The Living Dead Liberal Class

[davidswanson]

Chris Hedges began a recent column, in these days just prior to congressional elections by announcing:

"The lunatic fringe of the Republican Party, which looks set to make sweeping gains in the midterm elections, is the direct result of a collapse of liberalism. It is the product of bankrupt liberal institutions, including the press, the church, universities, labor unions, the arts and the Democratic Party. The legitimate rage being expressed by disenfranchised workers toward the college-educated liberal elite, who abetted or did nothing to halt the corporate assault on the poor and the working class of the last 30 years, is not misplaced. The liberal class is guilty."

In a short column this comes off as little more than a "don't vote for the evil of two lessers" sound bite, ready for easy rejection by the living dead liberal class intent on doing just that. But Hedges was drawing from the depth of his new book "The Death of the Liberal Class," which demonstrates overwhelmingly that -- regardless of how you will or should vote -- the American liberal class is dead and gone. We who remain lack the institutions and the attitudes necessary to save the plutocrats from themselves, much as we might like to do so.

Hedges traces the dying of liberalism in the United States to World War I, which "consolidated state and corporate control over economic, political, cultural, and social affairs. It created mass culture, fostered through the consumer society the cult of the self, led the nation into an era of permanent war, and used fear and mass propaganda to cow citizens and silence independent and radical voices within the liberal class." The illness worsened with World War II and McCarthyism, as the liberal class "became part of the corporate structure it should have been dismantling. It created an ideological vacuum on the left and ceded the language of rebellion to the far right." Hedges opens his book with a personal story of a man rebelling against the current system whose language comes from the right, a phenomenon that simply must exist when the left is afraid of its own shadow.

Hedges quotes the Washington Post in 1918 on a trial that acquitted the leaders of a mob that lynched a German-American: "n spite of the excesses, such as lynching, it is a beautiful and wholesome awakening of the interior of the country." The country has never unawakened from militaristic madness, which the Post has never stopped promoting. But history did not have to go this way, and it was not always common or even imaginable in this country for newspapers, labor unions, academics, and progressive activist groups to line up on the side of war and corporatism. The horror of that situation is softened by the pretense that what these people and groups are doing is inevitable, realistic, rational, and "objective."

The corporate mask of "objectivity" hides us from our responsibility to take positions on our own, not just in accordance with the demands of power. Hedges compares the way news was written about in 1834 and 1995:

"In 1834 the New York Sun reported on a woman whose husband came home drunk and abusive once too often. It wrote of the events in a manner that would be impossible in today's cold, stripped-down reliance on fact: 'As every sensible woman ought to do who is cursed with a drunken husband, she refused to have anything to do with him hereafter -- and he was sent to the penitentiary.' For comparison, here is the final sentence of a 1995 item from the Ann Arbor News, about a man who assaulted a prostitute after she refused to have sex with him: 'Employees at the Ramada Inn Ann Arbor, 3750 Washtenaw Avenue, said the man and woman checked in around 2 a.m. Friday.'"

That the 1995 story sounds normal, professional, and appropriate to us ought to make us physically ill. Were we to realize what we've come to, we might not be able to stand it. Or we might be able to better push back, rebel, and work for a better world. That, not despair, is what Hedges advocates.

[zeemike]

1. It is the power of gold.

Once the idealist comes into the circles of power they are seduced by the power of gold. (not literally)
And it is co clear how this happened and how it accelerated as the wealth went more and more to the top because they could buy more and more people as well as property....Juan Williams is only the latest example...he did what the right wanted him to do and cashed in....just like so many others both known and unknown....
I think now I will order The Treasure of the Sierra Madeira and watch it again...

[Radical Activist]

2. I'm not convinced about the importance of WW I to this problem.

I think what you're writing about generally relates to the class divides that have always been a problem for the left. That goes back even earlier than the conflicts between rural populists and urban middle-class progressives in the late 19th century.

The abandonment of rural areas and the "flyover" states is perhaps the biggest strategic mistake by liberals in the last few decades. I can count on one hand the number of national progressive organizations that get outside of major cities in middle America. You can't build a national movement that way, especially considering that so many of the greatest victories in the history of the American left happened in rural areas.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Right conclussion, wrong analysis

I date it to the beginning of the counterrevolution in 1948, yes right to work legislation.

It was not seen as important...

