Chris Hedges Video

More from Chris Hedges

HEDGES: Umberto Eco is the great Italian writer—I mean, he wrote that very popular book, The Name of the Rose, and he had a nice little book of essays called Five Moral Pieces, and in it he writes about the salient qualities of what he calls “Ur-Fascism,” or eternal fascism. And I wanted to list those—I thought it was probably as good a list as I’d ever seen compiled on what the main tenets of fascism are—to begin the book, because my argument is that this is not a religious movement. Although it certainly depends on the support of many earnest, well-meaning, decent people who are religious, I would argue that they are manipulated not only, of course, to be fleeced for their own money, but essentially to give up moral choice and surrender to the authoritarian demands of these leaders to march forward and essentially dismantle our democratic state. And I think that when we look closely at what it is that this Christian right movement espouses, it does bear many similarities to, you know, the main pillars of fascist movements: the cult of masculinity, the war against—

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, “the cult of masculinity”?

CHRIS HEDGES: Well, the fact that, you know, they elevate male figures within the megachurches, who cannot be questioned, who speak directly for God. Any kind of questioning or self-criticism becomes essentially battling the forces of Satan. That power structure is to be replicated in the family. Much of this movement is about the disempowerment of women. Children have to be obedient. And so, that power structure of the family with the dominant male and everyone else submissive is replicated in the megachurches, which oftentimes—and I’ve been in many over the last two years—revolve around cults of personality.

When we look at the sort of empires that people like Pat Robertson run, you know, this man is worth hundreds of millions, some people say up to $1 billion, surrounded by bodyguards, flying around on private jets, investing in blood diamonds in Sierra Leone. He has rock star status. I mean, if you’ve ever been to an event where he appears, people are weeping and want to be touched by him. There is no question. He essentially runs a despotic little fiefdom.

[...]

CHRIS HEDGES: ...and, you know, this is—I mean, essentially, when you follow the logical conclusion of the ideology they preach, there really are only two options for people who do not submit to their authority. And it’s about submission, because these people claim to speak for God and not only understand the will of God, but be able to carry it out. Either you convert, or you’re exterminated. That’s what the obsession with the End Times with the Rapture, which, by the way, is not in the Bible, is about. It is about instilling—it’s, of course, a fear-based movement, and it’s about saying, ultimately, if you do not give up control to us, you will be physically eradicated by a vengeful God. And that lust for violence, I think that sort of—you know, the notion, that final aesthetic being violence is very common to totalitarian movements, the belief that massive catastrophic violence can be used as a cleansing agent to purge the world. And that’s, you know, something that this movement bears in common with other despotic and frightening radical movements that we’ve seen over the past—throughout the past century.

Quote of the Day

Chris Hedges:

There is nothing wrong with taking a moral stand, but when we take a moral stand and then use it to elevate ourselves to another moral plane above other human beings, then it becomes, in biblical terms, a form of self-worship. That's what the New Atheists have, and that's what the Christian fundamentalists have.

Truer Words...

Hunter at Daily Kos:

One bright side of this campaign: the nation is indeed finally getting to see what a supreme tool John McCain is. And to see what two tools can do together. And what a professional campaign tool can do when they've been paid to lobby by one of the countries in question. And what the nation's most celebrated toolbox can do, when they just can't stand the idea of there being conflict somewhere in the world that they haven't been able to personally help make worse.

Honestly. Take all the worst things about the Bush administration, double them, then add Joe Lieberman. A McCain administration would be the presidential equivalent of a slasher flick.

Arkansas Democratic Party Chairman Assassinated

According to CNN:

The chairman of the Arkansas Democratic Party died Wednesday, hours after a shooting at the party's headquarters, police said.

Chairman Bill Gwatney died at 3:59 Wednesday afternoon after a gunman entered his Little Rock office and shot him several times in the upper body, Little Rock Police Lt. Terry Hastings said.

But Obama's the Elitist

In the Category of Things You Can't Make Up, the same guy who says this:

John McCain's celebrity ad was effective. It wasn't uncontroversial and it didn't please all the political scientists, but it sure got noticed, and it made Barack Obama overreact. Questions about Obama's desire for celebrity status will linger. He now has to be very careful about intersecting with Hollywood, pop culture and entertainment. Lee Atwater said the worst thing you can do in American politics is play to your negative stereotype. Well, Obama's negative stereotype now includes the idea that he may be a little too glitzy. (Speaking of negative stereotypes, when Obama was talking about the pictures of presidents on dollar bills, was he introducing the presumptuous notion that his face belongs on American currency? I wonder whom he thinks he should replace.)

...has his wife "standing in front of rows of her designer shoes cutting up sheets of freshly printed U.S. dollar bills with a pair of scissors so she can use them as wrapping paper."

But, you know, Democrats are elitists and don't share the concerns of working class Americans like Republicans do.

Thought-Provoking Post By Kyle

Kyle at Postmodern Papist has a post up concerning the quality of discourse in the blogosphere (particularly in comboxes) that is worth a read. This section particularly caught my attention:

The blogosphere proves a particularly dangerous realm, for we see only words, except perhaps an image, and we hear no voice. The faces of hosts and guests are conspicuously absent. We discuss and debate controversial topics in a setting marked by anonymity and the opportunity for immediate (often knee-jerk) response. The person is concealed behind words, and all too often, we allow ourselves to become trapped in the words and blind to the person behind them. Unable to see the face of one another, we see less of the other’s personhood, and thus the temptation to demean the other as a position, an idea, a narrative, or a label is increased. Words become weapons, standing in for famine, sword, and fire.

Dispatch from Shady Acres Rest Home

I’ve pointed this out before, but even if we grant that hippies caused all sorts of problems, they caused all those problems…40 years ago. Ranting about hippies now is sort of like the hippies of the sixties ranting about “bathtub gin” and Charleston dancing.

For Some Reason...

..I found this rather touching.

Unitary Executives, Pardons, etc...

Pruning Shears:

The crux of the problem is that the Republican party has come to view the law as entirely political. When Congress passes a law, or a President follows it (or doesn’t), or the Justice Department enforces it (or doesn’t), or the Supreme Court rules on it - these are all political footballs to be kicked around, not fundamental building blocks of a functional society. In other words, lawless, ignorant, contemptible hacks are fine as long as they are OUR lawless, ignorant, contemptible hacks. The collapse of integrity and wholesale politicization at Justice is not a problem in and of itself; it only is a problem if a Democrat does it. (The fact that they vote along party lines on these issues when they don’t walk out entirely should be all the proof you need.)

Department of the Obvious

James Howard Kunstler, on Las Vegas:

Las Vegas is the fastest-growing city in the United States. For a culture that understands things only in terms of numbers, this supposedly proves that it must be a splendid place. I’ve heard it touted often as the American city of the future, the prototype habitat for a society in which the old boundaries between work, leisure, entertainment, information, production, service, and acquisition dissolve, and a new exciting, colorful, pleasure-laden human meta-existence finds material expression in any wishful form the imagination might conjure out of an ever-mutating blend of history, fantasy, electrosilicon alchemy and unfettered desire. If Las Vegas truly is our city of the future, then we might as well all cut our own throats tomorrow. I certainly felt like cutting mine after only a few days there, so overwhelming was the sheer anomie provoked by every particular of its design and operation. As a city it’s a futureless catastrophe. As a tourist trap, it’s a meta-joke. As a theosophical matter, it presents proof that we are a wicked people who deserve to be punished. In the historical context, it is the place where America’s spirit crawled off to die.

For all the Hand-Wringing...

..by some of my fellow Democrats, I think it is clear to anyone watching that McCain is going to get his clock cleaned in November.

The only question in my mind is whether it will be an overwhelming, tsunami-grade landslide or a smaller but still convincing win.

Obama losing? I suppose I can summon a scenario where he loses the election (involving being caught...Well, what would it take? Incinerating puppies to heat his house?) but...no, he's pretty much got it in the bag.