Mock Ralph Nader all you like, but he's got things to say that no one else seems to care about. Why can't someone with a legitimate shot of winning talk about what really matters? Because they will be shouted down by both parties. Called cooks and losers by the media, lambasted by the talk show and late night hosts. In short, the money will bring to bear its weight and such a party will be effectively marginalized. Sorry, Ralph. If the "progressives" would listen to you and then listen to Hillary, they'd realize that you are their obvious choice.
But maybe its just easier to be herded.
The following is from an email from Nader 2004 (they're still trying to pay off their campaign debt!)
Did you know?
Top executives now make more in a day than the average worker makes in a year.
Plutocracy: 1. The rule or power of wealth or the wealthy; 2. A government or state in which the wealthy class rules. 3. A class for group ruling, or exercising power or influence, by virtue of its wealth. (Webster's Unabridged Dictionary)
Of the world's 100 largest economies, 47 are nations, and 53 are corporations.
Seventy-five percent of major corporations hire a union-busting firm to stop employees from forming a union.
Stretch limousines are longer, yet more people are homeless.
Thirty zip codes in America have become fabulously wealthy.
Meanwhile, whole urban and rural communities are languishing in poverty, crumbling infrastructure, growing economic insecurity and fear.
"Inherited economic power is as inconsistent with the ideals of this generation as inherited political power was inconsistent with the ideals of the generation which established our government."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt
Born on home plate -- Forty-two percent of those listed have inherited sufficient wealth to rank among the Forbes 400.
[Economic Apartheid in America]
In 1999, the 225 richest had a combined wealth of $1 trillion. That's equal to the combined annual income of the world's 2.5 billion poorest people.
The richest 10 percent of the world's population receives 49.6 percent of the total world income.
The bottom 60 percent receives 13.9 percent of the world's income.
The wealth of the world's three most well-to-do individuals now exceeds the combined gross domestic product of the 48 least developed countries.
Half of the world's population of six billion live on less than $2 a day, while 1.3 billion get by on less than $1 a day.
The image above was taken with explicit permission (for once) from fernando_graphicos.
3 comments:
I don't want to be a nay-sayer, but what does Nader propose to do? How can we address the unequal distribution of the wealth? By exactly what means? How limit the power of the corporations? We need to hear real plans. I respect his viewpoint but I wonder how he would effect change.
I challenge you to look into his efforts to effect change:
http://www.votenader.org/
http://www.commercialalert.org/
I think if Nader became president he would do a much better job than people like Bush and Kerry. He would be faced with an obstructionist Congress, but in some sense that's a good thing. When Congress and the Executive see eye-to-eye on everything, we're in a dangerous place.
It's truly frustrating that dangerous incompetents can take office and be treated deferentially, but those who talk about important issues intelligently are shunned and smirked at.
It is a truism that I picked up from Douglas Adams that the people who have the necessary skills to be elected president are exactly the sort of people who should not be allowed to be president.
For example, we spend much,much more on our military than our closest competitors. There's no need for this. If we cut military spending and spent the money instead on a single-payer healthcare system, humanity would be better off. However this sort of idea is completely barred from public discourse. The military and the insurance industry stands to lose too much, and they have the ears of powerful people. That's why it's so refreshing to hear a candidate like Nader or Kucinich.
Post a Comment