Oh and the creation in 1972 of the liberal media canard.

[Dr.Phool]

13. In his speech, promoting the book, he took aim at Taft-Hartley.

"The greatest crime ever perpetrated on working people, and it's still on the books".

As someone who has been "Taft-Hartleyed" a couple of times, I can agree. That and the Railway Labor Act.

I just ordered the book.

[Odin2005]

4. Link?

[KoKo]

15. http://www.davidswanson.org/

[Odin2005]

20. Thanks!

[Ozymanithrax]

5. bankrupt liberal institutions, including the press, the church, universities, labor unions, the arts

and the Democratic Party.

The modern press is not liberal, and have not been at least since the second Reagan term. The dominant church in American politics is right wing and conservative. Oh, there are some liberal churches, but they are few and far between. Universities are as beholden to money from corporations and are not the bastions of liberalism they once were accused of being. Labor unions have a shrinkage problem, being a shadow of their former selves, and most Americans have been taught by generations of propaganda that unions are simply mob controlled communist organizations. The arts, does not exist as an organized institution, Hollywood not withstanding. The Democratic party is center left to center with a lot of members center right.

And the Americans have no short term memory and only want someone to quit hitting them with a brick.

What is left of the liberals have forgotten generations of people who fought and were killed for the 40 hour work week or the civil Rights act.

[Doctor_J]

6. I kind of wish you people would do a little search before starting the 4th thread on this

:wtf:

[soryang]

7. Swanson and Hedges are on to something here but...

...it is the unrelenting application of corporate resources to this scientific propaganda effort that does date to WWI and Edgar Bernays, not some defect in the "liberal class." Humans are susceptable to propaganda, pure and simple. That's why people pay billions for repetitive commercial and political advertising, it's propaganda and it's a science.

[devilgrrl]

9. +1

Said it better than I could.

Thank you! :thumbsup:

[paulkienitz]

8. How can liberalism and conservatism both be dying at the same time?

This guy's definition of a "liberal class" may be something that's dying, but liberalism in general somehow seems to be getting stronger. I think it's pretty clear that even if the teabaggers score a big win in this election, they're going to get slapped hard in the election after that. Young people are rejecting christian conservative values, especially those values that attach to racism. Majorities are shifting to the liberal sides of issues such as public health care. Against that background it's pretty hard to see how the death of a "liberal class" means anything.

[Hannah Bell]

17. because the political process is completely dominated by capital thus neither party can offer

anything real to the majority of voters.

that would be one way both parties could be dying as anything other than a punch & judy show.

[FarLeftFist]

10. Corporations want us all to be mindless drone conservatives...

But the people are yearning for Liberalism (HC bill, Financial reform bill, hell, even the stimulus, most would say didn't go far enough). Our citizens want a world of compassion, empathy, peace, safe clean environments, and higher worker wages. In my opinion Liberalism hasn't even reached its peak, the more damage to the country the republicans keep doing, the more Liberalism will be revived with an even bigger impact. If we split this election or even keep it close I believe we will be poised for huge gains in 2012 and beyond. We get a chance to go back on offense and point out republican hypocrisy and failed policies/ideas, while also continuing to blow holes in their 'conservative' ideology. We can organize and come back stronger. Remember, Liberal economic and social policies have worked very well for America, while conservative economic and social policies have failed us time and time again. Every so-called 'conservative' president we ever had tripled the deficit AND size of Govt (Reagan, Bush, etc.). We will win the day with facts and history. Their whole ideology rests on lies, fear, and propaganda.

[zenprole]

11. It's a book?!?!

The blistering essay Hedges posted on Truthdig is from a book? Very awesome. He was already a heavy hitter, but now he's angling for the Hall Of Fame - moving into Upton Sinclair territory. If you haven't yet, check out his interview with Michael Moore on the Capitalism: A Love Story DVD.

The stakes are community, nation, environment, species. As cynical as I am, there seems to be some gumption forming in a few different places (including a somehow re-energized Michael Moore). There's the passing of the Baby Boomers, now dead weight politically; the choice between America becoming Nazi Germany v 2.0 or collapsing like the Soviet Union, or maybe achieving sane, sustainable community for the first time; these are interesting developments. But the idea of putting up a fight without the clutter of chaff that Hedges is blowing away - that, I like even more.

