Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Public House › Chris Hedges: "the deep state is real"
- This topic has 10 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 11 months ago by
wv.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 13, 2019 at 12:33 pm #108084wvParticipant
One man’s view. I share his view. I know there is disagreement on this stuff. Let a thousand flowers ride bicycles.
November 14, 2019 at 9:59 am #108103
Billy_TParticipantHedges leaves out all “context” in his critique here, and IMO he’s carrying water for Trump in the process.
It’s not a mystery why some in the Intel community have “gone after Trump.” Trump went after them, relentlessly, in public, on TV, in his tweets, on Fox, fired many of them, called them traitors, again, in public, for having the audacity to investigate his campaign.
Very disappointed in Hedges, yet again, leaving all of that out.
I realize it sounds a great deal juicier to make this into a Le Carre novel, but it’s actually a great deal more banal than that. No president in the history of America has ever attacked his own government like Trump. That includes his own appointees. It would be shocking if they didn’t eventually push back. And it’s not because Trump is somehow this champion antiwar voice, or is against the American empire.
In my view, Hedges is just being flat out silly for suggesting that. Trump fomented a (failed) coup in Venezuela, threatened to nuke North Korea, constantly threatens war with Iran, and has radically increased both defense spending and arms proliferation worldwide. He’s the Pentagon’s dream president, as well as the Intel community’s.
(Take away his personal attacks, and they’d love him and keep their usually silence)
And corporate America? He slashed their taxes and accelerated deregulation and privatization more than any president since Reagan.
Sheesh.
November 14, 2019 at 10:55 am #108104wvParticipantHedges….
….Sheesh.
===============
Well, as you know, we disagree on ‘Interpreting Hedges Words’.
Weirdly, I see
Hedges as basically, essentially, saying the same stuff you are saying, and I am saying. I ‘think’ we are saying the same stuff, but ’emphasizing’ different parts of the situation. I think Hedges (and wv) emphasize the
dark-side of the Dems/CIA/Deep-state and you are emphasizing the abyss that is Trump and the Reps.I just see it as a difference in emphasis. Just my take on it.
Not saying there aint disagreement — there is — but MAINLY, what i see is a difference in emphasis.
w
vNovember 14, 2019 at 1:23 pm #108117Billy_TParticipantI watched it again to see if I had jumped the gun a bit. I heard a bit more of a critique of Trump the second time, but then he basically cancels that out by turning Trump into the supposed victim.
He wasn’t. He isn’t. He brought all of this on himself. Again, if he hadn’t lashed out in the most personal way against the people Hedges mentioned, threatened them with investigations, called them traitors, etc. etc., they wouldn’t have responded in kind. And prior to that, if he and his campaign hadn’t colluded with Russia and Wikileaks to try to win the election, no investigation would have been launched in the first place. An investigation, btw, that was kept hidden until after the election — unlike HRC’s.
(Also: there is no Mueller investigation if Trump hadn’t fired Comey)
And Hedges is wrong about the collusion. That was proven by Mueller. I think Hedges is falling for the semantic trope that tripped up so many Americans:
1. There was no collusion (regarding the DNC hack)
2. There was no collusion with the Russians, period.It’s true they couldn’t prove #1, and I’m guessing Russia acted on its own. But we know the Trump campaign did collude with Russia after that. The Trump Tower meeting was “collusion,” and Mueller lists more than 150 other contacts in his report.
It’s similar to Bush’s causing 9/11 or just exploiting it after the fact. I go with the latter case, instead of the Truthers’ take.
November 14, 2019 at 1:34 pm #108118Billy_TParticipantI think the main problem with Hedge’s premise stems from its Manichean foundation.
If X is bad, and it “goes after” Y, Y must be good, or innocent, or the battle itself can’t be fair or justified.
To me, this is problematic for a host of reasons, with two (perhaps) being most essential.
It’s a broad brush take on the supposedly “bad” entity or person, and doesn’t allow for diversity within those entities and/or across time.
And it doesn’t consider the possibility that both “sides” in the battle might be bad, or at fault.
