"Let The Class War Begin . . ."

Freemason9

Gold Member
Aug 14, 2012
2,477
280
130
This is a thought-provoking column from Chris Hedges. Please take the time to read the entire article, because I think this thinking is coming to the forefront:

“The rich are different from us,” F. Scott Fitzgerald is said to have remarked to Ernest Hemingway, to which Hemingway allegedly replied, “Yes, they have more money.”

The exchange, although it never actually took place, sums up a wisdom Fitzgerald had that eluded Hemingway. The rich are different. The cocoon of wealth and privilege permits the rich to turn those around them into compliant workers, hangers-on, servants, flatterers and sycophants. Wealth breeds, as Fitzgerald illustrated in “The Great Gatsby” and his short story “The Rich Boy,” a class of people for whom human beings are disposable commodities. Colleagues, associates, employees, kitchen staff, servants, gardeners, tutors, personal trainers, even friends and family, bend to the whims of the wealthy or disappear. Once oligarchs achieve unchecked economic and political power, as they have in the United States, the citizens too become disposable.

The public face of the oligarchic class bears little resemblance to the private face. I, like Fitzgerald, was thrown into the embrace of the upper crust when young. I was shipped off as a scholarship student at the age of 10 to an exclusive New England boarding school. I had classmates whose fathers—fathers they rarely saw—arrived at the school in their limousines accompanied by personal photographers (and at times their mistresses), so the press could be fed images of rich and famous men playing the role of good fathers. I spent time in the homes of the ultra-rich and powerful, watching my classmates, who were children, callously order around men and women who worked as their chauffeurs, cooks, nannies and servants. When the sons and daughters of the rich get into serious trouble there are always lawyers, publicists and political personages to protect them—George W. Bush’s life is a case study in the insidious affirmative action for the rich. The rich have a snobbish disdain for the poor—despite well-publicized acts of philanthropy—and the middle class. These lower classes are viewed as uncouth parasites, annoyances that have to be endured, at times placated and always controlled in the quest to amass more power and money. My hatred of authority, along with my loathing for the pretensions, heartlessness and sense of entitlement of the rich, comes from living among the privileged. It was a deeply unpleasant experience. But it exposed me to their insatiable selfishness and hedonism. I learned, as a boy, who were my enemies.

The inability to grasp the pathology of our oligarchic rulers is one of our gravest faults. We have been blinded to the depravity of our ruling elite by the relentless propaganda of public relations firms that work on behalf of corporations and the rich. Compliant politicians, clueless entertainers and our vapid, corporate-funded popular culture, which holds up the rich as leaders to emulate and assures us that through diligence and hard work we can join them, keep us from seeing the truth.

“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy,” Fitzgerald wrote of the wealthy couple at the center of Gatsby’s life. “They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

Aristotle, Niccolò Machiavelli, Alexis de Tocqueville, Adam Smith and Karl Marx all began from the premise there is a natural antagonism between the rich and the masses. “Those who have too much of the goods of fortune, strength, wealth, friends, and the like, are neither willing nor able to submit to authority,” Aristotle wrote in “Politics.” “The evil begins at home; for when they are boys, by reason of the luxury in which they are brought up, they never learn, even at school, the habit of obedience.” Oligarchs, these philosophers knew, are schooled in the mechanisms of manipulation, subtle and overt repression and exploitation to protect their wealth and power at our expense. Foremost among their mechanisms of control is the control of ideas. Ruling elites ensure that the established intellectual class is subservient to an ideology—in this case free market capitalism and globalization—that justifies their greed. “The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships,” Marx wrote, “the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas.”

The blanket dissemination of the ideology of free market capitalism through the media and the purging, especially in academia, of critical voices have permitted our oligarchs to orchestrate the largest income inequality gap in the industrialized world. The top 1 percent in the United States own 40 percent of the nation’s wealth while the bottom 80 percent own only 7 percent, as Joseph E. Stiglitz wrote in “The Price of Inequality.” For every dollar that the wealthiest 0.1 percent amassed in 1980 they had an additional $3 in yearly income in 2008, David Cay Johnston explained in the article “9 Things the Rich Don’t Want You to Know About Taxes.” The bottom 90 percent, Johnson said, in the same period added only one cent. Half of the country is now classified as poor or low-income. The real value of the minimum wage has fallen by $2.77 since 1968. Oligarchs do not believe in self-sacrifice for the common good. They never have. They never will. They are the cancer of democracy.