Screw all the "third way" and "triangulation" theories of politics, and being chained to a massively dysfunctional electoral cycle. It's crunch time. They have all the money, but can 10% stand against all the rest of us? Let's find out.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

14. Hedges had me at "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America"

Will have to check out the "Capitalism" DVD.

[lutherj]

12. "Liberalism" has always been complicit. It throws the working poor a bone once in awhile,

while maintaining the status quo. It's way too late for liberalism. It's time to get radical.

[blindpig]

16. The truth of the matter

is that liberals are every bit as responsible for the state of this country as the conservatives. The nuances which separate the two sides are inconsequential, the great commonality, unflinching support of capitalism, explains it all.

[KoKo]

22. Definitely! Although it's all "hush, hush...do not speak about this..."

We MUST MOVE ON from OUR PAST...or THE PAST ...depending on Which Side is doing the SPIN!

[Uncle Joe]

18. I disagree with Hedges, liberalism is on the upswing and the greatest liberal institution;

that being the Internet is just coming in to its' own sense of self, anyone trying to stand in the way of that dynamic will be bulldozed.

I would also not be too quick in writing off the upcoming elections.

Thanks for the thread, davidswanson.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

19. Hedges is always excellent. One point of discussion I wish I could have with him

however is about this part,

The corporate mask of "objectivity" hides us from our responsibility to take positions on our own, not just in accordance with the demands of power. Hedges compares the way news was written about in 1834 and 1995:

"In 1834 the New York Sun reported on a woman whose husband came home drunk and abusive once too often. It wrote of the events in a manner that would be impossible in today's cold, stripped-down reliance on fact: 'As every sensible woman ought to do who is cursed with a drunken husband, she refused to have anything to do with him hereafter -- and he was sent to the penitentiary.' For comparison, here is the final sentence of a 1995 item from the Ann Arbor News, about a man who assaulted a prostitute after she refused to have sex with him: 'Employees at the Ramada Inn Ann Arbor, 3750 Washtenaw Avenue, said the man and woman checked in around 2 a.m. Friday.'"

That the 1995 story sounds normal, professional, and appropriate to us ought to make us physically ill. Were we to realize what we've come to, we might not be able to stand it. Or we might be able to better push back, rebel, and work for a better world. That, not despair, is what Hedges advocates.

As Hedges does, I also see the problem with the false equivalencies of modern journalism which reports activities motivated by concern for the good of people with the same weight as they report events, pundits, and politicians who practice hate mongering and all-out warfare on reason.

I must say that Hedges confuses me where he talks about a return to press that fosters"our responsibility to take positions on our own" as modeled by the opinion journalism in the Sun excerpt. What I'm thinking is that the 1834 NY Sun article includes moral judgement on the event, which Hedges seems to support--YET, isn't that what Fux does? "Report" all its stories slanted in terms of their moral universe? And, what does Hedges mean when he offers the Sun article which morally judges the story (and rightly so, imo) as an example of reporting that encourages us to responsibly take our own positions?

I do agree that it is right to model true morality, i.e. compassion, wisdom, integrity--or to my mind, good liberal integrity-- but that requires that that moral stance be based in liberal integrity in the first place. Social examples as offered in news reports, schools, churches, performance, journalism, etc. must generate from the correct moral universe. As Skinner's recent thread about human nature notes, we believe that we inhabit the correct moral universe, but the RW fascists think the same thing about themselves! Lacking trustworthy information and educated critical thinking skills, too many people are susceptible to the RW's twisted version of reality. They broadcast their "morality" loudly and righteously and own way too many outlets to do so.

As a generality, people tend to go along with the prevailing atmosphere, and to take their moral cues from their surroundings. Seems the institutions that value and propagate critical thought, compassionate action, concern for one another been overtaken by a number of negative forces, such as fundamentalist christianity, fundamentalist capitalism, fundamentalist RW ideology....while liberal social institutions have lost their influence amid the rise of mass culture, as Hedges explains.

In our hearts, most of us WANT these positive values expressed and supported by the institutions of our society. Seems we need to reclaim OUR VOICE, and those social institutions.

[KoKo]

21. +1

[BlancheSplanchnik]

23. Thanks

:hi:

[davidswanson]

24. yes of course

Fox News is right to drop the pretense of having no point of view, but wrong to have a fascist one