The 1
Percent’s Useful Idiots
By Chris
Hedges
August 01,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "Truthdig"
-
PHILADELPHIA—The parade of
useful idiots, the bankrupt liberal class that
long ago sold its soul to corporate power, is now
led by Sen. Bernie Sanders. His final capitulation,
symbolized by his pathetic motion to suspend the
roll call, giving Hillary Clinton the Democratic
nomination by acclamation, is an abject betrayal of
millions of his supporters and his call for a
political revolution.
No doubt
the Democrats will continue to let Sanders be a
member of the Democratic Caucus. No doubt the
Democrats will continue to agree not to run a
serious candidate against him in Vermont. No doubt
Sanders will be given an ample platform and media
opportunities to shill for Clinton and the corporate
machine. No doubt he will remain a member of the
political establishment.
Sanders
squandered his most important historical moment. He
had a chance, one chance, to take the energy, anger
and momentum, walk out the doors of the Wells Fargo
Center and into the streets to help build a
third-party movement. His call to his delegates to
face “reality” and support Clinton was an insulting
repudiation of the reality his supporters, mostly
young men and young women, had overcome by lifting
him from an obscure candidate polling at 12 percent
into a serious contender for the nomination. Sanders
not only sold out his base, he mocked it. This was a
spiritual wound, not a political one. For this he
must ask forgiveness.
Whatever
resistance happens will happen without him. Whatever
political revolution happens will happen without
him. Whatever hope we have for a sustainable future
will happen without him. Sanders, who once lifted up
the yearnings of millions, has become an impediment
to change. He took his 30 pieces of silver and
joined with a bankrupt liberal establishment on
behalf of a candidate who is a tool of Wall Street,
a proponent of endless war and an enemy of the
working class.
Sanders,
like all of the self-identified liberals who are
whoring themselves out for the Democrats, will use
fear as the primary reason to remain enslaved by the
neoliberal assault. And, in return, the corporate
state will allow him and the other useful idiots
among the 1 percent to have their careers and
construct pathetic monuments to themselves.
The
Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will be pushed
through whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is
president. The fracking industry, fossil fuel
industry and animal agriculture industry will ravage
the ecosystem whether Donald Trump or Hillary
Clinton is president. The predatory financial
institutions on Wall Street will trash the economy
and loot the U.S. Treasury on the way to another
economic collapse whether Donald Trump or Hillary
Clinton is president. Poor, unarmed people of color
will be gunned down in the streets of our cities
whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is
president. The system of neoslavery in our prisons,
where we keep poor men and poor women of color in
cages because we have taken from them the
possibility of employment, education and dignity,
will be maintained whether Donald Trump or Hillary
Clinton is president. Millions of undocumented
people will be deported whether Donald Trump or
Hillary Clinton is president. Austerity programs
will cut or abolish public services, further decay
the infrastructure and curtail social programs
whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is
president. Money will replace the vote whether
Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. And
half the country, which now lives in poverty, will
remain in misery whether Donald Trump or Hillary
Clinton becomes president.
This is not
speculation. We know this because there has been
total continuity on every issue, from trade
agreements to war to mass deportations, between the
Bush administration and the administration of Barack
Obama. The problem is not Donald Trump. The problem
is capitalism. And this is the beast we are called
to fight and slay. Until that is done, nothing of
substance will change.
To reduce
the political debate, as Sanders and others are
doing, to political personalities is political
infantilism. We have undergone a corporate coup.
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton will not reverse
this coup. They, like Barack Obama, know where the
centers of power lie. They serve these centers of
power.
Change will
come when we have the tenacity, as many Sanders
delegates did, to refuse to cooperate, to say no, to
no longer participate in the political charade.
Change will come when we begin acts of sustained
mass civil disobedience. Change will come when the
fear the corporate state uses to paralyze us is used
by us to paralyze the corporate state.
The Russian
writer Alexander Herzen, speaking a century ago to a
group of anarchists about how to overthrow the czar,
reminded his listeners that it was not their job to
save a dying system but to replace it: “We think we
are the doctors. We are the disease.”
We are here
not to reform the system. We are here to overthrow
it. And that is the only possibility left to restore
our democracy and save our planet. If we fail in
this task, if this system of corporate capitalism
and globalization is not dismantled, we are doomed.
And this is the reality no one wants to speak about.
We will
have to be in the political wilderness, perhaps for
a decade. But a decade ago Syriza, the party now
ruling Greece, was polling at only 4 percent. This
is what the Green Party is polling today. We will
not bring about systemic change in one or two
election cycles. But we can begin to build a
counterweight to the corporate state. We can begin
to push back.
