::::::::
We often use the metaphors of “left wing”, “center”, and “right wing” to categorize political opinions in this country. This practice dates back to the National Assembly in France after their 1789 Revolution. The Jacobins seated themselves on the left side, the Royalists on the right. The problem is, in 18th century France, and in 21st century America there are a lot more than two sets of positions. So why only two dominant political parties?
We idealize the concept of the “centrist”. That voter that isn't predisposed to believe anything, who sees a little wisdom everywhere. Most “centrists” alternate between Democrats and Republicans. Why do they neglect America's emerging political parties? Aren't they supposed to see a little wisdom everywhere? What about new ideas? Is the centrist inclined to accept new ideas? Or is the centrist essentially conservative? A reform here, a reform there, but essentially, keep things the same.
The fact is that, tactically, we are all at war to define the “center” and to define our views as “centrist”. But maybe we shouldn't. What did the centrists do on the question of slavery? A little wisdom here, a little wisdom there . . . What did the centrists do on women's suffrage? A little wisdom here, a little wisdom there . . . What did the centrists do on the War on Vietnam? A little wisdom here, a little wisdom there . . . Centrism is inherently conservative. If you like two opposing viewpoints equally, things will stay the same because the system is designed to keep things the same absent a strong demand.
Meaningful change doesn't come from people who think that everybody has a good point. So, with that in mind . . .
If you want to escalate the War on Afghanistan, vote for Obama or McCain.
If you don't want a firm, rapid timetable for leaving Iraq, vote for Obama or McCain.
If you want another war on the Middle East within the next decade vote for Obama or McCain.
If you don't care about our $10 trillion (and growing) national debt vote for Obama or McCain.
If you want a private health care system that will always waste money and exclude the poor and sick vote Obama or McCain.
If you never want election reform that will give emerging political parties a level playing field vote Obama or McCain.
If you want our military budget to stay the biggest in the world by far and actually grow even more vote Obama or McCain.
If you want to bail out big corporations every time they mess up, with your tax dollars, vote Obama or McCain.
If you think offshore drilling, coal, and nuclear power will solve the climate crisis vote for Obama or McCain.
If you think gay people shouldn't have equal rights to get married vote for Obama or McCain.
If you want a federal government that cares more about locking up potheads than the corporate criminals that export our jobs and steal our life savings, vote Obama or McCain.
If you don't want instant runoff voting vote for Obama or McCain.
If you like the anti-worker, anti-union Taft-Hartley law vote for Obama or McCain.
If you think the minimum wage should stay low and shouldn't be indexed to inflation, vote Obama or McCain.
If you have no fight left in you, vote for Obama or McCain.
If you've had enough, you, my friend, must vote for RALPH NADER.
That's right. Ralph Nader stands for what we need, even though it's hard. He never gets discouraged, he never quits, and he'd rather die than sell out. Vote for yourself, vote for the future, vote NADER. You can find out more at www.votenader.org. On issue after issue, Obama/McCain are wrong and NADER is right. If we don't take action now, we'll settle for nothing later.
You really need to vote for Nader, but no matter who you vote for, remember: politics doesn't end after November 4th. We need full-time citizens to keep the pressure on whoever is elected. The election is just the beginning.
