He’s baaaack. He’s run in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004, and his Olympics style effort to be the Energizer campaigner, regardless of whether or not his ideas have any hope of making it to the White House, continues. I confess, I voted for the guy in 2000. A lot of the things he has to say make sense to me. What I like about him is his ability to cut through the crap and say the unpopular thing. It’s unpopular to say that spending 3.8 million dollars in a single month working on your image to get elected to political office is a criminally irresponsible waste of resources, but it’s reality. It’s unpopular to point out that choosing to buy the new gadget with a “stimulus” instead of paying off the old debt is not healthy for the economy, but it’s reality. It’s *exceedingly* unpopular to point out that the Western world is flatly incapable (through force, through occupation, or through spending) of moving Islamist rhetoric to the comfortable middle ground of tolerance for economic practices which *do* threaten the traditional way of life and government that provide fertile ground for raising new generations to believe in enemies of their faith, but it’s reality.
In 2000, I was only barely applying what I had learned in economics and history to the decisions I made in the voting booth. I was six months pregnant, and I was disillusioned with the realities of life five years out of high school… for some reason, I had dropped out of college earnestly believing that just being smart would generate wealth in my life. I knew I would find my niche without tying myself to a curriculum that I didn’t enjoy studying.
What I didn’t see was a job market that reflected those beliefs. I saw a world that, as Hobbes pointed out, was nasty and brutish, and not at all promising. Ralph Nader spoke to the idealist in me that wanted it to be different. Where privilege was not so much a privilege as it was a right. Where the evil capitalists that made life hard were overthrown by the forces of “reason”.
Eight years have changed me a lot more than they have changed him… understandably. When I look at his blog, I see a guy who is still pointing to the right problems. Multi-million dollar silver parachutes for corporate executives when workers on the front lines can’t afford to keep up with the rising cost of living do hurt the economy, and the current political culture is not doing anything to change it. The difference is that I no longer feel that it is government’s responsibility to stop it from happening. It’s on the backs of the people that these changes need to occur, or not at all. If corporations choose to cut wages to the point where workers cannot pay the bills, then those workers will find other jobs. If those jobs aren’t available because corporations have cut the costs in such a way that private industry can’t compete, then the economy will suffer. If corporations don’t realize that loyal and well paid employees produce better work and better profits, then this is ultimately a problem for the business schools to address. They’ll do it effectively, or the economy will collapse, and not an ounce of assistance from the government will change that, either way.
So, Nader, I must respectfully decline your offer to cure all of our social ills. I agree with you on many issues, but I don’t think your solutions are SMART enough. They may be specific. They may be measurable. But they are neither attainable, realistic, nor are they timely… and frankly, I doubt they ever will be. Nasty, brutish, and short, this life is what we make of it. The government can’t solve it for us, and it frequently makes things worse when it tries.