We must
find the courage not to be afraid. We must find the
courage to follow our conscience. We must find the
courage to defy the corporate forces of death in
order to affirm the forces of life.
This will
not be easy. The corporate state—once its vast
systems of indoctrination and propaganda do not work
to keep us passive, once we are no longer afraid,
once we make our own reality rather than
accommodating ourselves to the reality imposed upon
us—will employ more direct and coercive forms of
control. The reign of terror, the revocation of
civil liberties, the indiscriminate violence by the
state will no longer be exercised only against poor
people of color. The reality endured by our poor
sisters and brothers of color, a reality we did not
do enough to fight against, will become our own.
To allow
the ideological forces of neoliberalism to crush our
ideals and our values is to fall into a deadly
cynicism and despair. To allow the consumer culture
and the cult of the self, which lies at the heart of
capitalism, to seduce us is to kill our souls.
Happiness does not come with the accumulation of
wealth. Happiness does not come from possessions or
power. These are narcotics. They numb and kill all
that is noble and good within us. Happiness comes
when you reach out in solidarity to your neighbor,
when you lend your hand to the stranger or the
outcast, when you are willing to lose your life to
save it. Happiness comes when you have the capacity
to love.
Our span of
life, in the vastness of the universe, is
insignificant. I will be 60 soon. The arch of my own
life is beginning to draw to a close. We all will
die. How do we use the miracle of this flash of
light that is called life?
Albert
Camus wrote, “One of the only coherent philosophical
positions is revolt. It is a constant confrontation
between [human beings] and [their] obscurity. It is
not aspiration, for it is devoid of hope. That
revolt is the certainty of a crushing fate, without
the resignation that ought to accompany it.”
He said
further, “A living [person] can be enslaved and
reduced to the historic condition of an object. But
if he [or she] dies in refusing to be enslaved, he
[or she] reaffirms the existence of another kind of
human nature which refuses to be classified as an
object.”
There is
only one way to rebel. You fight for all of the
oppressed or none of the oppressed. You understand
that there is no country. Our country is the earth.
We are citizens of the world. Nationalism is a
disease. It is a disease we must purge. As long as a
Muslim family suffers in a refugee camp in Syria or
an LGBT person suffers from the bigotry imposed by
the Christian heretics in the Christian right, we
all suffer.
There are
desperate single mothers struggling to raise
children on less than $10,000 a year in some
Philadelphia neighborhoods. Many of these children
go to bed hungry. There are unemployed workers
desperate to find a job and restore their dignity.
There are mentally ill and homeless we have
abandoned to the streets. There are Iraqi and Afghan
families living in terror, a terror we have
inflicted on them, in the futile and endless wars
waged to enrich the arms industry. There are men and
women being tortured in our worldwide archipelago of
secret detention centers. There are undocumented
workers whose families we have ripped apart,
separating children from parents, or imprisoned.
This is
reality. It is the only reality that matters. It is
a reality we must and will change. Because, as the
great socialist Eugene V. Debs, who upon being
sentenced in 1918 for violating the Sedition Act by
defying the madness of World War I, said, “I
recognized my kinship with all living beings. I made
up my mind that I was not one bit better than the
meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that
while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while
there is a criminal element I am of it, and while
there is a soul in prison, I am not free.”
Augustine
wrote that hope has two beautiful daughters, anger
and courage—anger at the way things are and the
courage to see that they do not remain the way they
are.
The fight
will be hard and difficult. It will require love and
self-sacrifice. It will require anger and courage.
It is the greatest moral imperative before us. Those
who do not defy the evil become its accomplice. We
may not succeed. But we must be among those of whom
future generations will say: They tried. They dared
to dream. They dared to care. They dared to love.
They enabled those who followed to press on in the
struggle.
WATCH:
Chris Hedges Reads ‘The 1 Percent’s
Useful Idiots’ at Socialist Convergence During
Democratic Convention
Who Should Bernie
Voters Support Now? Robert Reich vs. Chris Hedges on
Tackling the Neoliberal Order
August 02,
2016 "Information
Clearing House"
-
AMY
GOODMAN:
This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org.
Our special, "Breaking with Convention: War, Peace
and the Presidency." I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan
González.
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: As we
continue to talk about the Democratic National
Convention, we’re joined now by two guests. Joining
us from Berkeley, California, is Robert Reich, who
served as labor secretary under President Clinton
and is a professor at the University of California,
Berkeley. And here in Philadelphia is Chris Hedges,
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist. His most recent
book is Wages of Rebellion: The Moral Imperative
of Revolt.
