Chris Hedges: Rebellion Is The Only Way To Stop The Ruling Elites

| Strategize!

Above photo: Freedom Plaza in Washington, DC, October 2011.

Clearing the FOG cohosts, Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese, interviewed journalist and author Chris Hedges about the significant events of 2019 and what activists must prepare for in 2020 and beyond. Hedges covered uprisings and wars in the Middle East, Balkans, and Central America for twenty years as a foreign correspondent. He has studied and written books about sacrifice zones, the failures of the liberal class and the rise of the right in the United States. He shares the wisdom he has gained from his experiences watching governments fall to inform us about what to expect and how to build power. You can listen to the full interview plus current news and analysis on Clearing the FOG.



Clearing the FOG (CtF): What were some of the events in 2019 that you thought were of importance?

Chris Hedges (CH): I would say there are two. The failure to address the climate emergency, which is seeing an acceleration of the deterioration and destruction of the ecosystem that is quite dramatic and pronounced in California and Australia, would be number one. Even if we stopped all carbon emissions today, which again the ruling elites utterly betrayed and failed us in Madrid, we’re still going to deal with catastrophic climate change. The other was the failure on the part of the Democratic Party to address the rupture of social bonds and deep social inequality that has torn apart the country and resulted in the election of Donald Trump.

At the end of the year, after the complete failure of the Mueller report, which was hyped by all sorts of media organizations, not only Rachel Maddow and MSNBC but also the New York Times, we got this kind of mind-numbing spectacle of the impeachment with that very cloying and repugnant moral posturing on the part of the Democratic Party. What they did was selective. They charged Trump not with all of the most egregious impeachable offenses and constitutional violations that he carried out, but with the most trivial. That’s contempt for Congress and the attempt to get the Ukrainian President Zelensky to open an investigation of Biden and his son in exchange for about 400 million in US aid and allowing Zelenski to visit the White House.

If the Democratic Party was committed to actually defending the Constitution, then they would have to go back and impeach Trump for a series of violations that both George W. Bush and Barack Obama routinely committed. They don’t want to do that. So when I hear them talking about the restoration of the rule of law and see that they ignored the most serious Constitutional violations, which have now been normalized by both parties, it’s an example of at best self-delusion and probably very cynical manipulation.

I can run through a few. Bush launches two illegal wars that are never declared by Congress as demanded by the Constitution. He places the entire US public under government surveillance that’s violating the Fourth Amendment. He authorizes torture and kidnapping of foreign nationals who are not even US citizens and holds them where they’re tortured in black sites and offshore penal colonies around the world. Obama expands the illegal wars, which are now up to 11 if we count Yemen. Edward Snowden reveals that intelligence agencies are monitoring and spying on all of us, downloading all of our data and metrics into government computers where they’re stored for in perpetuity and nothing is done. Obama misuses the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force act to erase due process. That’s when he argues that the executive branch has the right to assassinate US citizens starting with a radical cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki and two weeks later his 16-year-old son, in essence, serving as judge, jury, and executioner. And then, of course, he signs into law section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act, which overturns the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act that prohibits the use of the military as a domestic police force. I sued him in federal court over that. And then there are other again bipartisan constitutional violations, including violating treaty clauses that are supposed to be ratified by the Senate, violating the appointments clause where you need Senate confirmation and the routine abuse of executive orders.

Watching the impeachment process was a very depressing spectacle for me because it was about the pretense of the rule of law. It again exposed the fact that the Democratic Party will refuse to be self-reflective and refuse to confront its complicity in neoliberalism, deindustrialization, programs of austerity, massive expansion of our prison system and militarizing of our police. It tries to personalize all of our problems in the figure of Trump.

CtF: You have written that the right-wing has picked up revolutionary rhetoric because people in the United States and around the world see the corruption of the elites. Now with these right-wing, fascists rising, do you see any possibility of the Left being able to pick up that need for a revolutionary vision and plan?

