Lepus,

Glad to hear your side of the discussion. I too am socialistically inclined but true to the idea of socialism, all socialists don't agree.

Gloria Steinham has made one point that is indisputable regardless of the ideologies that each candidate represents. In the real world of American politics as it stands today, a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.

I think that's a bad situation. But I disagree wholeheartedly with Nader that there is no difference with Gore and Bush. That is Nader's Achille's heel, that he can't see that. He is too much of an ideologue.

Socialists have had a bad rep as using cliche invectives to substantiate their position based on psuedo-Marxian, Schatmanite or other socialist writers. There is no qualifying arguement for the use of invective. Steinham's position is not one of compromise. It doesn't fit her pattern. We need to be careful because Nader's ideas may be buried when he is considered to be "withered and useless" as is the fate of most political gadflies who never attain popular appeal.

The socialist arguments prevail but only in the light of reasonable information and not invective. Socialism could work under certain circumstances and has in the US in such socialistic ideas as Social Security or government protection of trade unionism. The Civil Rights Movement was a form os socialistic appeal which caused governmental legislation to take place.

The problem Nader has is being identified with a "spoiler" which is too bad because many of his ideas are valid. But Steinham is facing reality. If Bush and a Rep8ublican congress gets in, you can kiss pro-choice goodbye. You can expect Bush to turn his back on trade-unionism, the environment, and civil rights. He will be a puppet for the affluent and corporative lobbies.

Gore, on the other hand, may not be as far left as some of us would like but he will not destroy the little progress that has been made in these areas of reproductive rights, civil rights, and even in the environment.

Nader's best function is as a social commentator and gadfly to remind us that there are important things to be done in this country. But he may be remembered as being a "spoiler" and this would be unfortunate.

Frank