“We Americans are not usually thought to be a submissive people, but of course we are,” Wendell Berry writes. “Why else would we allow our country to be destroyed? Why else would we be rewarding its destroyers? Why else would we all—by proxies we have given to greedy corporations and corrupt politicians—be participating in its destruction? Most of us are still too sane to piss in our own cistern, but we allow others to do so and we reward them for it. We reward them so well, in fact, that those who piss in our cistern are wealthier than the rest of us. How do we submit? By not being radical enough. Or by not being thorough enough, which is the same thing.”

The rise of an oligarchic state offers a nation two routes, according to Aristotle. The impoverished masses either revolt to rectify the imbalance of wealth and power or the oligarchs establish a brutal tyranny to keep the masses forcibly enslaved. We have chosen the second of Aristotle’s options. The slow advances we made in the early 20th century through unions, government regulation, the New Deal, the courts, an alternative press and mass movements have been reversed. The oligarchs are turning us—as they did in the 19th century steel and textile factories—into disposable human beings. They are building the most pervasive security and surveillance apparatus in human history to keep us submissive.

This imbalance would not have disturbed most of our Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers, largely wealthy slaveholders, feared direct democracy. They rigged our political process to thwart popular rule and protect the property rights of the native aristocracy. The masses were to be kept at bay. The Electoral College, the original power of the states to appoint senators, the disenfranchisement of women, Native Americans, African-Americans and men without property locked most people out of the democratic process at the beginning of the republic. We had to fight for our voice. Hundreds of workers were killed and thousands were wounded in our labor wars. The violence dwarfed the labor battles in any other industrialized nation. The democratic openings we achieved were fought for and paid for with the blood of abolitionists, African-Americans, suffragists, workers and those in the anti-war and civil rights movements. Our radical movements, repressed and ruthlessly dismantled in the name of anti-communism, were the real engines of equality and social justice. The squalor and suffering inflicted on workers by the oligarchic class in the 19th century is mirrored in the present, now that we have been stripped of protection. Dissent is once again a criminal act. The Mellons, Rockefellers and Carnegies at the turn of the last century sought to create a nation of masters and serfs. The modern corporate incarnation of this 19th century oligarchic elite has created a worldwide neofeudalism, where workers across the planet toil in misery while corporate oligarchs amass hundreds of millions in personal wealth.

Class struggle defines most of human history. Marx got this right. The sooner we realize that we are locked in deadly warfare with our ruling, corporate elite, the sooner we will realize that these elites must be overthrown. The corporate oligarchs have now seized all institutional systems of power in the United States. Electoral politics, internal security, the judiciary, our universities, the arts and finance, along with nearly all forms of communication, are in corporate hands. Our democracy, with faux debates between two corporate parties, is meaningless political theater. There is no way within the system to defy the demands of Wall Street, the fossil fuel industry or war profiteers. The only route left to us, as Aristotle knew, is revolt.

It is not a new story. The rich, throughout history, have found ways to subjugate and re-subjugate the masses. And the masses, throughout history, have cyclically awoken to throw off their chains. The ceaseless fight in human societies between the despotic power of the rich and the struggle for justice and equality lies at the heart of Fitzgerald’s novel, which uses the story of Gatsby to carry out a fierce indictment of capitalism. Fitzgerald was reading Oswald Spengler’s “The Decline of the West” as he was writing “The Great Gatsby.” Spengler predicted that, as Western democracies calcified and died, a class of “monied thugs” would replace the traditional political elites. Spengler was right about that.

“There are only two or three human stories,” Willa Cather wrote, “and they go on repeating themselves as fiercely as if they had never happened before.”

The seesaw of history has thrust the oligarchs once again into the sky. We sit humiliated and broken on the ground. It is an old battle. It has been fought over and over in human history. We never seem to learn. It is time to grab our pitchforks.

Chris Hedges: Let?s Get This Class War Started - Chris Hedges - Truthdig
 
Last edited:
So I should hate my brother because he has more money than me? I should go to war with him?

Ill pass.
 
So I should hate my brother because he has more money than me? I should go to war with him?

Ill pass.

So you were cool with feudalism, then?