And I’d
like to begin with Robert Reich. You’re a—you were a
Bernie Sanders supporter. You’re now backing Hillary
Clinton. You’re not at the convention, but your
perspective on what you saw last night and the
possibility of the Democratic Party uniting behind
Hillary Clinton, or a group of the Sanders
supporters going with Jill Stein?
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, it’s very hard to tell what the delegates are
going to do. And it’s very hard to tell—even harder
to tell what the electorate is going to do. You
know, this is a very agonizing time for many Bernie
Sanders supporters. I, with a great deal of
reluctance initially, because I’ve known Hillary
Clinton for 50 years—50 years—endorsed Bernie
Sanders and worked my heart out for him, as many,
many people did. And so, at this particular
juncture, you know, there’s a great deal of sadness
and a great deal of feeling of regret. But having
worked so long and so many years for basically the
progressive ideals that Bernie Sanders stands for, I
can tell you that the movement is going to continue.
In fact, it’s going to grow.
And right
now, at this particular point in time, I just don’t
see any alternative but to support Hillary. I know
Hillary, I know her faults, I know her strengths. I
think she will make a great president. I supported
Bernie Sanders because I thought he would make a
better president for the system we need. But
nonetheless, Hillary Clinton is going to be the
nominee. I support her. And I support her not only
because she will be a good president, if not a great
president, but also, frankly, because I am
tremendously worried about the alternative. And the
alternative, really, as a practical matter, is
somebody who is a megalomaniac and a bigot, somebody
who will set back the progressive movement decades,
if not more.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Chris Hedges?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, reducing the election to personalities is kind
of infantile at this point. The fact is, we live in
a system that Sheldon Wolin calls inverted
totalitarianism. It’s a system where corporate power
has seized all of the levers of control. There is no
way to vote against the interests of Goldman Sachs
or ExxonMobil or Raytheon. We’ve lost our privacy.
We’ve seen, under Obama, an assault against civil
liberties that has outstripped what George W. Bush
carried out. We’ve seen the executive branch
misinterpret the 2001 Authorization to Use Military
Force Act as giving itself the right to assassinate
American citizens, including children. I speak of
Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son. We have bailed
out the banks, pushed through programs of austerity.
This has been a bipartisan effort, because they’ve
both been captured by corporate power. We have
undergone what John Ralston Saul correctly calls a
corporate coup d’état in slow motion, and it’s over.
I just came
back from Poland, which is a kind of case study of
how neoliberal poison destroys a society and creates
figures like Trump. Poland has gone, I think we can
argue, into a neofascism. First, it dislocated the
working class, deindustrialized the country. Then,
in the name of austerity, it destroyed public
institutions, education, public broadcasting. And
then it poisoned the political system. And we are
now watching, in Poland, them create a 30,000 to
40,000 armed militia. You know, they have an army.
The Parliament, nothing works. And I think that this
political system in the United States has seized up
in exactly the same form.
So, is
Trump a repugnant personality? Yes. Although I would
argue that in terms of megalomania and narcissism,
Hillary Clinton is not far behind. But the point is,
we’ve got to break away from—which is exactly the
narrative they want us to focus on. We’ve got to
break away from political personalities and
understand and examine and critique the structures
of power. And, in fact, the Democratic Party,
especially beginning under Bill Clinton, has carried
water for corporate entities as assiduously as the
Republican Party. This is something that Ralph Nader
understood long before the rest of us, and stepped
out very courageously in 2000. And I think we will
look back on that period and find Ralph to be an
amazingly prophetic figure. Nobody understands
corporate power better than Ralph. And I think now
people have caught up with Ralph.
And this
is, of course, why I support Dr. Stein and the Green
Party. We have to remember that 10 years ago,
Syriza, which controls the Greek government, was
polling at exactly the same spot that the Green
Party is polling now—about 4 percent. We’ve got to
break out of this idea that we can create systematic
change within a particular election cycle. We’ve got
to be willing to step out into the political
wilderness, perhaps, for a decade. But on the issues
of climate change, on the issue of the destruction
of civil liberties, including our right to
privacy—and I speak as a former investigative
journalist, which doesn’t exist anymore because of
wholesale government surveillance—we have no
ability, except for hackers.
