Chris HedgesReviews

With the recent passing of Henry Kissinger and the current ongoing genocides in the Middle East I was drawn to read this Chris Hedges work from 2002. Sadly it is distressingly still relevant in every way today. His graphic telling of brutalities and overpowering repulsions of carnage suggest a pornographic attraction, which is one of the themes in this book about the personal impacts of being in war. Deep psychological effects are coupled with observations on propaganda campaigns selling wars to constituencies. He is well seasoned and carefully calculated in weighing his facts. His narrative is up close and personal. Yet the book is largely philosophical. Invoking literary references as well as other military sources, Hedges constructs a point of view that endures. In part this supports the man in the street perspective of how civilizations crumble into dust. While not offered as such it contributes at least little towards understanding how Israel and Hamas are hell bent on obliterating their homeland. This seems to be no middle ground and probably never has been, especially once at war.

A timely, thoughtful, and important work. The author doesn't lack evidence to support his thesis: one thing radical evangelical Protestants like to do (to their occasional detriment--witness Todd Akin and his fellow rape-denying Congressional candidates) is run their ignorant mouths. Oddly, this is a book that may suffer from a surfeit of supporting evidence, and I wonder if this might have made a better long-form magazine article.

On the other hand, this is Chris Hedges, one of the great American journalists, and I'm reluctant to second-guess him. If you're interested in--or frightened by--counter-Enlightenment projects in the American body politic, then this book is well worth your time.

Definitely not what I was expecting. I was expecting something where it's more about the social and cultural things that are taboo in america, but this was more about political things.

examination of war

I will start by saying that I am sympathetic to the overall idea behind this book: a strict, "militant" atheism has the potential to -and in some people probably already has- become a fundamentalism. Fundamentalism, in any shape or form, is a "Bad Thing" that must be guarded against. I also am already a subscriber to the idea that humans are not morally perfectible, that this is usually a big component, implicit or explicit, of said fundamentalism. I think it evident, as well, that human society as a whole, if such a thing exists, is probably not steadily improving in some absolute moral sense; minimally, that any such gains can be lost in the blink of an eye.

So far, so good. Now, lets walk through how Hedges goes wrong.

Chapter One, a couple of Major Issues:

On page 20 Hedges quotes nearly a paragraph from Sam Harris. He cuts the quote to being with what reads like Harris proposing that "we" be prepared to kill other people if "we" deems their beliefs to be too dangerous.

But this not at all what the section in Harris is actually saying; if you go back to the source and read it, the paragraph (and preceding paragraphs) are talking about how beliefs shape our actions. Harris then he goes on to say, as quoted by Hedges, that, "Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them." But this is in a section discussion beliefs, systems of beliefs, and so forth! Including how much belief can motivate us, up to and including killing people!

Strike two. Page 36. Quotes Harris as, again, proposing that we nuke an Islamic regime that acquires long range nuclear weapons. Which is not at all what Harris is saying! He *clearly* states that this would be ridiculous outcome, and moreover a crime against humanity, but that some future US government might feel they have no alternative. He then goes on to say how this could result in a counter strike against the US, and this would lead to -obviously- more mass death, and all because of irrationality.

But Hedges doesn't present *any* of that. He again cuts the quote to make it sound like Harris is actively proposing we go out and nuke e.g. Iran as soon as we think they have a long range nuclear capability. In fact, the scenario describe is morally complicated; there is no "good solution." Again, all of which Hedges either missed completely or disingenuously ignored to better make his point.

Note: In the passage in The End of Faith Harris places blame squarely at the feet of "religion" for what would be a US first strike against a fundamentalist state. Which seems, well, not at all fair. It is *this* reasoning that Hedges seems to really, really get angry over. And I would say understandably so. This is also couched in page after page of Harris "demonstrating" how Islam is a religion of violence. Which strikes many as more than a bit bigoted. Here of there Harris walks this back a bit, saying that, more or less, e.g. Christianity was a religion of violence at one point. But that gets lost in his repetition of, "Islam, Islam, Islam" everywhere else.


In chapter two, Hedges discusses science and religion and how he sees scientists and atheists misusing "science" (e.g. turning it into what Hedges calls the "cult of science.") I, again, am sympathetic to some overarching ideas here: e.g. it seems ridiculous to me that there are some fairly smart people talking about "the singularity" in 10 to 50 years. This is fantasy dressed up as religion dressed up as science.

Hedges then goes on to commit a whole series of mistakes that reveal how little he understands both what he is criticizing directly, as well as the underlying science. He waves his arms at "Darwinism" being applied outside biology, and says this is a mistake; he seams to mean that theories that are part of modern, neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory are applied outside biology, and this is (universally?) bad. And then he talks about Nazis.

He waves his arms at Quantum Mechanics, talking about how processes at the particle level are irreducibly random, leaps from there to the fact that the world is unpredictable, and says viola. Of course, the two have nothing to do with each other. Quantum processes are inherently random, and at the sub-microscopic scale this randomness becomes evident in certain situations; "life" is random because we don't have enough information. Theoretically, at least, you could drive cars around from now until the heat death of the universe and not have an accident, given sufficient information; car accidents are not inherently random. International politics, driving cars, religious debates, and day to day life are not quantum processes, not inherently random either; just really, really complicated/information laden. Two different kinds of randomness, and never the twain shall meet.