Do you know what feudalism is? Cause if you think we will ever have feudalism without a complete collapse of society and a loss of knowledge, then you probably don't.
 
so the insane left thinks that it can incite the unrest and that it will lead it? :cuckoo:

gosh, they are the ignorant idiots, to say the least.

those who think they will be the "leaders" would be devoured the first.

clearly history teaches us nothing.

or it does, but one has to actually have the brain to analyze :lol:
 
So I should hate my brother because he has more money than me? I should go to war with him?

Ill pass.

So you were cool with feudalism, then?

Do you know what feudalism is? Cause if you think we will ever have feudalism without a complete collapse of society and a loss of knowledge, then you probably don't.

he does not. it's a new talking point in the leftard agenda. otherwise he would know that socialist utopias are de facto feudalism with aristocracy replaced by the government
 
The top 1 percent in the United States own 40 percent of the nation’s wealth while the bottom 80 percent own only 7 percent, as Joseph E. Stiglitz wrote in “The Price of Inequality.” For every dollar that the wealthiest 0.1 percent amassed in 1980 they had an additional $3 in yearly income in 2008, David Cay Johnston explained in the article “9 Things the Rich Don’t Want You to Know About Taxes.” The bottom 90 percent, Johnson said, in the same period added only one cent. Half of the country is now classified as poor or low-income. The real value of the minimum wage has fallen by $2.77 since 1968. Oligarchs do not believe in self-sacrifice for the common good. They never have. They never will. They are the cancer of democracy

Hey, you know what! That's ok. Its not like 90% of America is poor or low income just half. Whats the big deal?

Our wages have gone down almost $3 don't be a hater. Its not like its $10 dollars stop being a baby.


The bottom 80 percent only owns 7% of the wealth! Thank the stars we're allowed any of it. We should be grateful. Its not like its 0%

The rich, throughout history, have found ways to subjugate and re-subjugate the masses. And the masses, throughout history, have cyclically awoken to throw off their chains.

History schmistory. Its not like the past repeats itself. We're smarter now and besides. The other 99% have flat screens and microwaves yanno.
 
So I should hate my brother because he has more money than me? I should go to war with him?

Ill pass.

So you were cool with feudalism, then?

Do you know what feudalism is? Cause if you think we will ever have feudalism without a complete collapse of society and a loss of knowledge, then you probably don't.

It does seem as if we are headed down that path, though. We have an active and effective political movement (the right wing Tea Party) that opposes education and science; the economy is in the ditch, and they seem to like it that way. I can see superstition and religion becoming political ideology in America.

Information is useless if it cannot/will not be utilized or trusted.
 
So you were cool with feudalism, then?

Do you know what feudalism is? Cause if you think we will ever have feudalism without a complete collapse of society and a loss of knowledge, then you probably don't.

he does not. it's a new talking point in the leftard agenda. otherwise he would know that socialist utopias are de facto feudalism with aristocracy replaced by the government

The use of the term "leftard" identifies you as a squirrel.
 
:lmao:

Same as it ever was.

Will there ever come a time when the envious blame the correct culprits for the wealth gap in the USA? I highly doubt it.
 
Do you know what feudalism is? Cause if you think we will ever have feudalism without a complete collapse of society and a loss of knowledge, then you probably don't.

he does not. it's a new talking point in the leftard agenda. otherwise he would know that socialist utopias are de facto feudalism with aristocracy replaced by the government

The use of the term "leftard" identifies you as a squirrel.

the use of the term feudalism identifies you as an idiot.
which the majority of the leftards are
 
:lmao:

Same as it ever was.

Will there ever come a time when the envious blame the correct culprits for the wealth gap in the USA? I highly doubt it.

no, because you have to see the goal- and then you will understand why these lies are repeated and the hatred is spewed
 
:lmao:

Same as it ever was.

Will there ever come a time when the envious blame the correct culprits for the wealth gap in the USA? I highly doubt it.

no, because you have to see the goal- and then you will understand why these lies are repeated and the hatred is spewed

Well okay, then. It's quite clear on what side of the ball you plant your heels.
 
It does seem as if we are headed down that path, though. We have an active and effective political movement (the right wing Tea Party) that opposes education and science; the economy is in the ditch, and they seem to like it that way. I can see superstition and religion becoming political ideology in America.

Information is useless if it cannot/will not be utilized or trusted.

We oppose science and education now? You do realize that the reason we oppose Obama's policies is precisely because we want the economy to grow, right?