I mean,
this whole debate over the WikiLeaks is insane. Did
Russia? I’ve printed classified material that was
given to me by the Mossad. But I never exposed that
Mossad gave it to me. Is what was published true or
untrue? And the fact is, you know, in those long
emails—you should read them. They’re appalling,
including calling Dr. Cornel West "trash." It is—the
whole—it exposes the way the system was rigged,
within—I’m talking about the Democratic Party—the
denial of independents, the superdelegates, the
stealing of the caucus in Nevada, the huge amounts
of corporate money and super PACs that flowed into
the Clinton campaign.
The fact
is, Clinton has a track record, and it’s one that
has abandoned children. I mean, she and her husband
destroyed welfare as we know it, and 70 percent of
the original recipients were children. This debate
over—I don’t like Trump, but Trump is not the
phenomenon. Trump is responding to a phenomenon
created by neoliberalism. And we may get rid of
Trump, but we will get something even more vile,
maybe Ted Cruz.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Robert Reich, I remember you, on Democracy Now!,
talking about your time as labor secretary when
President Clinton signed off on welfare reform, and
you described walking the streets of Washington,
D.C., wondering where the protests were, that you
had vigorously objected. And it was also an issue, a
bill that Hillary Clinton had supported. So, can you
respond to Chris Hedges on these three points,
including, so, you take a walk in the political
wilderness for a little while?
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, Amy, it’s not just taking a walk in the
political wilderness. If Donald Trump becomes
president, if that’s what you’re referring to, I
think it is—there are irrevocable negative changes
that will happen in the United States, including
appointments to the Supreme Court, that will not be
just political wilderness, that will actually change
and worsen the structure of this country. I couldn’t
agree with Chris Hedges more about his critique,
overall, of neoliberalism and a lot of the
structural problems that we face in our political
economy today. I’ve written about them. But I’ve
done more than write about them. I’ve actually been
in the center of power, and I have been doing
everything I possibly can, as an individual and also
as a mobilizer and organizer of others, to try to
change what we now have.
I think
that voting for Donald Trump or equating Hillary
Clinton with Donald Trump is insane. Donald Trump is
certainly a product of a kind of system and a
systematic undermining that has occurred in the
United States for years with regard to inequality of
income and wealth and political power. But we don’t
fight that by simply saying, "All right, let’s just
have Donald Trump and hope that the system improves
itself and hope that things are so bad that actually
people rise up in armed resistance." That’s insane.
That’s crazy.
What we
have to do is be—we’ve got to be very, very
strategic as progressives. We’ve got to look at the
long term. We’ve got to understand that Bernie
Sanders brought us much further along than we were
before the Sanders campaign. We owe a lot to Bernie
Sanders, his courage, his integrity, his power, the
fact that most people under 30 voted for Bernie
Sanders. In fact, if you look at the people who
voted for Bernie Sanders under 30, that was more
people than voted for Donald Trump and Hillary
Clinton together under the age of 30. We are
building a progressive movement in this country. But
over the next four years, I don’t want Donald Trump
to irretrievably make it difficult, if not
impossible, for us to move forward with that
progressive movement.
Now, I
understand Hillary Clinton is not perfect. I’ve
known her , as I said before, for 50 years. I met
her when she was 19 years old. I know her strengths,
and I know, pretty well, her weaknesses. She is not
perfect. And as Chris says, you know, she is also
very much a product of many of the problems
structurally in this country right now. We fight
those structural problems, yes. Hand in hand, Chris,
with you, shoulder to shoulder—I’m very short, maybe
it’s my shoulder, and it’s your rib cage—but it
doesn’t matter, we continue to fight. I will
continue to fight. Many people who are watching and
listening will continue to fight. We must continue
to mobilize. I hope Bernie Sanders does what he
implied he would do last night—that is, carry the
movement forward, lend his name, his energy, his
email list. This is not the end of anything. But we
have got to be, at the same time, very practical
about what we’re doing and very strategic about what
we’re doing. This is not just a matter of making
statements. It’s a matter of actually working with
and through, and changing the structure of power in
this country.
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: Chris, I’d
like to ask you—you’ve written that liberals are
tolerated by the capitalist elites because they do
not question the virtues of corporate capitalism,
only its excesses, and call for tepid and
ineffectual reforms. Could that have also have been
said of FDR in the 1930s?
Because you were one of the folks who did not back
Bernie Sanders from the beginning.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
That’s right.
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: So, you’ve—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, I didn’t back Bernie Sanders because—and
Kshama Sawant and I had had a discussion with him
before—because he said that he would work within the
Democratic structures and support the nominee. And I
think we have now watched Bernie Sanders walk away
from his political moment. You know, he—I think he
will come to deeply regret what he has done. He has
betrayed these people who believed in this political
revolution. We heard this same kind of rhetoric, by
the way, in 2008 around Obama.
