It’s the kind of story a lot of Americans like. Shadowy figures follow a solitary man around, as he fights to expose a huge corporation placing customers at unnecessary risk of their lives. One of the points that An Unreasonable Man makes is that we have almost lost perspective on Ralph Nader’s legacy, the risks that he took and the battles that he won.
He is thoughtful, intense, and quietly passionate. There are so many things we take for granted now which were children of his passion, such as seat belts, air bags, health protection, the Freedom of Information Act used by reporters and citizens on a daily basis to examine their government, and more. Even the very principles of consumer rights and public safety seem to stem from his actions. It is said that he has a legislative record that any president would be proud of, without ever being elected. Yet, when he ran for office, he found many doors barred.
As part of ITVS’ Community Campaign “Vote Democracy” to encourage young voters, PBS is showing the film “An Unreasonable Man” on December 18. America is struggling once again to choose between Democrat and Republican, and after watching the film viewers will have a different perspective on why it’s an either / or choice – or even whether it really is their choice.
The film covers the span of Nader’s career (so far), beginning with fresh out of Harvard Law and gathering fellow Ivy League students to put their youthful energy and brilliance into fighting for social change in Washington. By the end of the film he is estranged from the organization he founded, reviled by Democrats who blame him for not abandoning decades of fighting spirit and handing them the 2000 presidential race, and even seen by some as irrelevant, though our modern society is permeated with the results of his principles in action. A story about his mother holding Senator Prescott Bush’s feet to the fire (grandfather of the current president) over a local dam in Connecticut shows his heritage.
Perhaps the most alarming moment in the film is not the dramatizations of GM gumshoes following him and frightening phone calls to him and his family late at night as he pursued the automaker in congressional testimony about car safety and neglect, but at the 2004 presidential debates in Boston.
When the debates, according to the film no longer run by the League of Women Voters but a consortium of former Democratic and Republican party leaders, declined to invite him because he did not meet the preselection criteria, once again his team came through, with a ticket to the debate audience donated by a Boston student. Appearing at the gate, the filmed events unfold – Nader is refused entry, even with a ticket. But he has decades of persistence behind him.
Nader arranges with a news crew to watch the debate and respond from a nearby mobile studio. Again, he is refused entry even to the grounds. In the end, a Massachusetts State Policeman threatens him with arrest, citing the well known phrase: “I’m just following orders.” The film then shows a “face book,” apparently created so that the police can keep all but the authorized candidates and average citizens with a ticket from anywhere near the debate location.
Many Americans continue to vote “practically,” for a candidate who “can win.” The film reminds us that this is not the spirit of democracy. In fact, they note, our preselection system has little to do with democracy at times, and the media is complicit in focusing on horse races instead of issues. An Unreasonable Man celebrates Nader’s legacy as a passionate, independent thinker, and suggests that we would do well to follow his lead.
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/votedemocracy
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/unreasonableman
