At 8:58 PM 7/23/96, R. Anders Schneiderman wrote: >I think Nader's position is appalling, and I find it hard to understand how >anyone can argue that voting for him is any better than voting for Clinton. >When Clinton does things that make my stomach turn, it's usually because >he's protecting his butt. Nader doesn't have that excuse; he has no power >to protect. The only reason Nader didn't take a stand on this issue is >because he's another White Boy on the Left who doesn't take racism >seriously. I can't speak for Nader; his refusal to talk about "gonadal politics," as he calls it, is also unfortunate. But I do think it's a bit of a leap to conclude that Nader is "another White Boy on the Left who doesn't take racism seriously." You could also argue that affirmative action is entirely in accordance with ruling class strategy - as Marx said, the better a ruling class is able to absorb the natural leaders of the oppressed classes, "the more solid and dangerous its rule." Would making that argument be a sign that one "doesn't take racism seriously"? Anders, like his comrade Nathan, seems very quick to accuse others of various failings, even as they're composing an apology for Bill Clinton. This "Clinton is protecting his butt" argument is one of the most ancient apologies for lesser evilism. Clinton was one of the prime movers in pushing the Democratic Party rightward. Was he "protecting his butt" when he helped found, and later lead, the DLC? How about when he was enforcing right to work laws in Arkansas? When he was signing Rickey Ray Rector's death warrant? The man has a history; he's not some good-hearted liberal forced rightwards by circumstance. Insofar as he believes in anything at all (aside from his re-election) he is a classic neoliberal yuppie Democrat. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> web: <http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html>