A political
campaign raises consciousness, but it’s not a
movement. And what we are seeing now is furious
spin—I listened to Ben Jealous just do it—from the
self-identified liberal class. And they are
tolerated within a capitalist system, because, in a
moment like this, they are used to speak to people
to get them to betray their own interests in the
name of fear. And I admire Robert and have read much
of his stuff and like his stuff, but if you listen
to what he’s been saying, the message is the same
message of the Trump campaign, and that his fear.
And that is all the Democrats have to offer now and
all the Republicans have to offer now.
And the
fact is, from climate change alone, we have no time
left. I have four children. The future of my
children, by the day, is being destroyed because of
the fact that the fossil fuel industry, along with
the animal agriculture industry, which is also as
important in terms of climate change, are destroying
the ecosystem on which we depend for life. And
neither party has any intention to do anything about
it.
AMY
GOODMAN:
What should Bernie Sanders have done?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Bernie Sanders should have walked out and run as an
independent.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Take—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
And defied the Democratic Party.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Take up the invitation of Dr. Jill Stein—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Yes.
AMY
GOODMAN:
—and run on a ticket with—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
She offered to let him run on the top of the ticket.
That’s what he should have done. And the fact is,
you know, let’s not forget that Bernie has a very
checkered past. He campaigned for Clinton in '92. He
campaigned for Clinton again in ’96, after NAFTA—the
greatest betrayal of the working class in this
country since the Taft-Hartley Act of 1948—after the
destruction of welfare, after the omnibus crime bill
that exploded the prison population, and, you know,
we now have—I mean, it's just a monstrosity what
we’ve done; 350,000 to 400,000 people locked in
cages in this country are severely mentally ill.
Half of them never committed a violent crime. That’s
all Bill Clinton. And yet he went out and
campaigned. In 2004, he called on Nader not to run,
to step down, so he could support a war candidate
like John Kerry. And I’m listening to Jealous before
talk about the Iraq War. Sixty percent of the
Democratic senators voted for the war, including
Hillary Clinton. The idea that somehow Democrats
don’t push us into war defies American history.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Robert Reich?
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, all I can say is that at this particular point
in time—I mean, again, many of the things that Chris
Hedges is saying, I completely agree with. The real
question here is: What do we do right now? And what
do we do to mobilize and organize a lot of people
out there who right now are not mobilized and
organized? And how do we keep the energy building? I
disagree with Chris with regard to Bernie Sanders. I
think Bernie Sanders has been a great and is a great
leader right now of the progressive cause.
What I
think we ought to do is develop a third party
outside the Democratic and Republican parties, maybe
the Green Party, so that in the year 2020, four
years from now, we have another candidate—it may be
Bernie Sanders, I think he’s probably going to be
too old by then—but we have a candidate that holds
the Democrats accountable, that provides a vehicle
for a lot of the energy of the Bernie Sanders
movement to continue to develop, that fields new
candidates at the Senate, in Congress, at the state
level, that actually holds Democrats’ feet to the
fire and Republicans’ feet to the fire, that
develops an agenda of getting big money out of
politics and severing the link between
extraordinarily concentrated wealth and political
power in this country. That’s what we ought to be
doing.
Now, we
can—but in order to do that, we cannot have—and, you
know, I think that Hillary will be a good president,
if not a great president. This is not just trucking
in fear, Chris. But I do fear Donald Trump. I fear
the polls that I saw yesterday. Now, polls, again,
this early in a campaign still—we’re still months
away from the election, but they are indicative.
They show Donald Trump doing exceedingly well,
beating Hillary Clinton. And right now, given our
two-party system, given our winner-take-all system
with regard to the Electoral College, it’s just too
much of a risk to go and to say, "Well, I’m going to
vote—I’m not going to vote for the lesser of two
evils, I’m going to vote exactly what I want to do."
Well, anybody can do that, obviously. This is a free
country. You vote what you—you vote your conscience.
You have to do that. I’m just saying that your
conscience needs to be aware that if you do not
support Hillary Clinton, you are increasing the odds
of a true, clear and present danger to the United
States, a menace to the United States. And you’re
increasing the possibility that there will not be a
progressive movement, there will not be anything we
believe in in the future, because the United States
will really be changed for the worse.
