Hendrik Hertzberg, in this week’s New Yorker, takes on the Nader legacy.
For the past three years, everything Nader accomplished during his period of unparalleled creativity, which lasted from around 1963 to around 1976, has been systematically undermined by the Administration that he was instrumental in putting in power. Government efforts on behalf of clean air and water, fuel efficiency, workplace safety, consumer protection, and public health have been starved, stymied, or sabotaged in tandem with the shift of resources from public purposes to high-end private consumption, the increasing identity of government and corporate interests, and the growth of a cult of secrecy and arrogance that began well before September 11, 2001. Nader bears a very large share of responsibility for these spectacular traducements of his proclaimed values. So it is quite a tribute to the brilliance of his early achievements that an argument can still be made that the net effect of his career has been positive.
What I love about the entire piece is that it doesn’t negate Nader’s positive contributions, but it does look at what his legacy will be. He argues that, despite 2000, Nader is still a net positive — which I am not sure I agree with — but that if his run in 2004 were to help a second term, then Nader’s assistance in creating eight years of Bush-rule would effectively negate the good work the man had done in the public sphere.
I, for the record, agree. He has tarnished his progressive legacy already. He may be well on his way to destroying it.