Ralph Nader supports imperialism, promotes national chauvinism Ralph Nader, presidential candidate for the Green Party in the U.$., has built a populist campaign on issues that appeal to Amerika's petty-bourgeois majority. Fighting corporations and big business and advocating for the "little guy" are common themes in Nader's campaign. While Bush and Gore are barely distinguishable from one another as presidential candidates, Nader has taken some very different positions on both domestic and international issues which has mobilized many otherwise uninterested activists and youth to get behind his campaign. For this reason MIM thinks it's important to talk about the Nader campaign and why we do not support him. In fact, MIM goes so far as to say that Nader's campaign principally ends up organizing people for white nation chauvinism at the expense of the world's people. Nader says some correct things, e.g. that the practices of big corporations are bad for the environment. But he fails to address u.$. imperialism and only fights for greater wealth for the Amerikan labor aristocracy. Fundamentally, Ralph Nader ends up supporting u.$. imperialism as a system. MIM considers this inevitable for any candidate in u.$. elections that wants to gain widespread support and attention. In this article we explain why we say that Nader supports imperialism along with our alternative. Free trade Ralph Nader, like many apologists for the Amerikan so-called working class, likes to complain about the impact of various trade agreements on the Amerikans. In one campaign interview he said: "I think there should be trade all over the world. I think, however, we can't allow U.S. companies to go to dictatorships and allow dictatorship-repressed labor costs and abuses to be an asset for these U.S. companies in building products that they then send back to this country against workers and companies here that are playing by the rules. That isn't free trade. That is utilizing dictatorially repressed labor costs in bad environmental conditions, basically, do anything you can or anything you want in this dictatorship, as long as you grease the wheels." Nader ignores the important fact that the system he describes is imperialism. And the dictatorships he complains about are set up by u.$. imperialism specifically so that u.$. corporations can go exploit the labor and resources there. Nader complains about the symptoms but does not address the problem. Free trade just means that there are no restrictions on trade. As a concept it is irrelevant when taken in the context of the imperialists controlling all trade. Nader thinks that granting China Permanent Normal Trade Relations status would be a big mistake. He appeals to chauvinist labor aristocracy sentiments opposing u.s. companies moving to China to set up factories there. He says "...the investor guarantees connected to a PNTR deal would speed the migration ... of well- paying factory jobs [to China]." He says this will contribute to factory closings in the u.s. To give Nader some small amount of credit, he does say that if the Chinese were going to benefit from the PNTR "the issue might be more complicated." But, as he correctly notes, having more u.$. imperialism in China will make conditions there worse. This is the point he should be addressing, not the bogus fear of losing factory jobs in the united $tates. The reality is that u.$. corporations will go to China, exploit the workers, and bring the profits home. Those profits will benefit the wealthiest the most, but they will also get distributed to all the bought off so-called workers in the united $tates. The real story on jobs and trade There is much hype out there about trade agreements hurting the Amerikan labor aristocracy. Ralph Nader has stepped up to lead this bandwagon and he is perpetuating a lot of dangerous myths and using sparse facts to rally white nation chauvinism. Here we briefly review some trends in the Amerikan economy, with an eye toward how globalization is supposed to be hurting Amerika's so- called working class. (Data are from the March Current Population Survey, conducted by the Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Summaries from this data and downloading options are available at: http://www.bls.gov/cpshome.htm.) We look at the number of people in each occupational category, their average earnings, and the change in each category from 1978 to 1998. There are 8 million more "sales workers" in 1998 than there were in 1978, while the number of "machine operators, assemblers and inspectors" shrank by about 1.8 million. The total number of employees has increased by 33.7 million, which is a 34% increase, and their average pay is up 21%. The labor aristocracy has two beefs here. They are upset that there are 13.4 million more combined sales and service jobs, which pay less than the average. But MIM points out that earnings in these two occupation groups are up 34% and 24% respectively over the last 20 years, however, even though they remain below the average. The second labor aristocracy beef is that earnings fell for most of the blue-collar occupations. This complaint is often put in the context of free trade with people arguing that workers in the Third World are stealing u.