That’s not
a—that’s not a risk I’m prepared to take at this
point in time. I’m going to move—I’m going to do
exactly what I’ve been doing for the last 40 years:
I’m going to continue to beat my head against the
wall, to build and contribute to building a
progressive movement. The day after Election Day, I
am going to try to work with Bernie Sanders and
anybody else who wants to work in strengthening a
third party—and again, maybe it’s the Green
Party—for the year 2020, and do everything else I
was just talking about. But right now, as we lead up
to Election Day 2016, I must urge everyone who is
listening or who is watching to do whatever they can
to make sure that Hillary Clinton is the next
president, and not Donald Trump.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Well, we’re going to break and then come back to
this debate on both sides of the United States, as
well as of this issue. Chris Hedges is with us,
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, award-winning
author and activist. Latest book, Wages of
Rebellion: The Moral Imperative of Revolt. And
who you were just listening to is Robert Reich, who
is the former labor secretary under President
Clinton and professor at University of California,
Berkeley, his latest book called Saving
Capitalism. He was a Bernie Sanders supporter
and now says he will vote for Hillary Clinton. When
we come back, we’ll hear some of the words of Donald
Trump and get response. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY
GOODMAN:
"Opening Ceremony" by Laura Ortman. This is
Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. Our special
for this two weeks, "Breaking with Convention: War,
Peace and the Presidency." I’m Amy Goodman, with
Juan González.
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: Well, in a
moment, we’ll return to our debate between Robert
Reich and Chris Hedges, but first let’s turn to
Donald Trump’s nomination speech at the
RNC in Cleveland last
Thursday. Trump said Sanders’ supporters would vote
for him in the fall.
DONALD
TRUMP:
I have seen firsthand how the system is rigged
against our citizens, just like it was rigged
against Bernie Sanders. He never had a chance,
never had a chance. But his supporters will join
our movement, because we will fix his biggest
single issue—trade deals that strip our country
of its jobs and strip us of our wealth as a
country. Millions of Democrats will join our
movement, because we are going to fix the system
so it works fairly and justly for each and every
American.
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: That was
Donald Trump talking at the convention in Cleveland.
Robert Reich, interestingly, Donald Trump and Chris
Hedges agree on one thing, that free trade deals
that the—that both the Republicans and Democrats
have negotiated over the past few years, especially
NAFTA, have been
disastrous for the American people. You were part of
the Clinton administration when
NAFTA was passed. Talk about this, the impact
that Trump is utilizing among white workers in
America over the issue of free trade.
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, Donald Trump is clearly using trade and also
immigration as vehicles for making the people who
have really been hurt by trade, by globalization,
feel that he is going to somehow be on their side.
He’s not going to be on their side.
Trump is
right in a very, very narrow respect, that trade has
hurt very vulnerable people, working-class people.
The burdens of trade have been disproportionately
fallen on those people who used to have good
unionized jobs in America. And the failure of
NAFTA and also the
WTO, the World Trade
Organization, Chinese ascension into the
WTO, all of those
Clinton-era programs—the failure was, number one,
not to have nearly strong enough and enforceable
enough labor and environmental side agreements;
number two, not to have adjustment mechanisms here
in the United States for people who lost their jobs
to help them get good jobs, that were new jobs, for
the jobs they lost. The winners in trade could have
compensated the losers and still come out ahead, but
they did not. And that is a structural, political
problem in this country that we have to address.
It is also
a problem with regard to technological displacement.
It’s not just trade. Technology is displacing and
will continue to displace and will displace even
more good jobs in the future, but we have absolutely
no strategy for dealing with that. And right now,
the burdens of technological displacement are
falling, once again, on the working middle class,
lower-income people, who have very, very few
alternatives, driving a greater and greater wedge
between those who are lucky enough to be—to have
rich parents or be well educated or be well
connected, and everybody else.
We cannot
go on like this. This is unsustainable. And Donald
Trump and Bernie Sanders are symptomatic, their
rise, are both symptomatic of this great wave of
antiestablishment anger that is flooding American
politics, although on the one side you have
authoritarian populism, and on the Bernie Sanders
side you have a political revolution. I prefer the
political revolution myself. I’m going to continue
to work for that political revolution.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, I think we have to acknowledge two facts. We
do not live in a functioning democracy, and we have
to stop pretending that we do. You can’t talk
about—when you eviscerate privacy, you can’t use the
word "liberty." That is the relationship between a
master and a slave. The fact is, this is capitalism
run amok. This whole discussion should be about
capitalism. Capitalism does what it’s designed to
do, when it’s unfettered or unregulated—as it is—and
that is to increase profit and reduce the cost of
labor. And it has done that by deindustrializing the
country, and the Clinton administration, you know,
massively enabled this.
