History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Why Chris Hedges Believes That Serious Revolt Is the Only Option People Have Left

September 3rd, 2012 · 1 Comment


Why Chris Hedges Believes That Serious Revolt Is the Only Option People Have Left
Hedges discusses his new book “Days of Destruction Days of Revolt.”

This is a good interview of Hedges, and I must admire Hedges’ nerve in being thus radical about ‘revolt’. Most consider the question hopeless, and will abandon those who try to make real change. Hedges is trying to force radicals to see the reality of their situation, and his relative safety as a celebrity is an important and useful context for telling it like it is. But any radical has to ask if he pre-compromised as a decoy before the revolt even gets underway. It is a terrible issue, but one that must be faced. As a Christian, a proponent of non-violence, and nescient about 9/11, the first question any sidelined radical must ask in bitterness is, is Hedges a government plant?
Needless to say calls for revolt from celebrities are dangerous and will get a lot of people killed, as the celebrities reap the more.
Let me endorse Hedges wholeheartedly by saying this is false, but from now on the question must always be asked. Even for the Alternet sloggers, who talk a good game, but have suspicious funding. And that includes me here at Darwiniana, and at The Gurdjieff Con. Anyone who lived with sufis knows how his unconscious is subject to attempted cooptation by the ‘dark methods’, still beyond the grasp of the CIA, fortunately, despite their hidden prowess with mindcontrol. I have fought so many hypnosis games from sufis that I nearly faint at the thought of the naifs hoping to be ‘radicals’ in the tradition of leftist ignorance of what rightists are like.
I could be the worst of the lot. In fact, I plead innocent, it’s not true, but even so I am not very good revolutionary material at my age, so it doesn’t matter. If what I say is right, use it. Words: cash on the barell.
My point is that I am still not sure the OWS, which I support and admire, wasn’t a covertly seeded pseudo-revolt, designed to fail. Maybe it doesn’t matter, since it escaped the control desired. I can’t resolve my doubts, and at this point don’t worry since their tactics, by thie relative mildness, were far more appropriate that the tired old Bolshie junk we get from Leninnist diehards preaching to groups like the OWS. But in the future the action of the ‘left CIA’ is going to try to produce a fake ‘revolt’. And a figure like Hedges is a godsend.

Thus I must interject some caveats here: any call for a radical initiative demands getting clear about who we are revolting against: it is not quite those nice fellows/whores in Congress, who are puppets. Nor is it, I suspect, Manchurian Candidate Obama, etc… Actually we don’t quite know who we are to revolt against? The Langley mafia?
The point:
Getting straight about the 9/11 conspiracy question is hard for most, and is especially treacherous for those with some kind of public voice if they tell the truth about the subject. For some reason the left is completely confused or else compromised about the subject.
Any call for revolt that is still in the dark about government complicity in 9/11 is PHONY BALONEY, and a disservice to those who know better who will be marginalized by celebrities like Hedges who will get the focus.
So, to Hedges I would say (for the third time on this blog): study the facts. Starting a revolt in the dark about the 9/11 issue will get people killed as they are blindsided by the their confusion about the real powers that be.
So here is my point: to call for revolt, in such a vague way, is useful, but don’t forget that the CIA started and won a revolt decades ago, so the term ‘revolt’ is highly ambiguous. Indeed, Any Rand was hot for ‘revolt’ against the system, also. Be wary then of ‘revolt’ without specifics.
I have incidentally in the past few days post some specifics, on communism, the ‘abolition of private property’, something to be considered (I didn’t yet quite say ‘advocate’) as a gedankend experiment at a moment of escalating crisis. That may be (still) unrealistic, but it is specific, and not government plant would recommend it.

Nevertheless this stance of Hedges has a lot of nerve, and I recommend reading it. It is splendid to see the beginning of a progression toward real renewal, in the wake of the great first steps of the OWS.

Tags: General