From 2009. Chris
Hedges, as usual, nails it on the head.
“Liberal fascism” might
be the correct term for what we are witnessing
Liberals
Are Useless
Chris
Hedges
7
December, 2009
Liberals
are a useless lot. They talk about peace and do nothing to challenge
our permanent war economy. They claim to support the working class,
and vote for candidates that glibly defend the North American Free
Trade Agreement. They insist they believe in welfare, the right to
organize, universal health care and a host of other socially
progressive causes, and will not risk stepping out of the mainstream
to fight for them. The only talent they seem to possess is the
ability to write abject, cloying letters to Barack Obama—as if he
reads them—asking the president to come back to his “true”
self. This sterile moral posturing, which is not only useless but
humiliating, has made America’s liberal class an object of public
derision.
I
am not disappointed in Obama. I don’t feel betrayed. I don’t
wonder when he is going to be Obama. I did not vote for the man. I
vote socialist, which in my case meant Ralph Nader, but could have
meant Cynthia McKinney. How can an organization with the oxymoronic
title Progressives for Obama even exist? Liberal groups like these
make political satire obsolete. Obama was and is a brand. He is a
product of the Chicago political machine. He has been skillfully
packaged as the new face of the corporate state. I don’t dislike
Obama—I would much rather listen to him than his smug and venal
predecessor—though I expected nothing but a continuation of the
corporate rape of the country. And that is what he has delivered.
“You
have a tug of war with one side pulling,” Ralph Nader told me when
we met Saturday afternoon. “The corporate interests pull on the
Democratic Party the way they pull on the Republican Party. If you
are a ‘least-worst’ voter you don’t want to disturb John Kerry
on the war, so you call off the anti-war demonstrations in 2004. You
don’t want to disturb Obama because McCain is worse. And every four
years both parties get worse. There is no pull. That is the dilemma
of The Nation and The Progressive and other similar publications.
There is no breaking point. What is the breaking point? The criminal
war of aggression in Iraq? The escalation of the war in Afghanistan?
Forty-five thousand people dying a year because they can’t afford
health insurance? The hollowing out of communities and sending the
jobs to fascist and communist regimes overseas that know how to put
the workers in their place? There is no breaking point. And when
there is no breaking point you do not have a moral compass.”
I
save my anger for our bankrupt liberal intelligentsia of which,
sadly, I guess I am a member. Liberals are the defeated,
self-absorbed Mouse Man in Dostoevsky’s “Notes From Underground.”
They embrace cynicism, a cloak for their cowardice and impotence.
They, like Dostoevsky’s depraved character, have come to believe
that the “conscious inertia” of the underground surpasses all
other forms of existence. They too use inaction and empty moral
posturing, not to affect change but to engage in an orgy of
self-adulation and self-pity. They too refuse to act or engage with
anyone not cowering in the underground. This choice does not satisfy
the Mouse Man, as it does not satisfy our liberal class, but neither
has the strength to change. The gravest danger we face as a nation is
not from the far right, although it may well inherit power, but from
a bankrupt liberal class that has lost the will to fight and the
moral courage to stand up for what it espouses.
Anyone
who says he or she cares about the working class in this country
should have walked out on the Democratic Party in 1994 with the
passage of NAFTA. And it has only been downhill since. If welfare
reform, the 1999 Financial Services Modernization Act, which gutted
the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act—designed to prevent the kind of banking
crisis we are now undergoing—and the craven decision by the
Democratic Congress to continue to fund and expand our imperial wars
were not enough to make you revolt, how about the refusal to restore
habeas corpus, end torture in our offshore penal colonies, abolish
George W. Bush’s secrecy laws or halt the warrantless wiretapping
and monitoring of American citizens? The imperial projects and the
corporate state have not altered under Obama. The state kills as
ruthlessly and indiscriminately in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as
it did under Bush. It steals from the U.S. treasury as rapaciously to
enrich the corporate elite. It, too, bows before the conservative
Israel lobby, refuses to enact serious environmental or health care
reform, regulate Wall Street, end our relationship with private
mercenary contractors or stop handing obscene sums of money, some $1
trillion a year, to the military and arms industry. At what point do
we stop being a doormat? At what point do we fight back? We may lose
if we step outside the mainstream, but at least we will salvage our
self-esteem and integrity.
I
learned to dislike liberals when I lived in Roxbury, the inner-city
in Boston, as a seminary student at Harvard Divinity School. I
commuted into Cambridge to hear professors and students talk about
empowering people they never met. It was the time of the leftist
Sandinista government in Nicaragua. Spending two weeks picking coffee
in that country and then coming back and talking about it for the
rest of the semester was the best way to “credentialize” yourself
as a revolutionary. But few of these “revolutionaries” found the
time to spend 20 minutes on the Green Line to see where human beings
in their own city were being warehoused little better than animals.
They liked the poor, but they did not like the smell of the poor. It
was a lesson I never forgot.
I
was also at the time a member of the Greater Boston YMCA boxing team.
We fought on Saturday nights for $25 in arenas in working-class
neighborhoods like Charlestown. My closest friends were construction
workers and pot washers. They worked hard. They believed in unions.
They wanted a better life, which few of them ever got. We used to run
five miles after our nightly training, passing through the Mission
Main and Mission Extension Housing Projects, and they would joke, “I
hope we get mugged.” They knew precisely what to do with people who
abused them. They may not have been liberal, they may not have
finished high school, but they were far more grounded than most of
those I studied with across the Charles River. They would have felt
awkward, and would have been made to feel awkward, at the little
gatherings of progressive and liberal intellectuals at Harvard, but
you could trust and rely on them.
I
went on to spend two decades as a war correspondent. The qualities
inherent in good soldiers or Marines, like the qualities I found
among those boxers, are qualities I admire—self-sacrifice, courage,
the ability to make decisions under stress, the capacity to endure
physical discomfort, and a fierce loyalty to those around you, even
if it puts you in greater danger. If liberals had even a bit of their
fortitude we could have avoided this mess. But they don’t. So here
we are again, begging Obama to be Obama. He is Obama. Obama is not
the problem. We are.
Chris
Hedges, author of “Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the
Triumph of Spectacle,” will speak with other anti-war activists at
Lafayette Park across the street from the White House at 11 a.m. Dec.
12 in a rally calling for the withdrawal of all American troops from
Iraq and Afghanistan.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.