Chis Hedges - A "Non-Attached Progressive-Fundamentalist" Who Has Captured My Observations About The "Establishment Progressives"

This man is named "Chris Hedges".  He is a progressive-fundamentalist war reporter for "The Nation" magazine.

I have heard no other progressive who has done a better job voicing what I had previously observed about the "Establishment Progressives" per his recent C-SPAN Book TV presentation.

If you scratch out "The Liberal Class" and replace it with "The Black Establishment" there would be a near 100% complete match in his words exposing their antics.

I don't pretend to agree with Mr Hedges with regard to his general positions and his analysis.  Certainly if the city of Camden has no grocery stores - this is not an example of corporate exploitation.  This is an open opportunity for a non-aligned group to come in and build up a strong customer base without the threat from Wal-Mart.  His main flaw is that he focuses on the fight against corporations while failing to articulate how "progressive minded individuals" can collaborate to build up a parallel system in the rubble of American Corporate Democracy.

At the same time I am forced to agree with a good number of the observations that Mr Hedges puts forth in his book.   The use of consumer credit is what has allowed many Americans to regain the standard of living that their productivity and income can no longer substantiate.  There are great problems ahead unless we realign these living standard with the income.

He criticizes his friends on the left for largely speaking as "Progressives" but ultimately operating within the capitalist war-socialist system that they merely mouth condemnation of.


The "Black Establishment" IS A Component Of The "Liberal Class"

C-SPAN Book TV (CSPAN II) plans to re-air Mr Hedges presentation on February 7th.  They have not yet published the time so you need to keep track of their schedule on their web site.

I had previously described the classifications of:

•  "Establishment Progressives" - those who use the words of "progressivism" as their mechanism to make inroads into the seats of power within the government, corporations and other institutions. 
• "The Unattached Progressives" - those who have an anarchical streak within them.  They are more committed to ideological purity and enforces it upon both Conservatives and "Establishment Progressives".

By far the best critical analysis of progressive figures that are typically "off limits" by the mainstream media (including Civil Rights leaders and elected officials who are racial minorities) has come from my frequent reading (OK - monitoring) of hard left media sources.

This includes:

• "International Socialist Review" magazine
• "The Nation" magazine
• "Dollars and Sense" magazine
• "Democracy Now" television broadcast
• A select number of web sites

For example, I learned about how Atlanta Mayor Maynard Jackson used heavy handed tactics against striking sanitation workers in Atlanta back in the 1970's - NOT from the Black Establishment Media channels who seek desperately to protect their brand and all who have their portraits hanging inside of their art gallery.  Instead it was a (White) progressive magazine which did a review of the squandered promises in various cities where "favorable people" where put into power but they ultimately chose to protect the establishment institutions.    

On another occasion I recall reading a progressive magazine which enumerated the functions of all of its "coalition partners" in driving "progressive social and economic change" for the nation.  While we might expect "labor" to be enumerated as such - they listed "The Black Political Machine" as an important component of the progressive takeover.   It was disturbing to see these third party observant eyes expertly capturing what our people have been ensnared into marching along with.  If I am Black BUT NOT a "progressive" does this mean that I stand opposed to BLACK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT?      I maintain that the best evidence of the forces that stand most opposed to "Black community development" are those who control Flint, Detroit, Newark, Camden, Gary, Chicago, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Rochester and Buffalo.  

The point is not whether I agree with their analysis or not.  The point is that such critical analysis is largely absent in the "Black Establishment Press".   Their job is to defend the establishment and their IDEOLOGY over any concern about a dogged focus on the promised benefits and showing an unrelenting resolve for receiving the delivery.