And, you
know, we’re sitting here in Philadelphia. The last
convention was in Cleveland. These are Potemkin
villages, where the downtowns are Disneyfied, and
three and four blocks away people are living in
appalling poverty. We have responded to surplus
labor, as Karl Marx says, in our deindustrialized
internal colonies, to quote Malcolm X, by putting
poor people of color in cages all across the
country. Why? It’s because surplus labor—corporate
entities cannot make money off of surplus or
redundant labor. But when you lock them in a cage,
they make $40,000 or $50,000 a year. This is the
system we live in.
We live in
a system where, under Section 1021 of the National
Defense Authorization Act, the executive branch can
put the soldiers in the streets, in clear violation
of the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, to see—carry out
extraordinary rendition of American citizens who are
deemed to be, quote-unquote, "terrorists," strip
them of due process and hold them indefinitely in
military facilities, including in our black sites.
We are a country that engages in torture.
We
talk—Robert talks about, you know, building
movements. You can’t build movements in a political
system where money has replaced the vote. It’s
impossible. And the Democrats, you know, their
bedside manner is different from the Republicans.
You know, Trump is this kind of grotesque figure.
He’s like the used car salesman who rolls back the
speedometer. But Hillary Clinton is like, you know,
the managers of Goldman Sachs. They both engage in
criminal activities that have—and Clinton’s record,
like Trump, exposes this—that have preyed upon the
most vulnerable within this country and are now
destroying the middle class. And to somehow speak as
if we are in a functioning democracy, or speak as if
there are any restraints on capitalism, or speak as
if the Democratic Party has not pushed forward this
agenda—I mean, Obama has done this. You know, he has
been as obsequious to Wall Street as the Bush
administration. There’s no difference.
AMY
GOODMAN:
Robert Reich?
ROBERT
REICH:
Chris, you know, I—again, I find this a frustrating
conversation, because I agree with so much of what
you have said, but the question is: What do we do
about it? I mean, we are in a better position today,
in the sense that Bernie Sanders has helped
mobilize, organize and energize a lot of Americans,
and educated a lot of Americans about the very
issues that you have talked and written about and I
have talked and written about. But it is—the
question is: What is the action? What is the actual
political strategy right now?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, let me—let me answer that.
ROBERT
REICH:
And I think the political—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Let me answer that.
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, let me just—let me just put in my two cents. I
think political strategy is not to elect Donald
Trump, to elect Hillary Clinton, and, for four
years, to develop an alternative, another Bernie
Sanders-type candidate with an independent party,
outside the Democratic Party, that will take on
Hillary Clinton, assuming that she is elected and
that she runs for re-election, and that also
develops the infrastructure of a third party that is
a true, new progressive party.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Well, that’s precisely what we’re trying to do.
There is a point where you have to—do I want to keep
quoting Ralph?—but where you have to draw a line in
the sand. And that’s part of the problem with the
left, is we haven’t.
I covered
the war in Yugoslavia, and I find many parallels
between what’s happening in the United States and
what happened with the breakdown of Yugoslavia. What
is it that caused this country to disintegrate? It
wasn’t ancient ethnic hatreds. It was the economic
meltdown of Yugoslavia and a bankrupt liberal
establishment that, after the death of Tito, until
1989 or 1990, spoke in the language of democracy,
but proved ineffectual in terms of dealing with the
plight of working men and women who were cast out of
state factories, huge unemployment and, finally,
hyperinflation.
And the
fact is that these neoliberal policies, which the
Democratic Party is one of the engines for, have
created this right-wing fascialism. You can go
back—this proto-fascism. You can go back and look at
the Weimar, and it—Republic—was very much the same.
So it’s completely counterintuitive. Of course I
find Trump a vile and disturbing and disgusting
figure, but I don’t believe that voting for the
Democratic establishment—and remember that this—the
two insurgencies, both within the Republican Party
and the—were against figures like Hillary Clinton,
who spoke in that traditional feel-your-pain
language of liberalism, while assiduously serving
corporate power and selling out working men and
women. And they see through the con, they see
through the game.
I don’t
actually think Bernie Sanders educated the public.