$. jobs. The labor aristocracy advocates are right that earnings have fallen overall in blue- collar occupations, but it's just not that bad. First, the pay declines are relatively small compared to the pay increases in other occupations. Second, the blue-collar occupation groups have added only 3.4 million jobs, or about 10% of the total new jobs. The slow growth, or decline, of these blue-collar jobs means these jobs are becoming less and less important, so their stagnating pay doesn't hurt as many people. Less than 20% of all employees are in these occupational groups. Finally and maybe most importantly, white men in these occupational groups did not see even these small declines. White men in "precision production, craft and repair," "transportation and material moving," and "handlers, equipment cleaners and laborers" -- all had small increases in earnings over the last 20 years. So people in blue-collar jobs have suffered some losses in the last two decades, but not the white men in that group. At the same time, the number of employees in the "executive, administrative and managerial" group has increased 71%, or 7.5 million, and their earnings are up 18%. And the number of people in the professions (from teachers to lawyers and doctors) has increased 58%, or 7.3 million, and their earnings are up 27%. This growth is bigger than the growth in sales and service jobs, and the earnings for these people are very high. It is also important to note here that the Amerikan so-called working class is not exploited. That is, they are not producing more than they are being paid. Arguments about relative declines in income are important because they speak to people's subjective mentality. But discontent about relative wealth among whites in this country has historically led to support for social democracy, imperialism, and fascism, not revolution. Distribution of wealth When MIM talks about distribution of wealth we talk about it on a global scale. In order to eradicate imperialism, the oppressed peoples and their allies will have to implement socialism on a world scale. Economically, this means that the workers who are making the products, creating the wealth, should benefit from that wealth. Currently, there is a net flow of wealth from the Third World to the First; that will change under socialism. When Ralph Nader talks about distribution of wealth he wants to take more money from the richest in the united $tates and give it to Amerika's so-called workers. MIM does not dispute that the bourgeoisie in the u.s. is raking in ridiculous profits, but they are not taking this money from the Amerikan labor aristocracy, they are taking it from the Third World. When Nader criticizes the tax breaks big corporations get he is concerned that "the middle class" is being forced to support Big Business. He is worried that "capitalism routinely expands without expanding the ranks of those called capitalists." So his solution: Let the middle class in Amerika into the ranks of the capitalists. There are only two ways to increase the wealth of the Amerikan middle classes. (1) Take from the richest and more evenly distribute (within u.$. borders ) the superprofits stolen from the Third World. (2) Increase the exploitation of the Third World. When so-called workers in the united $tates demand more money they are essentially demanding a bigger piece of a pie they did not help bake. And when the bourgeoisie gives in to this demand it comes at the expense of the Third World. Nader misses the point that we have moved into the era of imperialism where we have to deal with capitalism in a global context. Ignoring the Third World entirely to complain about the supposed raw deal for the Amerikan middle class amounts to rallying for Amerikan chauvinism. Why do u.$. so-called workers deserve so much better than workers in other countries (who are being controlled by u.$. corporations)? Nader finds it easy to dismiss the issues of other countries as problems of their "dictatorships" because he ignores the existence of imperialism, preferring to pretend that the united $tates is an isolated capitalist country that creates all its own wealth. MIM encourages readers to check out MIM Theory 1 and 10 for an in- depth analysis of the labor aristocracy in this country. These theory journals explain in detail why we say that the so-called working class in this country does not create wealth, but instead are parasitically benefits from the exploitation and oppression of the majority of the world's population. Populism In some ways Ralph Nader's campaign mirrors past presidential campaigns of Patrick Buchanan, the right-wing fascist. As Nader said in his acceptance speech to the Green Party convention, "Let us not in this campaign prejudge any voters, for Green values are majoritarian values, respecting all peoples and striving to give greater voice to all voters, workers, individual taxpayers and consumers." He's right. The issues he is promoting are majoritarian values if he is only talking to the majority within u.$. borders. The majority in this country would be happy to take home a bigger piece of the imperialist pie. When Nader talks about the issues of his campaign he appeals to difficulties faced by well-off Amerikans: "endless traffic jams,...[being] put on telephone hold for the longest times before you get an answer to a simple question..., aghast at how little time your frenzied life leaves for your children, family, friends and community, overcome by the sheer ugliness of commercial strips and sprawls and incessantly saturating advertisements..." These are problems the majority of the world's people can only dream about. The united $tates has one passenger car for every two people; Thailand has one for every 57, and Syria has one for every 126. Algeria, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Guatemala, Honduras, India, etc. all had fewer than 5 telephone lines per 100 people in 1994.