Below is a video of Chris Hedges. It is an interview by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now
. I am not a man of the left, nor am I a small d democrat. As a constitutionalist, surely there are many things Amy, Chris and moi disagree on. There is, however, not much in this video I can gainsay. I do think a better choice of words would have been corporativist elite than corporate elites. It may be a quibble, but many big corporations do not have the standing that say Goldman or GE or Morgan do in influencing or controlling policy.
Yet in light of the fact that the security establishment did not want the indefinite detention aspects of the bill, his deduction that elite fear is the driver is not something to be dismissed. In truth it scares the Neutralist all the more. In the long run, it cannot succeed and points up how brittle the system is that it perceives this as necessary. For a time, it will cause much suffering. People this desperate have crossed a Rubicon.
Of course this might be a declaration that we have lost overseas. After all, were "we not fighting them over there so we did not have to fight them over there?" Maybe that should have been all along, "We are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight ourselves over here."
Other small observations: has Mitt Romney ever read the bill of rights? I thought Rick Santorum a mindless chickenhawk opportunist, but give the lad his due. He explained our rights under the constitution as well as Chris might have.
Why The Neutralist? The term Isolationist implies a narrow Fortress America outlook and is used as an epithet. The term Neutralist does not indicate someone hiding out from the world. No one calls the Swiss isolationists. The Wilsonian world view is old, tired and wrong. Our interventions have been less and less successful and now the failure can no longer be covered up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment