Forgetting the face of pluralism

The historic 2008 US presidential election has finally come to a close with an epic victory by Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

What President Elect Obama has achieved is formidable. Perhaps his greatest achievement is having stimulated political interest in an entire segment of the American population that has traditionally been underrepresented in the voting process. The high voter turnout, which has been a key topic for the media since the Democratic National Convention, cannot be attributed to anything else.

Meanwhile, obtaining information on less media-friendly aspects of the election results has been quite a challenge. Detailed election results for candidates other than Obama and McCain, for instance, are hard to come by. These results reveal a picture that is a far cry from the Ross Perot years and even from the 2000 election, in which Ralph Nader was credited with "aiding" George W. Bush to victory by taking away votes in Florida that otherwise may have gone to Al Gore. This year, according to C-SPAN, Ralph Nader is credited with 0.5% of the popular vote, Bob Barr with 0.4% and Cynthia McKinney with 0.1%. This is probably the least talked about side effect of yesterday's triumph.

Of course, these three candidates and the eight other third party candidates have received little media attention over the course of their campaigns. Over the past three months I have come across wrapups of their profiles and positions in the mainstream media in the US and abroad, although these always remain marginal and information-poor. I have to hand it to the French language media, though. Both the Figaro and the Monde went so far as to publish articles yesterday on third party candidates. This is more than we can say about their British and German counterparts. I applaud their efforts to shine a spotlight on these politicians who struggle to make their voice heard, despite this coming a few months too late.

What is less convincing is the manner in which they do so. Depicting third party candidates as curiosities at best and political nuisances at worst, these journalists undermine the immense added value these candidates bring to a political landscape that is increasingly bipartisan. Third party candidates, in view of their marginalized status, are often behind the most radical recommendations for foreign and domestic policy, and this provides a vital stimulus for discussion between all parties.

The two major parties, on the other hand, have to deal with the grip of corporate influence on their policies, which brings a whole host of obligations and responsibilities with it. We witnessed the ever complexifying relationship between the corporate and political world this summer, when the US Congress enacted legislation immunizing telecommunications agencies that had cooperated with the Bush administration in spying on US citizens. A short time thereafter, one of those telecomms giants, AT&T, threw a party for Blue Dog Democrats in Denver during the Democratic National Convention.

In these circumstances, it becomes increasingly difficult, for instance, for a Democrat to openly criticize the niche corporate America has made itself in American politics. This topic continues, however, to be honestly discussed in third party circles, and especially among those close to independent candidate Ralph Nader.

Then there is the need for major party candidates to compromise, or rather, to appear to be compromising. A good example of this phenomenon is Barack Obama's willingness to distance himself from his original anti-war rhetoric. This rhetoric, which allowed him to differentiate himself from Hillary Rodham Clinton in the primaries, became much less useful to Obama during the general election, during which time he was obliged to appeal to the more centrist segment of his own party and of the American population.

A third party candidate does not need to adapt his or her message in this way. Green party candidate Cynthia McKinney, for instance, could allow her anti-war stance to permeate throughout her campaign, notably meeting up with and embracing the endorsement of the otherwise divisive anti-war figure Cindy Sheehan.

We need outspoken politicians like these to put issues on the table and get the discussion going. We need them at round tables and at presidential and vice-presidential debates to voice opinions that others can't voice. We need them to counter major party candidates and bring out the best and the worst in them. They are essential to the democratic process and should not be forgotten.