CH: Well, I do see the need but I don’t see it happening. I think that is driven by fear. Especially at every presidential election cycle, the Left, the liberal class just crumbles.

The attraction of Trump is that he rightly attacks the Deep State, which is real. But what is the Deep State? The Deep State is the generals, the war industry, the bankers, the lobbyists, the corporatists, the intelligence agencies, the government bureaucrats and the technocrats who actually run both domestic and international policy. The fact is we don’t control our own economy. It’s controlled by Goldman Sachs and Citibank and JP Morgan Chase.

The Washington Post when it released the Afghanistan Papers recently, the roughly more than 2,000 pages of internal government documents about the war in Afghanistan, which they obtained through a three-year legal battle, exposed exactly the bipartisan lies, fraud, deceit, corruption, waste and mismanagement during the 18-year conflict that was carried out by the ruling elites, by the Deep State, the Deep state that so many Trump supporters have been betrayed by and turned on with a vengeance. Trump’s attraction is that he calls them out often in very vulgar and crude terms.

The Democratic Party in pushing Biden, because he’s been anointed by the Democratic Party donor class, is seeking to perpetuate a system that at least half or more of the country wants to get rid of. And the Left has not embraced or understood that the whole ideology of the ruling elite – neoliberalism and imperialism – just doesn’t resonate anymore. They’re bound to this ideology because the people funding the party recognize quite correctly that if they don’t have that kind of corporate money and corporate backing, they will lose power. And so they’d rather take the whole system down, which is what they’re doing.

This is the problem of the Left. It has misread power. I’m a strong supporter of Extinction Rebellion because I think they’ve correctly read power. We can go back for the last four decades, carbon admissions have exponentially risen. All of the attempts to work within the system, this is and others, have been an utter and complete failure. And the Left, partly because we were so knocked off balance over the last few decades, our organizations were either co-opted or destroyed, is just not willing to face this reality.

CtF: Putting aside the Democratic Party, how do you see the potential for the left movement awakening to anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist thinking?

CH: I don’t know that the Left is organized. I don’t know that it has yet offered a strong alternative vision to the mainstream. I think it’s often divided by identity politics without grasping that the fundamental issue is class. This is class warfare and as Warren Buffett has correctly said, his side is winning.

We also have to make it clear that they have not only marginalized us but cut down the spaces by which we can communicate. That’s why I’m on RT. What I do on RT should be on a functioning public broadcasting system, but the public broadcasting system, in particular PBS, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers.

If you go back to the 70s, you could see Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Angela Davis, and all sorts of people who were not beholden to institutions or to corporations offering a critique of power. The last national show that we had that critiqued power is Bill Moyers’ show, which is now off the air and in the end, was funded through a private foundation.

All of those sentiments are on the rise, but it is yet to be translated into a political movement. And if there are uprisings without that kind of vision and focus, then the ruling elites can easily decapitate them.

CtF: You worked with us back when we were organizing the occupation in Washington DC throughout 2011 and that was a time of a lot of uprisings around the world. The Occupy Movement really took off in the United States. Now we’re seeing a rise again around the world against corruption and neoliberal capitalism. Do you think that has the potential to come back to the United States in another wave and what do we need to do to be prepared for that if it does?

CH: I covered uprisings for 20 years as a foreign correspondent all around the globe, the Palestinian uprisings, most of the revolutions in Eastern Europe, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and the street demonstrations that brought down Slobodan Milosevic. What’s fascinating is that what ignites it, no one can predict. Even purported leaders of the opposition don’t know what pushes people over the edge, which is usually something very relatively in and of itself minor and even banal.

Neoliberalism or global capitalism is a global phenomenon. It has affected people in the same way.  One of the things we don’t hear about the protests in Hong Kong is that especially the young are without work and social inequality is very pronounced. I think that economic tyranny lies at the root of the uprisings that we’ve seen not only in Hong Kong, but in India, Chile, and France, and in Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon. But it also lies at the root of the rise of these right-wing demagogues as we just saw in Britain with Boris Johnson, Narendra Modi in India, and Trump in the United States.

And so, yes, I think that we’re not immune to this kind of social unrest and this kind of upheaval, especially as the forces that created it have no regulation and no restraint – student debt, personal debt, national debt. We’re about to watch the Republican Party again take an axe and slash social services and food stamps. These corporatists know only one word and that’s more and they won’t stop until there’s blowback. The problem is that if that blowback is just kind of a release in the streets of anger and frustration and rage, all legitimate, without an alternative vision and without alternative structures to begin to challenge power, then it can be crushed.

CtF: When we were involved in Occupy, it was a different phase of the movement’s development. Occupy was an eruption of anger, the 99% versus the 1%. Since Occupy, there has been a lot of work done by various groups on new economy ideas, whether it’s participatory budgeting or worker-owned businesses, cooperatives or public banks. California is the first state to do a public bank since North Dakota in 1919-20. We’re seeing some movement toward the beginning I think of a vision that you’re describing and I think that’s a potential positive.

The other thing that’s a challenge in the United States is the electoral system because right now so many activists are getting pulled into the 2020 election particularly through the Sanders campaign and a little bit through the Warren campaign and somewhat in the Green efforts, but those are so squashed in the United States that they are hardly visible. We see the election system as a kind of a mirage democracy. It’s molded, manipulated and in the end, never quenches people’s needs.

Sanders is interesting because if he loses because of a Democratic primary violation, that could create an eruption itself. If he wins, then you have someone in office you can actually push to try to get things done. That may cause an eruption. Can the Sanders campaign have that kind of an impact?

CH: I think you could make a strong case that the nomination was stolen from Sanders in 2016. People walked out of the Democratic National Convention, but it didn’t have that impact.

The New York Times has run more than one story where they are interviewing anonymous Democratic Party donors who are already organizing to make sure neither Sanders nor Warren, and I don’t trust Warren too much, get the nomination. It is the question of whether you can work from within. I have long argued that the Democratic Party is not salvageable. It’s not reformable. It is not in any sense a real political party in that the base has any real say.

Maybe the Sanders campaign will prove me wrong. I hope they do prove me wrong, but I don’t think so. And if Sanders did get the nomination, these rich donors who find Trump an embarrassment and repugnant and vulgar and inept have made it clear they will support Trump.

If Sanders had won in 2016, we would have had complete paralysis because Sanders would have never had the base within either the Republican or the Democratic Party to push through the kinds of reforms he says he wants to institute. I just don’t think at this point our system of what Sheldon Wolin called “inverted totalitarianism” is reformable or salvageable. Nor do I think that electoral politics are going to bring about the kinds of radical reforms, especially in terms of our addiction to fossil fuels, that are urgently needed.

CtF: What’s happening in Chile is really interesting because it is stronger than what anyone predicted. Piñera just announced that in April he will put forward discussions and planning to talk about developing a new constitution, which is one of the major demands of the protesters. What are your thoughts on what’s happening down there?

CH: The examples of Chile, Hong Kong, and Lebanon are important because these people have taken to the streets to put pressure on the ruling elites, which is what we have to do. That Constitution was written as soon as Pinochet took power by the so-called Chicago School, the global corporatist and neo-liberal, Milton Friedman-type economists on behalf of the world’s ruling elites. And the hands of any Chilean government have been effectively tied because of that Constitution.

There’s nothing at this point that has proved to be an impediment to the further concentration of wealth in the hands of this global oligarchic elite. Eight families now hold as much wealth as 50 percent of the world’s population. We’re certainly seeing during the Trump administration an acceleration of the demolition of government controls and regulations, the further privatizing of public lands, and public services, the assault on labor unions, the ability of global speculators to use trillions of dollars lent to them of government money at virtually zero percent interest to do things like buy back their own stock to swell their own compensation packages.

