We Have Engineered the Rage of the Deluded

[TygrBright]

A lot of people are going to get a jizz of satisfied agreement from Chris Hedges' latest commentary.

Indeed, like many DUers, I felt a jolt of righteous anger myself. Because his core argument: That terrorism is a direct product of the catastrophic transformation of the world economy to oligarchy; I'm in total agreement with that.

Here's where we part ways, though.

Hedges believes that religion is the tool of the dispossessed, to lash out at the privileged.

I, on the other hand, believe that religion is the tool of the privileged, to put the dispossessed to work solidifying the oligarch's control by escalating fear and generating increased support for militarized policing and institutionalized repression of dissent.

Here's how I came to this conclusion:

Who dies in terror attacks? Whose property is destroyed? Who is vulnerable?

One thing is crystal clear: It's not the oligarchs or even the wealthy helots who serve them. It's the vast bourgeoisie, the bards, the satirists, institutions of learning, places where the remaining middle classes gather to enjoy what few privileges remain to them, and, of course, the dispossessed's own neighbors.

Riots never start at the gates of gated communities.

Martyrs never seem willing to die blowing up the limousines pulling up at the exclusive club galas.

When was the last time an offshore bank or a stock exchange was the target of a major terrorist attack?

No, religion is never used to gin up rage at the real authors of the world's misery.

It is used, as it always has been, as a tool to divide, control, oppress, and divert attention from the rapacious greed and thievery of our Beloved Oligarchs.

Sorry, Chris.

Making nice about these pathetic tools' "honor" or "righteous anger" or whatever isn't going to bring any enlightenment to this discussion.

Trying to respect the "religious sensibilities" of these shock troops will avail the rest of us no relief.

Pandering to the "sincere beliefs" of those whose misery and rage has blinded them to the extent of becoming proxies for the very forces oppressing them isn't going to bring about the fundamental changes needed to reverse the tide of inequality.

Religion is a potent, potent lever that the powerful have always used to disempower threats and keep the masses under control. When the "jam tomorrow, reward in the afterlife, divine purpose" bullshit loses its effectiveness, they turn seamlessly to the "holy war/victims of oppression" play. It's in the very same playbook.

And until the rage is focused exactly where it belongs, nothing will change.

somberly,
Bright

[ND-Dem]

1. I think religion can be used in both ways. witness mlk.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Yes, religion has sometimes been the tool of the oppressed--

as with the liberation theologists in Latin America or the Catholic Workers Society. But religion, even if it starts out from revolutionary roots, is more often co-opted as a instrument for the powerful to use in manipulating the masses, as the Romans co-opted Christianity and turned it into a slave religion. It also has its place in firing up the masses with righteous indignation preparatory to leading them into war. "Gott mit uns" and all that.

[Scuba]

8. Thank you for that; critical thinking is needed and welcome.

[Blue_Tires]

36. +1

[calimary]

14. This. ^^^^ I think religion can be used in both ways, going both directions.

The 1% using it to push downward, the disaffected on the other end of the financial spectrum - pushing upward. It's all used and manipulated for justification. One size fits all, and all excuse-making, and cover-seeking. FROM any direction TO any direction.

[upaloopa]

2. I think we spend way too much time with

the concept of privilege on this board. Not to say there isn't privilege but too many here use that concept to tie up every argument they have in need little bows when it doesn't even fit.
The very privileged don't give us much thought at all.

[hfojvt]

4. it's all part of a secret master plan

of the magnificent seven, the masters of the universe.

The rest of us are just getting played

[TygrBright]

6. No, they don't. They have a well-paid class of helots to do that thinking for them. n/t

[Phlem]

13. "The very privileged don't give us much thought at all."

And what happens when they run the country?



me thinks your working a little to hard for the other side, it's starting to show.