Crips against the Bloods. One mafia family against another, etc.
Or, “good guys” within the entity deemed bad, with proper intentions, perhaps even “noble.”
In short, I think Hedges and some of his peers make huge assumptions in their critiques, and I think they narrow the possibilities to suit a preset narrative.
Just my take. Hope all is well, WV.
November 14, 2019 at 1:44 pm #108119Billy_TParticipantForgot to mention:
There’s no evidence that Trump is against “endless wars.” It means nothing to me that he said it. He has nearly 14,000 lies on the books since he took office. Do his deeds match that comment? No. Again, he’s escalated our wars and ordered more troops into Saudi Arabia, gave them greater support in their genocidal war in Yemen, expanded drone attacks overall, weapons sales, jacked up defense spending, launched a failed coup in Venezuela, rattles his saber constantly against Iran, and early on against NK, etc. etc.
I’m not seeing what Hedges is seeing. Words mean nothing, if they aren’t backed up by deeds. His deeds tell me he’s fine with war. He just wants to get credit for them, one way or another.
November 14, 2019 at 2:44 pm #108120wvParticipantWell, my own interpretation of Hedge’s words (and dore)is simply that the fact that Trump is a monster is a ‘given.’ He doesnt go on and on about it for the same reason i dont. There’s two reasons really, (1) Its just a given. Its obvious. Yes, yes, yes, he’s a monster. But its obvious and a given and understood. Among Leftists. Hedges is a Leftist, Anti-Capitalist. (2) Going on about Trump can be misunderstood as support for the Dems, the Capitalist-Libs, the DNC, etc.
For example, Hedges said flat out, Trump should/could have been impeached within the first six months of his term, for all kinds of reasons. I mean, thats hardly ‘carry water for trump.’ He said he should/could have been impeached LONG AGO. He didnt go on about it though. No need. Its a given. Understood. Trump is a monster. (But then so is the CIA. One monster fighting the other, at times.)
I, personally, moi, just dont see much difference between what you think and what Hedges/Dore thinks. The only difference i see is the Russia thing. You think the interference was “significant” and Hedges/Dore/Noam/wv thinks it was minor and “relatively insignificant” (especially compared with the US interference all over the world.)
So, we just interpret Hedges differently.
w
vNovember 14, 2019 at 4:31 pm #108122November 14, 2019 at 4:42 pm #108124Billy_TParticipantI messed up on the formatting, so I’ll just answer here without the quotes.
;>)
Your response was a goodin’, and helped clarify the “emphasis” point. Thanks.
It’s a shame, though, that we’re in such a fecked up moment in time, that critique of the most powerful person on earth might be misinterpreted as support for the opposing party. Isn’t that kinda sad?
Anyway, a clarification of my own:
My thing isn’t the relative “significance” of the Russian interference, and I’ve said repeatedly that I think the US is guilty of much worse overall. As in, more of it, more often, over more time, and to worse effect.
My thing is that if an American chases after, exploits, willingly receives foreign help, he or she needs to be held to account. The real issue is on the American side, for me, not the Russian.
It’s one of those “givens” that no nation should be doing this shhht. But it’s also a given that empires and nation-states always have. So until we can put a stop to the practice, we should focus on holding to account . . . individuals, groups and parties that willingly take advantage of that geopolitical chess for their own ends.
November 14, 2019 at 7:35 pm #108127wvParticipant… I’ve said repeatedly that I think the US is guilty of much worse overall. As in, more of it, more often, over more time, and to worse effect.
My thing is that if an American chases after, exploits, willingly receives foreign help, he or she needs to be held to account. The real issue is on the American side, for me, not the Russian.
It’s one of those “givens” that no nation should be doing this shhht. But it’s also a given that empires and nation-states always have. So until we can put a stop to the practice, we should focus on holding to account . . . individuals, groups and parties that willingly take advantage of that geopolitical chess for their own ends.
==================
Yes. Agreed. And i think Hedges would basically agree
w
v
.November 14, 2019 at 9:25 pm #108130wvParticipantBtw, J.Dore and Tulsi:
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