The corporations are back to doing exactly what they were doing before 2008 with structured asset destruction through inflation, stripping assets through mergers and acquisitions and raising levels of debt incumbency, which has created this huge debt peonage on the public. Jamie Dimon has been indicted along with JPMorgan Chase more than any other bank in American history for this kind of fraud. I mean really sleazy stuff like having veterans sign mortgage loans and then jacking those loans up to amounts that they can’t pay.

We’ve created another bubble. The Ponzi schemes are back in business. In addition to creating income inequality and monopoly power, that is going to create another financial collapse. When it comes, I don’t know what will trigger it, but it’s not a sustainable system and what will happen then? Will they go back and demand more money, trillions of dollars from the US Treasury? How will people react?

Certainly, people will react with a kind of outrage and anger. But we’re headed for an extremely difficult period especially because they have stripped us of all of our rights: privacy, due process, habeas corpus. And now under Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act, they can deploy the military into the streets. And they’ll use everything within their power. They will not shrink from using coercion and force to maintain control. And it could get pretty ugly. I mean, we have a thousand of our citizens right now who are shot dead by police, almost all of them unarmed, almost all poor people of color in American cities. That’s one every eight hours.

CtF: One of the challenges on the left is understanding what’s happening around the world. The United States is getting more aggressive and somewhat more sophisticated in its regime-change campaigns. There are so many reasons for people in Hong Kong to protest. It’s a neoliberal capitalist paradise where there’s almost no enforcement of business or finance crimes and people have a very wide wealth divide and inequality, expensive housing, and low paying jobs with no future. It’s just a really hard situation for the vast majority of people in Hong Kong so it’s understandable that it’s a big uprising.

Then it’s interesting to see the National Endowment for Democracy’s role in Hong Kong. They are spending more than a million dollars a year. They have been funding anti-China movements in Hong Kong since before the turnover of Hong Kong to China. These Hong Kong protests are turning into “Trump save us” or anti-China stuff, singing the Star-Spangled Banner or putting up the UK flag in the legislature, saying “bring us back to colonialism.” This is really the US targeting China.

CH: Right, but it was Lord Salisbury who said there are no permanent allies, there’s only permanent power. So if you look at the whole human rights drive going back to Charter 77 founded by Václav Havel in Czechoslovakia, he was a non-person within Czechoslovakia. The only way you could hear Václav Havel’s voice was over Voice of America. I knew Havel and Havel was not a supporter of US imperialism. He was a socialist.

In repressive situations, we’ll often make alliances. All the points you make are true. I’m not arguing them. But the idea that any resistance movement is somehow untainted is wrong. In the whole Cold War, the Soviet Union, which you know had a very deeply repressive, anti-democratic system, backed revolutionary socialist governments, such as the Cuban government, which I would support. In terms of foreign affairs, there often are contradictions, moral contradictions as you correctly pointed out, but I don’t think that invalidates the uprisings themselves.

CtF: The 2020s are going to be a time when major crises are culminating, the climate crisis, economic crisis, militarism, and repression. What would be your advice to activists to where they should put their focus or things that they should be preparing for?

CH: Well, I think Extinction Rebellion, which is this radical climate group that just organized thousands of people to shut down city centers in about 60 cities around the globe has got it. It’s nonviolent occupation of bridges and roads and roundabouts to paralyze commerce and to begin to force the ruling elites to respond to the climate emergency. Extinction Rebellion is quite clear that they’re not interested in reform. They’re interested in rebellion. They are interested in removing the ruling elites from power. They will do that by breaking the law and by going to jail. Over a thousand people were arrested in London.

That’s where we really have to go. We have to use our numbers to paralyze the system. That’s the only hope that we have. And I think that’s what we have been seeing in countries like Lebanon, Chile, and Hong Kong. I think, especially if we talk about the climate emergency alone, that is the only mechanism left to save us.

CtF: Thank you, Chris. You can read Chris on Truthdig and watch him on RT. 

  • tapatio

    Excellent and accurate.

  • An excellent account of the coming civil war in the USA is found in John Michael Greer’s 2015 publication “Twilight’s Last Gleaming”.

