Nader rouses Yalies with call to 'conscience'

The cries of "Let Ralph debate" were drowned out only by the applause of a standing ovation that swept through Battell Chapel on Wed., Oct. 4. Over 1,000 people—many of whom were turned away after waiting in a line that stretched around the corner—came to hear Green Party leader and presidential candidate Ralph Nader. He spoke for two hours about his campaign, addressing what he termed "cash register politics" and challenging students to act with the same dedication as the abolitionists of over a century ago.

LIVIA DEMARCHIS/YH Green Party candidate Ralph Nader speaks to reporters about his campaign and being denied participation in the debates.

"We grow up corporate," Nader said. "We look at the world through corporate eyes." He explained that the domination of corporate interests prevails in both the Democratic and Republican parties, especially in campaign finance and health care. In a press conference before the speech, he called corporate influence "an iron fist" that students should try to resist.

Convinced that the two parties are almost identical, Nader called the election a choice "between the bad and worse." He said citizens in the present system are also steeped in apathy by "artificial questions [in] predictable debates," which in turn keeps their expectations low. He dared students to raise their standards and defy the control of a government that is funded and influenced by corporations. "When power is concentrated," Nader shouted amid erupting cheers, "it's like a gag in your mouth, a novocaine injection to your brain."

Tuesday night's Commission on Presidential Debates certainly gagged Nader with "political exclusion," as the third party candidate called it. Though polls show that a majority of Americans want to see him in the debates, Nader has not been allowed to be a part of them. Furthermore, despite the fact that a Northeastern University student gave him a legitimate ticket to the Lipke Auditorium—the space adjoining the main stage of the debates that provided TV coverage of them—John Bezeris, a Commission representative, refused him admission. In response, Nader has stipulated a settlement to the Commission, threatening to sue unless they agree to give a public apology and donate $25,000 to the Harvard Law School Clinic for Electoral Reform.

As of now, however, the two-party system is still in operation, with Bush and Gore as the viable options. Because most people voting for Nader would be drawing votes away from Gore, many have raised questions about votes being wasted on a candidate who cannot win, thereby aiding a Bush victory. Others, however, see a Green Party vote as far from a throwaway—substantial support for Nader would encourage the development of what he calls a Green Party watchdog, alerting Republicans and Democrats to the country's more progressive aspirations.

When confronted with one of the fundamental concerns of the 2000 election—the fact that the president will choose three Supreme Court Justice members in his term—Nader remained nonplussed. He reiterated that the two parties are indistinguishable, and that the difference in choices of justices under the two-party system is negligible.

In terms of securing student votes, Nader's belief in the two major parties' interchangeability remained his weakest point. "It's unfathomable to me that Bush could be president," Georgina Cullman, TC '02, said. "Nader reminded me of my political beliefs, of what I wish our country was really like, but I might not feel comfortable voting for him because of my fear [that Bush would be elected]." Other students voiced similar feelings of ambivalence. "Nader isn't really running for president, he's running for funding," William Crawford, BR '01, former president of the Yale Political Union and a member of the Tory Party, said.

Crawford was also skeptical of some of Nader's other arguments. He saw the anti-corporate stance, for instance, as being "on the way out." In many areas, corporations have been shrinking over the last ten years, not expanding," he said.

Despite hesitation, students showed excitement over Nader's speech and campaign. Emma Snyder, DC '02, said Nader gave her "the sense that he's not our parents' generation," and that "this is our battle to fight." As for Crawford, he contemplated voting for Nader "to help the Greens get matching funds next time."

Advocating persistent campus activism as a step toward changing the system—"I'm sure the students in the '60s flunked a few classes," he said—Nader left the audience with a challenge to begin taking action with the upcoming election: "Why don't we vote our conscience?"

Back to News...