[upaloopa]

17. They don't think about you when they run the country.

Last edited Tue Jan 13, 2015, 12:48 PM - Edit history (2)

They think of themselves. And there isn't the other side. There is what is in your mind and your opinion. It may reflect truth at times and other times it doesn't.
I am not afraid of my opinion.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

20. That's why I quit the Catholic Church

a couple of months ago and became an ordained minister in the Universal Life Church, the church that my wife and I was married in 45 years ago.
I know what my beliefs are and I don't let fear rule my life.
Use critical thinking, do the right thing and don't let the bastards wear you down.

[Phlem]

21. I never said I was afraid of my opinion.

Where in the hell do you get that?

"There is what is in your mind and your opinion."

[upaloopa]

29. You don't get that what you post here is your

opinion?
And you saying I speak for the other side means nothing to me because again it isn't reality it is only your opinion and I am not afraid of what you post about my opinion.

[Phlem]

30. You don't get that what you post here is your opinion"

Duh, nope, I don't get that at all.

Is the water warm in denial?

[upaloopa]

31. I must be too dense to get your message

[KingCharlemagne]

24. "The very privileged don't give us much thought at all." - Truer words

have seldom been uttered. My compliments.

[CJCRANE]

5. Bashar Assad, of all people, made a good point in his interview with Paris Match.

He pointed out that Salafism was exported to Europe from certain oil-rich countries and allowed to prosper there.

It's interesting if you look at the perps of 9/11 compared to today's extremists, many of whom now come from the West.

Why this was allowed to happened is another question.

[Avalux]

7. They are zombies. Full of rage and without hope.

They are the perfect prey for the powerful who use religion to manipulate them; they are not spiritual and have been fed a twisted doctrine of the religion they profess. They are desensitized and trained to kill with no care for the lives of others.

They have been unleashed upon the rest of us by the oligarchs who created them, with their wars, destruction, nation building, and societal destabilization.

We cannot give in to fear, no matter how hard they try to scare us.

[Maedhros]

9. While I agree with most of your post, I would caution against viewing religions

as monolithic entities.

Islam is clearly being used in the Mid East and elsewhere by governments as a means of control over the masses. What we call "terrorism" is springing from radical splinter groups that interpret the Koran in such a way as to justify their anger and thirst for vengeance against their oppressors. We see the same phenomenon with Christianity in America.

Hedges is pointing out that while religious fundamentalism directs the anger, we should pay attention to what creates the anger in the first place - economic oppresssion. I don't believe he is pandering to fundamentalists - observing a behavior is not equivalent to condoning a behavior.

[RobertEarl]

19. You nailed it, Maedhros

I would only add that religion's history is one of authoritarianism, in that there is 'one which arches over all', and every believer is supposed to follow that authority.

Religion has thus been used to control the masses. Now we have TV. <grin>

[SoLeftIAmRight]

10. TWO WORDS

liberation theology

[Dont call me Shirley]

11. Religious fundamentalism is a tool of the mic

They so want their damned armageddon.

Sick fantasies for very sick people.

[valerief]

12. I agree. Religion is always a tool of the privileged. If it didn't brainwash people effectively,

the rich would stop using it.

[DeSwiss]

15. Tastes great, less filling!

- It's both, but I get your point.

I once used the claw on the claw hammer as a screwdriver. It worked.

K&R

Chris is a Presbyterian PK!

[Android3.14]

16. Chris swung and missed

watching all the others jump on Hedges' bandwagon was amusing, though. Always seems to be the mid-morning and early afternoon crew that follow any old yahoo furthest out on the limb.

[KingCharlemagne]

27. So I take it you disagree with Hedges' thesis statement (in his first paragraph):

It was a harbinger of an emerging dystopia where the wretched of the earth, deprived of resources to survive, devoid of hope, brutally controlled, belittled and mocked by the privileged who live in the splendor and indolence of the industrial West, lash out in nihilistic fury.

Do you disagree that the Paris attack was a "harbinger"? Do you disagree that there is an "emerging dystopia"? Or both ideas?

[Android3.14]

32. I disagree with who he is holding responsible

This is an example of blaming the victim, poorly timed, inappropriate and it attracted some of the most pathetic unthinking support.