    Quite a few recent articles have been discussing civil war in the USA on quite a few different online news site, such as:

    And this article lists 50 unbelievable facts indicating the collapse of the USA. One point of the 50 states that a recent survey showed 67% of Americans now expect civil war:

  • kevinzeese


  • Tony

    Outstanding show, outstanding interview.

  • Tony

    “The Deep State is the generals, the war industry, the bankers, the
    lobbyists, the corporatists, the intelligence agencies, the government
    bureaucrats and the technocrats who actually run both domestic and
    international policy.”

    I would also add the “Deep State” members; NED, School Of The Americas, USAID, Freedom House, etc

  • I know your writing and appreciate your vote of confidence. It is meaningful to me and others who know who you are.

  • kevinzeese

    Thanks. I meant to write ‘approve’ so that your comment would be posted. When there are URL’s linked to a comment, they are automatically stopped for review. This is a way to stop spam or people trying to sell products.

    But, I do appreciate your comments and usually agree with you!

  • voza0db

    To Stop The Ruling Elites“… who are they?!

  • voza0db

    That will leave very few americans out!

  • chetdude

    And NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox, NPR…

    The mindless propaganda machines for deep state imperialism…


    A revolution happens when the time is ripe.
    1.- The ruling class cannot continue as before, it undergoes political crisis through which discontent is manifested. “Those on top can’t and those at the bottom don’t want to” continue as before.
    2.- There is a sharp increase in the needs of the people that are not being met.
    3.- A reaction not before seen of masses unable and unwilling to go on as before, and the pouring out into the street of millions. None of these points are dependent on anyone’s will- they happen spontaneously under a crisis that affects those at the top as well as those at the bottom. The revolutionary leadership has to be equally cognizant of both (top and bottom)- it cannot just focus on the working people and their problems. The approach is scientific, but there is instinct and art in the leadership that must be there.

    One danger is to confide in one’s own forces, thinking that everyone has the same revolutionary zeal. The vanguard alone cannot win. They must be heartily supported by the people, or at least have a sector that is neutral, for the revolution to succeed. Agitation and propaganda are not enough. The people have to have passed through their own political experience.

    The revolutionary experience is felt differently under different circumstances. A democratic revolution leaves room for a broad spectrum of classes to join in. On the other hand, a worker’s revolution signals the rise to power of the working class and its allies.

    The problem of revolution is the problem of power. Previously, power was transferred from the feudal lords to the bourgeoisie, which was a class on the way up. Today the task is to deprive the right wing of its power and to turn it over to the workers and their allies. This revolution prevents the exploiting class from political domination and destroys the basis of its economic power, and thus is a new step on the historical canvass.

    Socialism is not the same everywhere and at all times. The right wing can be suppressed by different means. Conditions change all the time, with concrete situations of each country, each with its national characteristics. The situation can be more or less virulent, the correlation of forces may vary, and the degree of organization of the working class need not be the same in every case.

    One important aspect that must be decided is the degree to which peaceful means may be used. This depend on objective conditions, of the situation within the country, on the level of development and sophistication of the workers, and on the international situation. Forms of struggle depend not only on the workers, but on the ruling class and their paid adherents, and to what extent each is willing to go to break down or preserve the walls of exploitation. The ruling class has a greater tendency toward violence, because it feels it is being attacked, even though the workers are being peaceful.They will never renounce power voluntarily, and will use force on the most innocuous action of protest, while at the same time accusing them of violence.The seizure of power by the bourgeoisie in the 18th Century was one of the bloodiest in history, and they had no inconvenience in cutting off heads. Hypocritically, they accuse today’s revolutionaries of conspiring to seize power violently on the backs of the workers. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

    Revolutionaries must guard against adventurism, against conspiracy theories, and instead see the revolution as a vast and irresistible mass action, led by the conscious section of the working class. The only stable power is that which is based on the majority.