Why do you think that burdening people and taking away their choices could ever lead to economic prosperity?

Why do you see religion so negatively? The Founders were very religious men and women and they managed to create the greatest Nation in the modern world.

See to create prosperity, you need to be good people. You need to be honest. You need to work hard. You need to be humble and able to change. It's by underminding these principles and become a dishonest, idle, and proud that you run into the problems we have today.
 
:lmao:

Same as it ever was.

Will there ever come a time when the envious blame the correct culprits for the wealth gap in the USA? I highly doubt it.

no, because you have to see the goal- and then you will understand why these lies are repeated and the hatred is spewed

Well okay, then. It's quite clear on what side of the ball you plant your heels.

sure, I don't hide it.
I know perfectly well that revolutions incited to put into power one hopeful idiots usually devour those almost immediately and bring into power the worst scum possible, even if the inciters weren't the angels themselves.
oh, and leftard utopias never work.
has been proven repeatedly
 
There is no way to discuss this rationally with someone that has never had to fight or sacrifice to gain anything.
They are elitists and yes they do believe in feudalism, although they will make statements that there is no way it can happen in this country. (feu·dal·ism
ˈfyo͞odlˌizəm/
noun
historical
noun: feudalism

1.
the dominant social system in medieval Europe, in which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection.
Maybe they have forgotten Pre-Civil War in the United States.

Study the history of the working class and the effect unionism had during that time and what the workforces exposed to prior to the movement.
The working class should never submit to the idea they and their labor are worth less and less.
 
It does seem as if we are headed down that path, though. We have an active and effective political movement (the right wing Tea Party) that opposes education and science; the economy is in the ditch, and they seem to like it that way. I can see superstition and religion becoming political ideology in America.

Information is useless if it cannot/will not be utilized or trusted.

We oppose science and education now? You do realize that the reason we oppose Obama's policies is precisely because we want the economy to grow, right?

Why do you think that burdening people and taking away their choices could ever lead to economic prosperity?

Why do you see religion so negatively? The Founders were very religious men and women and they managed to create the greatest Nation in the modern world.

See to create prosperity, you need to be good people. You need to be honest. You need to work hard. You need to be humble and able to change. It's by underminding these principles and become a dishonest, idle, and proud that you run into the problems we have today.

Did you even read the OP, Avatar? It actually supports much of what you say. I don't recall mentioning Obama at all, and I am no fan of Obama's. We simply had no choice at all in the last election--Romney? Are you serious? The definitive son of aristocracy with magic underwear and mansions? NO. Obama was elected the first time because of Palin, and the second time because of Romney. If the GOP was serious about winning, they would have provided viable options.

Not ass clowns like Palin and Romney.

What were we talking about, again? LOL
 
Advocating class warfare supports what I am saying IE killing and hating our brethren because they have money is not a good thing... yeah not seeing it.

You mentioned the Tea Party. So of course I mentioned Obama. The two are related. The Tea Party supports policies that make people free. Obama, as we have seen the past 5 years, doesn't.

And yes, Romney was a much superior choice to Obama. He isn't the son of aristocracy. There is no aristocracy in this country. We don't have any. You cant be the son of something that doesnt exist. Not to mention when he was born his parents weren't wealthy. If anyone acts like aristocracy in this country it's the current administration.

You have so many little things wrong. You claim the Tea Party is against science and education. Pure nonsense. Even a liberal ivy league professor did a study that conluded we are far more educated in matters of science than the general population. You claim Romney was born the son of aristocracy which is total nonsense.

Why do you believe such crap?

And you're wrong about the 08 election. Obama wasnt elected because of Palin. He was elected because of Bush and McCain.
 
Not because they have money idiot its because for them to have more money everyone else has to take a hit unless there is some unlimited supply of cash somewhere no one knows about.

For every dollar that the wealthiest 0.1 percent amassed in 1980 they had an additional $3 in yearly income in 2008, David Cay Johnston explained in the article “9 Things the Rich Don’t Want You to Know About Taxes.” The bottom 90 percent, Johnson said, in the same period added only one cent.

If half of all Americans are low income or poor that Is a problem, yes? No? Why or why not?

The answer cannot be that since 1980 the levels of laziness went thru the roof because 1 that's improvable and 2 its bullshit
 

Forum List

Back
Top