It's as stupid as "They hate us for our freedom."

The "wretched of the Earth" have the means to survive, if they choose. They hope their version of Islam crushes everyone. The leaders of the people who are doing these acts are the ones exhibiting brutal control, and far more than the "privileged who live in splendor and indolence of the industrial west" are mocking them.

They deserve mocking. They are ignorant dipshits, as stoooopid as the Westboro crackpots, and if you don;t realize it, then you haven;t been paying attention..

So yes, the Hedges piece was poorly written, ill-considered, untimely, and over all a piece of shit.

[KingCharlemagne]

33. Please indicate the specific passages where you think Hedges is

"blaming the victim." As far as I can tell, Hedges is reframing the issue as one of 'haves' vs. 'have-nots', not blaming the victims of the Paris attack.

[Android3.14]

34. The title seems to be a good start

Unless you think the "We" referenced in the title, "We have engineered the rage of the dispossessed", is someone other than the targets of those psychopathic radical hurky-jerky ignoramuses.

But you are right. He is reframing the issue. But he did it in poor taste, with poor timing and it was dead wrong. Seriously, what did the French citizenry and the people at Charlie Hebdo do that "engineered" their murders. What did the United States citizens or the people in the Twin Towers do that justified 9/11?

Well, they are just upset that we have...what...TVs? Women walking around with the ability to fucking read? Nope. They're upset because they can't stand it that we think their religion is worthy of humor.

It sounds like some patriarchal asshole saying that a rape victim shouldn't have been wearing that provocative dress. She "engineered" her own rape.

Hedges can go jump in the lake.

[KingCharlemagne]

35. Small point (but one suggestive of something more): the title of the

piece is not "We have engineered the rage of the disposssessed." The title, in fact, is "A Message From the Dispossessed."

The sentence which you have cited is actually the first sentence of Hedges' second paragraph. Hedges continues, "The evil of predatory global capitalism and empire has spawned the evil of terrorism." I think taking those two sentences together the "we" is the capitalist-imperialist forces of the West and their labor aristocracies and bourgeois oligarchies.

Your fundamental misreading of Hedges, as evidenced by the example above, suggests that no amount of textual explication or discourse with you is likely to change your mind.

[Android3.14]

37. Small point taken

I read the piece from kpete's post on DU, who had used the line as the title.

Hedges makes a point of blaming Charlie Hebdo for their own homicides. He writes, "The cartoons of the Prophet in the Paris-based satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo are offensive and juvenile. None of them are funny. And they expose a grotesque double standard when it comes to Muslims."

Hedges' last paragraph includes this sentence, "As the resources of the world diminish, especially with the onslaught of climate change, the message we send to the unfortunate of the earth is stark and unequivocal: We have everything and if you try to take anything away from us we will kill you.", the we to which he refers is everyone in the west, not just "the capitalist-imperialist forces of the West and their labor aristocracies and bourgeois oligarchies" as you so naively put it. It is obvious that he is placing the blame of the attacks on the victims.

The last sentence of your previous post suggests projection on your part, rather than any reluctance on my part to change my mind.

[Tom Ripley]

18. Religion is the ineffective and illusory "tool of the dispossessed"

Pie in the sky is actually not very nourishing

[Union Scribe]

22. Yawn.

Just more simplistic anti-religion rhetoric. When is this shit going back into the Religion cess pit, er group, where these endless diatribes belong?

[Trillo]

23. Thank you for posting your thoughts in GD. NT

[KingCharlemagne]

25. I'm not sure that Hedges believes religion is a 'tool' of the dispossessed. In this piece to

which you link, he says that religion is one of the few institutions that give the dispossessed any sense of stability or meaning (a concept with which I readily agree).

Hedges echoes Karl Marx' words from 150-some years ago:

"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

"A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right" (1843-44)

[wildbilln864]

26. k & fucking r! n/t

[NanceGreggs]

28. Or ...

... the Deluded have engineered the Rage of the Equally Easily-Deluded.