    1.- An insurrection is not a plaything, and once it starts, it must be carried to the end.
    2.- In the time and place indicated, one must rally a greatly superior force in order not to be destroyed.
    3.- Once the insurrection has started, one must pass on to the offensive, never defensive.
    4.- The enemy must be caught by surprise at a time when its forces are scattered and relatively weak.
    5.- One must have successes, even small ones, constantly, in order to maintain the moral superiority.

    The exploiting class may be destroyed in one country, but they have resources and international capital to keep resisting change for a long time. The revolution is often the result of capitalist killing fields, wars and sanctions that make it impossible to go on living. At the same time they have counterrevolutionary forces in the army that can do great damage, and a civil war could ensue.

    The working class take into its hands the monopolies and makes them run in a way that all the people can see the advantages of the new means of production and distribution.

    There is hope that a revolution may be peaceful and non-violent. In the first place, the relation of forces has changed in recent years. Capitalism is less overpowering, and people all over the world have become allies of revolutionary change. In addition, the idea of free health care and free college, full employment, etc is powerfully appealing to people who have a dismal future without those things, and which capitalism denies them. Also, people are fed up with endless wars, the main offering on the capitalist plate.

    A peaceful revolution does not mean a reformist one, either. The class struggle is always present, overtly or covertly. The revolution must take place without reforms that make it appear capitalism has been defeated when it has just undergone a superficial make up.

  • jemcgloin

    I’m a big Hedges fan, but i think he is underestimating how bad things will get if the Left does not take over the Democratic Party and take back our government.

    Hedges says, “Neoliberalism or global capitalism is a global phenomenon.” The real Deep State is not the U.S. government. (The state is not its own Depp State. It doesn’t even make sense, logically.)
    The real Deep State is the global mega-rich, mostly billionaires that control policy through massive dark money donations to POLITICIANS not bureaucrats,, and by owning all mass media, which they use to enforce our “inverted totalitarianism.”. (If Hedges doesn’t think that RT is owned and operated by global billionaires, especially but not limited to the Russian “oligarchs,” he might as well be on Brietbart, owned by the Mercers who back Trump. RT still stands for Russia Television and they did not just set it free like a pet bird!)

    I have studied declassified documents detailing US Intelligence abuses for forty years. Almost all of the abuses were ordered by the civilian leadership. The CIA didn’t lie to start the Iraq War. Cheney had the Intelligence manipulated from the TOP DOWN. Trump’s version of the Deep State is that the professionals in government are stopping him from doing the work of the People. That is nonsense. Trump is accusing them of things they aren’t doing, while he violates the Constitution in plain sight.

    For Hedges to claim that the Deep State is “government bureaucrats” is to help Trump attack all limits on his power. And even Hedges’ arguments about Obama and NDAA (which are absolutely correct) show that it is the corrupt politicians that are the problem, not the bureaucrats.) Snowden was a bureaucrat. My friend at the EPA is a bureaucrat, who is no longer allowed to do her job.

    The genius of Trump is that he is the Deep State, pretending that he is attacking it. He understands this at a gut level, and is expertly manipulating the fact that even his Right Base is now opposed to “free trade,” while corrupt Democratic politicians still protect it.

    The Right believes in top down decision making and political inequality. The Constitution, especially with its amendments does the opposite. The 14th Amendment makes everyone born here or naturalized politically equal under the law. The Right doesn’t have the votes to amend it, so they corrupt it. The Constitution is essentially a Left document. But, instead of defending it and using it to expand equality, the Left has given up on the document that we wrote, surrendering it to the Right and their puppies, the centrist Democrats.

    In 2016 Sanders made clear that what he was proposing would not be passed because the system is rigged and that is why he was part of a peaceful political revolution so that We the People could take back our Constitution.

    Hedges is too optimistic about rebellion and too pessimistic about the US Constitution.

    I believe in protest but that is only one side of the coin. Hedges is essentially telling us to give up on electoral politics instead of fixing it. That is more surrender, just like when the Democrats tell me protest is a waste of time. We must push AND pull.

    We cannot beat the heavily armed and supremely vicious Right in the streets. Without the Constitution and a need for political legitimacy, they have no reason not to machine gun protesters like in other countries where the Constitution was shredded.