(1) The real problems faced by most people in the world include whether they will have enough food to eat, where to get clean water, whether their children will die of preventable diseases, and how to get a job that will keep their family alive. The Third World Nader compares the conditions in the united $tates to other imperialist countries but conveniently ignores the plight of the majority of the world's population, which was created by the united $tates and other imperialist countries. One of the only mentions of the Third World in Nader's long acceptance speech was his statement that "The banking giants and their IMF and World Bank cohorts are continuing their structural adjustment policies in Third World countries that cut public budgets, end critical consumer subsidies and replace real food acreage with cash crops for exports, while imposing environmentally damaging megaprojects that enrich the local oligarchy." This is correct, but this does not go far enough. It ignores who put the oligarchies into power in those countries and who is benefiting from this system. Nader asks "Isn't it about time that the United States government stop supporting dictatorships and avaricious oligarchies with our tax monies, munitions and diplomacy? Isn't it time that our government takes a cue from numerous studies and model projects, and advances foreign policies that support the peasants and the workers for a change." MIM responds with a resounding yes, but we make it clear that this is only possible with the overthrow of imperialism. The u.s. government has to set up dictatorships to help it exploit the Third World people and bring home the wealth to maintain this system at home. We will never see an end to the unjust repressive practices of the imperialist system until it is overthrown. Prisons and crime Nader points out that Vice-President Gore and Governor Bush have received more than $100,000 in soft money contributions from corporations running for-profit prisons. He correctly opposes these prisons, since they abuse prisoners and do not offer any rehabilitation or educational services. But he does not take on the whole criminal injustice system. Prisons run by the government also do not give prisoners the basic rights which bourgeois law supposedly ensures them, nor do they provide education or rehabilitation of any kind. The Green Party When talking about Ralph Nader it is important to also mention the Green Party since he is running on their platform. According to its platform, "The Green Party calls for military spending to be cut by 50% over the next 10 years, with increases in spending for social programs. Preventive diplomacy, a strong economy and humane trade relations are our best defense. We must maintain a viable American military force, prudent foreign policy doctrines, and readiness strategies that take into account real, not hollow or imagined threats to our people, our democratic institutions and U.S. interests." Here the Green Party makes clear what Ralph Nader avoids directly addressing: only by defending imperialism with military force can the wealth of this country be preserved. Their platform also states "We endorse human rights policies in regard to relations with China, South Africa and other nations with a history of rights violations." This point is very vague but can only mean that the Green Party considers u.$. imperialism to be an appropriate arbiter of humyn rights around the world. This ignores that the united $tates is the biggest rights violator in the world. But it also leaves the door open for the united $tates to invade other countries in the name of humyn rights as it did in Iraq, Haiti and many other countries. The Green Party's position on immigration is similar to their foreign policy as a whole. They give lip service to the rights of people of other countries but in the end support only what ensures u.$. wealth and stability. MIM calls for open borders. We are very clear that the wealth in this country is created in the Third World and there is no justification for keeping the borders closed except for keeping the stolen wealth in the united $tates to be enjoyed by Amerikans only. The Green Party calls for particular attention in immigration to be given to "those minorities who are political exiles and refugees, including Russian Jews, mid-East Kurds, Tibetans and Haitians." MIM asks what makes some people political exiles and not others? Is it not a political issue that Mexicans want to cross the border because they can not make enough money in their own country to feed their families? Don't vote, fight imperialism instead Ralph Nader's candidacy has mobilized a lot of support from people who see a vote for him as a protest against the system. In this article we've argued why we do not think a vote for Nader is really a vote against imperialism. Some people will argue that it would be better to vote for an anti-imperialist or even a communist candidate as a true protest against the imperialist system. MIM does not agree with this strategy. It is not possible to win the presidential elections in the united states without bowing to the interests of the imperialists. So there can be no viable candidate representing communist views. MIM thinks bigger than just a few protest votes for a candidate who can not win in an imperialist election. Rather than organizing people to participate in a corrupt system, we organize people to overthrow that system. While we will never defeat imperialism by organizing for participation in imperialist elections, the people of the world will eventually defeat imperialism through revolutionary struggle. Rather than lead people down dead end paths, MIM leads people in revolutionary organizing. If you were thinking about spending your time on election day in the voting booth, consider instead spending it organizing against imperialism. Of course this work requires more than just the time you would spend voting, but ending exploitation and oppression is a worthy cause of a lifetime of work and dedication. Notes: Except where otherwise noted, all quotes found at www.votenader.org. 1. The united $tates had 59 lines per 100 people. Statistical Abstract of the United $tates, 1996.