When I started petitioning for the campaign, I expected we would meet up with the bitter Democrats who believe that Nader lost them the elections in 2000 and 2004. The irony of course is that in opposing Nader’s access to the ballot they are sanctioning the ever narrowing scope of political dialogue. If the democrats are losing constituents to third party candidates like Nader, it is because they are not adequately representing progressive values not because Ralph is a spoiler. Having third parties like the greens and Ralph Nader, can only serve to make the Democratic party more accountable to its constituents, because they if they are not, they will lose more people like me, who believe that the Democrats are just as beholden to the special interests that are clogging the authenticity of our democracy as the republicans.

I am standing at a small pedestrian walkway between a mall and a bus stop. A man with bad legs, a shaved head, and no front teeth slurring a thick New Jersey accent storms through the alley yelling: “They can’t deny me food when I am hungry!” He asks if he can use my phone to call the train station, saying “I’m getting out of this place, I’m going back to Philly!” I hand him the phone. As he makes his call, I catch pedestrians on their lunch breaks and reflect on the previous day in front of the super market—it had ended with us being kicked out by the store manager for “soliciting.” There is a certain feeling of despair that comes over you when on top of all the apathy, rudeness, and opposition to our cause, we have the rug literally swept out from under us. One of Ralph Nader’s key issues is to end ballot access obstructionism, where state ballot access laws make it near impossible to run a candidate on the state general election ballots. On top of this already unfair and unjust obstacle, we live in a society where public spaces are rapidly being converted in to private spaces. Many Americans can go through their entire day without interacting with anyone: from the suburban home to the car, to the cubicle, to a self-check-out grocery store. Private shopping malls and “Town Centers” have become the public space of our time, yet they do not allow the same rights as genuine public spaces. Our lives have become so dependent on technology and dispersed that public spaces are becoming a rarity. A development in Huntington, West Virginia—one of our petitioning locations—is a prime example. “Pullman’s Square” is a recent development that has revitalized the down town with new shops and business locations (after sprawl and manufacturing job losses destroyed them). There is even what appears to be a public park with a fountain and lawn. On a Friday night this square is bustling with teenagers, couples, and families; but due to the fact that the area is owned by a development company, it was off limits to us petitioners, who had to stay a safe distance from it all as security guards watched us like hawks.

As the man finishes the phone call, he thanks me and stumbles off. I continue to petition the small pedestrian walkway that leads to the mall entrance until the sun begins to set behind the large apartment and commercial buildings and decide to call it a day. Being a petitioner is not easy, but it can certainly be rewarding when you run into people who understand the importance of third party candidates and appreciate Ralph Nader’s years of tireless service to consumers and democracy. As I finish the day my feet are tired and my throat raw. Sometimes it is difficult, but what keeps me going is the idea that third parties are an essential part of our democracy, and that our democracy is in great peril. This is what democracy looks like, people in the streets promoting a cause, fighting for change, raising their voices.

Five Years In Iraq

With the fifth anniversary of the war in Iraq upon us, and as President Bush praises Iraqis for fighting Al-Qaida, the lives of Iraqis continue to get worse. According to polls cited on Democracy Now, 2/3 of Iraqis want us to withdraw immediately. However, in a recent interview with Dick Cheney on a morning talk show, he made it clear that public opinion is of little importance. Well sure, why would it be, the Iraqi government hasn’t privatized the oil yet. Over the weekend, the Winter Soldier Investigations were held at the Labor College in Maryland, Receiving practically no corporate media coverage. Again, www.democracynow.org was there, and the stories of the soldiers are worth listening to.

To watch the testimony see www.ivaw.org

On March 19th 2003 I was living in Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic. I went grocery shopping that day and bought a news paper with large letters and images of the invasion. I was so sad, yet all around me the Mormon missionaries I served with were proud and pleased (the white ones that is).

On March 19th 2008, I attended a small candle light vigil in Provo Utah, organized by a high school senior named Alex. He and his guests felt good about what they were doing, and told the newspaper reported that they believed they were making a difference. I felt saddened that they actually believed that this small rally would sway the opinion of the man whose office we stood in front of: Orrin Hatch, or anyone else for that matter. I have been to rallies against the war every year since 2005, and it would seem that each year they become less relevant to the determination of the architects of this new foreign policy.

We are in an election year. If Barrack Obama gets elected will he withdraw the troops? I doubt it. He may withdraw the troops and then invade Pakistan.