    We have a few months to keep Trump from being re-elected. He has just provoked Iran into attacking Americans so he can justify invading Iran in October so he ca run as a “war president” in November.

    Bureaucrats are not the enemy. They are the people who we need to regulate carbon and otherwise do the people’s business. Between the professional liars in the CIA and the pathological liar in the White House, I believe the professional liars. They do what they are ordered to do. They say our elections are under attack, so Trump calls them “treasonous,” and accuse them of a “coup” against HIM. It is Trump who is treasonous and Trump is is trying to overthrow the Sovereign Authority of We the People to end all limits on his power.

    The Left must win this election, or Trump will take our politics back 700 years to before the Magna Carta.

    Take over the Democratic Party from the centrists that lose on purpose and save the Constitution that keeps millions of people alive. Letting Trump end the Constitution is suicidal.

  • jemcgloin

    In the last Civil War 600,000 Americans died.Many millions could die this time. Maybe you should be less excited about civil war, and work harder to avoid one.

  • jemcgloin

    The ruling elites are the few thousand people on the planet who, together own HALF of all wealth, half of everything.

    They now control all mass media, owning the controlling shares, and only hiring people that believe in their world view that they are the “Wealth Creators” and the “Job Creators.” They also make most of the donations to our politicians.

    They are not government bureaucrats, as Trump would have you believe. Government bureaucrats are hired to do the work of governance on behalf of We the People and mostly do their best. They are the institutional memory that keeps politicians from just doing “whatever they want.”

  • voza0db

    If we, the Herd, can’t get an OBJECTIVE TARGET, “few thousand people” is not enough to start a rebellion!

  • twestheimer

    The word REVOLUTION in most minds is violent … is that what is the goal? I hope there is an alternative! Nevolution ?

  • twestheimer

    I agree, if change can happen before the empire disintegrates from within it will be a party that was pulled back from the corporate elites. They can’t see they are spoiling their own nests?

  • Jon

    “most minds” because of the conditioning of the MSM. But think of it just as a transfer of power from the obscene oligarchs to the people for self-government, the very idea of the First American revolution. Ideas matter!

  • haroldburbank

    chris is well meaning, but no climate scientist, and shows no interest in the profound dissent on so called climate change in the real science community. progressives should drop the climate angle and study judith curry, dick lindzen and other true climate experts before opining. i otherwise concur with his pol ec and class analyses.

  • didactic1

    Chris, what is your recommendation for what firearms and auxiliary self protection equipment we should acquire?

    Do you have age specific and disability relevant recommendations to accommodate as many groups as possible

  • dan

    What I love about Hedges is that he cuts through so much of the b.s.; a handful nowadays do: Chomsky, Cornell West, Mumia, Peltier, to name a few….

  • D Turgeon

    How do you know Chris has not studied Judith Curry and other “true climate experts”?

    From what I have read of Ms Curry’s online published work, she does not claim man-made carbon emissions do not influence global warming, or that global warming does not influence climactic events. Concurring with her position that the climate is a very complex, little understood natural system, that the extent of the human contribution to current global warming is unknown, and that much more research needs to be undertaken especially w/r/t natural climate processes, is not incompatible with a profound and dire concern over curbing carbon emissions a.s.a.p. As others have pointed out, we do not have the luxury of waiting for scientific certainty as to the degree to which carbon emissions have contributed to global temperature rise before implementing a ‘green new deal’ type effort, as by then it may very well prove too late to make any difference in the natural outcome.

    I can’t help but be reminded of the intense debate in the ‘8o’s over of chlorofluorocarbons and their potential for the destruction of the protective ozone layer. And while that was a simpler scientific debate than global climate change, it bore many similarities to the current situation. The consensus then, as now, is that the potential downside to a feeble response may be so dire that the world can not afford to gamble on waiting for scientific certainty before acting decisively. Dropping the “climate angle” is dropping the ball on our collective future.