The truth is that they and Hedges have this as a common flaw.  In as much as they are focused on "Ideological Enforcements" rather than results - they are never made to ask if their IDEOLOGY is the best tool at the present time to deliver upon the promises.  The desired results will only come from the adoption of more effective management strategies that are parceled out in a more segmented fashion geographically.   Whereas most franchise seek to execute their success locally as a means of aggregating their wealth for the benefit of the centralized entity - the Progressive sees "localization" per the view of the racially hijacked term known as "States Rights".  By forgoing their nationalized claim of "social justice" they believe that they are left vulnerable to the whims of a "distributed market economy" where their interests can be sliced and diced and exploited.     They see  With the Black Establishment Press they have a "dual axis of planetary rotation":   Race and Progressive Ideology.   In general practice both are maximized.  

The unfortunate consequence of their machinations is that it is often necessary to deemphasize the conditions of the 'Black Permanent Interests' in pursuit of their ideological goals.  While Hedges made mention of "The Tea Parties" and, of course, the Republican Party in his briefing - he set his sights on the grand hypocrisy of his fellow travelers on the left.  He realized that his progressive goals could only be accomplished by purging those who have incorporated progressive talk into their spiel  but have ultimately misappropriated progressive values.   By comparison the focus on the "Tea Parties" IS the central "ideological unity enforcement" mechanism for the "Progressive who is a Democrat who is Black".   While they are able to make the case that "racist White people" always need to have an enemy to get mad at...............they can't see that they make use of the very same "group think" accouterments for their own purposes.   There is simply no way a serious minded Black Community Conscious person can look at failing schools, heightened violence and eroding economic opportunity in the Black community and see SARAH PALIN'S face as the threat from which this has originated.  Palin and the "Tea Parties" are a threat to DEMOCRATS.  In as much as these embedded operatives that lurk within our community consciousness are Democrats - they misappropriate the PRIORITY FOCUS of the Black community upon "unifying enemies".

Hedges On Obama And The Democratic Party

With Obama promising to raise $1B for his reelection campaign - Mr Hedges dares to ask WHO will be supplying the balance of these funds and WHAT they will have purchased from helping Mr Obama win a new round.   Of course in the first go round the story that was emphasized was the record number of small donations from individuals that Obama received via new "social networking" channels.  The "Establishment Progressives" that Hedges calls out did not mention that Obama also got a record amount of corporate money.   

Hedges calls out Reps Conyers and Kucinch as Progressive allies who demanded the "multiple taxpayer paid health care" (the "Public Option") and rhetorically threatened to refuse to vote for anything less.  YET when this multi-billion dollar gift to the insurance industry was voted upon - they stood in support of it.   Hedges points out that millions more customers will be brought into the fold of the insurance companies and that government subsidies will fatten their balance sheets.  In his view the private health care system should have been taken apart, the only sure means to remove profiteering from the system.  None of his "progressive friends" stood up and refused to go along with the compromise.

I have more respect for those who seek to retain the consistency of their dogma.  They are more predictability in their reactions without the complicit outrage or silence in reverse correlation to their adversary's or friend's placement in the seat of power at a given time.

When The "Black Community Is Made Into A Partisan Or Ideological Constituency" We Lose When They Win

 There is a big difference between "compromising" when the conditions require it and BEING COMPROMISED as you adopt an external entities platform as your own.

This past weekend as I was doing my review of "Lampblack Yellow Journalism" I was stunned at how articles purporting to represent "Black Community Development Interests" started out and concluded with POLITICAL strategies.  In the "virtual Black community" when the ideological adversary is present there exists a battle over seats of power so that the community resources can be more "justly" distributed.  When the adversary "leaves us all alone - to take over all of the institutions seats" as he goes elsewhere to populate his own damned seats - this is called "corporate abandonment" of Black people.  

Few of the "congregational reporters" dare to observe that in the decades of the pitched battle where seats in the "human resource development" institutions were won by attrition - the lack of ORGANIC COMPETENCY DEVELOPMENT within the domain has left our people in a great state of peril - after the "catalyst" has departed their midst.

Indeed there was a VICTORY -as evident by the "campaign victory parties" where "The Electric Slide" was executed with great precision.   There was also an unfortunate LOSS suffered by the Black community in that what was focused upon as our "victory" was not, in fact, that which developed them.