In fact, Bernie Sanders spoke for the first time as
a political candidate about the reality the public
was experiencing, because even Barack Obama, in his
State of the Union address, was talking about
economic recovery, and everything was wonderful, and
people know that it’s not. And when you dispossess—
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, let me—let me—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Let me just finish. Let me finish. When you
dispossess that segment, as large as we have—half
the country now lives in virtual poverty—and you
continue to essentially run a government that’s been
seized by a cabal, in this case, corporate, which
uses all of the machinery of government for their
own enrichment and their own further empowerment at
the expense of the rest of the citizenry, people
finally react. And that is how you get fascism. That
is what history has told us. And to sit by—every
time, Robert, you speak, you do exactly what Trump
does, which is fear, fear, fear, fear, fear. And the
fact that we are going to build some kind of—
ROBERT
REICH:
Well, let me—let me try to—
CHRIS
HEDGES:
—amorphous movement after Hillary Clinton—it’s just
not they way it works.
ROBERT
REICH:
Let me try to inject—let me—let me try to inject—
AMY
GOODMAN:
Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich?
ROBERT
REICH:
Let me try to inject some hope in here, in this
discussion, rather than fear. I’ve been traveling
around the country for the last two years, trying to
talk to tea partiers and conservatives and many
people who are probably going to vote for Donald
Trump, to try to understand what it is that they are
doing and how they view America and why they’re
acting in ways that are so obviously against their
self-interest, both economic self-interest and other
self-interest. And here’s the interesting thing I
found.
This great
antiestablishment wave that is occurring both on the
left and the right has a great overlap, if you will,
and that overlap is a deep contempt for what many
people on the right are calling crony capitalism—in
fact, many people on the left have called crony
capitalism. And those people on the right, many,
many working people, they’re not all white. Many of
them are. Many of them are working-class. Many of
them have suffered from trade and technological
displacement and a government that is really turning
its back on them, they feel—and to some extent,
they’re right. Many of them feel as angry about the
current system and about corporate welfare and about
big money in politics as many of us on the
progressive side do.
Now, if it
is possible to have a multiracial, multiethnic
coalition of the bottom 90 percent that is ready to
fight to get big money out of politics, for more
equality, for a system that is not rigged against
average working people, where there are not going to
be all of these redistributions upward from those of
us who have paychecks—and we don’t even realize that
larger and larger portions of those paychecks are
going to big industries, conglomerates, concentrated
industries that have great market power, because
it’s all hidden from view—well, the more coalition
building we can do, from right to left, multiethnic,
multiracial, left and right, to build a movement to
take back our economy and to take back our
democracy, that is—
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: Robert
Reich—Robert Reich, I’d just like to interrupt you
for a second, because we only have a minute left,
and I just wanted to ask Chris one last question. In
less than a minute, if you can, regardless of—you’re
voting for Jill Stein, other folks are going to vote
for Clinton and Trump. Where do you feel this
massive movement that has developed over the last
few years, this people movement, would have a better
opportunity to grow, under a Trump presidency or
under a Clinton presidency, assuming that one of
those two will eventually be elected?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
I don’t think it makes any difference. The
TPP is going to go
through, whether it’s Donald Trump or Hillary
Clinton. Endless war is going to be continued,
whether it’s Trump or Clinton. We’re not going to
get our privacy back, whether it’s under Clinton or
Trump. The idea that, at this point, the figure in
the executive branch exercises that much power,
given the power of the war industry and Wall Street,
is a myth. The fact is—
ROBERT
REICH:
Equating—I’m sorry. I’m sorry.
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: Even on
immigration?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
What? On?
JUAN
GONZÁLEZ: Even on
immigration?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
What? On immigration? I mean, let’s look at Obama’s
record on immigration. Who’s worse?
AMY
GOODMAN:
We’ve got 10 seconds.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
I mean, you know, you can’t get worse than Obama.
ROBERT
REICH:
And can I just say something?
CHRIS
HEDGES:
I mean, the idea is, the Democrats speak, and the—
AMY
GOODMAN:
Robert Reich, 10 seconds.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
Yeah.
ROBERT
REICH:
I just want to say, equating Donald Trump and
Hillary Clinton is absolute nonsense. I just—anybody
who equates the two of them is not paying attention.
And it’s dangerous kind of talk.
CHRIS
HEDGES:
That’s not what I—that’s not what I did.
AMY
GOODMAN:
We’re going to have to leave it there, but this is a
discussion that will continue. Chris Hedges, I want
to thank you for being with us, Pulitzer
Prize-winning journalist, author of Wages of
Rebellion: The Moral Imperative of Revolt. And
former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich,
professor now at the University of California,
Berkeley. His most recent book, Saving
Capitalism.
|