I could go on in this vein, but will stop. I really have a pet peeve with people dragging out QM to explain stuff, as they nearly, nearly, nearly never have the foggiest idea of what they are talking about.

I'll just do one more chapter. In chapter three, I see much that I agree with. Yes, there is a brittleness to the "New Atheist" program, though I think Hedges overplays this somewhat. I began a couple of years ago to become dissatisfied with what I was hearing from e.g. "The Four Horsemen" because it was invariably to simplistic, or just illogical. To claim that "religion" is responsible for all wrongs committed in the name of one or another particular religion, while "atheism" is not responsible for anything is a severe double standard. To say the least. To dismiss, essentially, all other causes for discord, war, murder, etc. other than religion is, well, stupid.

However, Hedges overplays this a bit when he, in turn, simplifies and flattens the feelings of "new atheists." He sees them merely as yet another group of fundamentalists; he doesn't seem to even consider that they are reacting to the increasingly politicized fundamentalist religious movements in the US, or the hubris and privilege that "the religious" often express when confronted with the fact that some people are in fact not religious. He seems to lean toward blaming atheists for the misunderstanding and stress that the existence of two distinct, probably incommensurable, world views causes. E.g. that for a person who does not believe in a "higher power", anthropomorphic or not, it is actually often fairly *disturbing* to deal with full-grown adults *who have an invisible friend.* Add to this that said invisible-friend-having people also run, essentially, the whole world... it is difficult to simply accept that as an alternative world view. And I imagine it must be very disturbing for those who do believe in a God/god/gods/power to have people around who hold the very concept -not just your particular belief, but the concept itself- as invalid.


And that none of that has got anything to do with Empire or Globalization of the vapidity of middle class life. Which clearly are Hedges true concerns (and, to an extent, again, I have to agree with his views.)


Anyway, since this review is quickly becoming as long as the book, I will stop. I will say that I've rarely read something that I found myself so much in agreement with while simultaneously so strongly in disagreement with. Part of it is that Hedges is somewhat sloppy in his reasoning, part of it is that I just don't agree with him everywhere, part of it is that I think he is a bit hypocritical. But he does well point out the overreach of the "New Atheists." He is not as successful at explaining the idea behind the lack of absolute progress (I'd say go read John N. Gray if you are interested in this.) And I think he fails to address that his entire book is a call to a higher morality, a call for moral progress in effect, or that he is choosing to define religion and cherry-pick authors and beliefs (in Hedges case, in to case a good light) in just the same way that he accuses Hitchens and Harris of doing (in their cases, to cast in a very nearly uniformly bad light.)

I realize after reading this why my opinion of Chris Hedges falls each time I read a book by him. In part, it is because his analysis of each issue tends to be tendentious and simpleminded; in part, it is because he, the pot calling the kettle black, sees those that disagree with him as somewhere between moral monsters and merely amorally corrupt. And in part, it is because, as I was reminded by reading my own review of [b:I Don't Believe in Atheists|1888742|I Don't Believe in Atheists|Chris Hedges|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1348768580l/1888742._SX50_.jpg|1890025], his tendentiousness sometimes crosses over into what can only truthfully be called lying.

All those things are on display here. Corporations are the root of evil. Repeat ad nauseam, and you have the first 150 pages for this book. From environmental degradation to the news people watch to... well, everything, corporations are responsible for it. E.g. people don't use plastic bags because they are a cheap convenience and people fundamentally lack grand-scale foresight, but because corporations have foisted this on us, forced it on us, tricked us, created false consciousness.

Actually, repeat *that* for the first 150 pages, and you've re-written a good chunk of this book. People don't do "bad" things because those things are "easy" or "taste good" or "lazy" or "cheap" or whatever, they do them because they've been tricked into believing those things are easy, tasty, lazy, cheap, etc. and if they could just break free then and fight the evil overlords, all would be well.

I disagree. Like the Communism that Hedges periodically castigates, the charges (plural) of false-consciousness are such an easy way of relieving yourself of any heavy lifting. Do people disagree with you? Corporate stooges. Is the "common man" not coming around? He's been blinded, robbed of his sense. I *know* that I should never use another plastic bag and yet I shamefully often do. I *know* that should pay more attention to where my clothes are made and what materials they are made from, but I have a thousand "more important" things to do. I realize that there is some real debate about whether organic and local foods are more environmentally friendly, but I could err on the side of caution and at least provisionally switch to only (or even just mostly) eating local, organic produce and dairy.

And so forth. Why don't I make those better choices? I suppose you can make sense of Hedges POV by bumping the responsibility up the chain and claiming that I don't do those things because the cheap, harmful alternatives are badly subsidized, costs are externalized, etc. and so that responsibility really does lie with "The Corporations," and I really am making the logical, best choice given the options, costs, ease of access, etc. But it is unclear to me why I get a (kind of, anyway, maybe) pass, but some other people (because that's what corporations are) making cars or Cheetos or rayon or whatever do not.

It's oddly disconnected from his POV on the wars in Iraq, Afganistan, and of war in general, and his take on American involvement in support of Israel. On that (those) subjects Hedges is morally outraged at the government, yes, the major political parties, yes, but also in some real way of the common voter. There it is our lack of caring, our turning a blind eye, our preference for sports and the Kardashians and sex pseudo-scandals and the lastest Hollywood explosion-fest that is responsible for the suffering and death that continue unabated. Sure, there is a nod to the corporate media burying the truth, but even Hedges can't really pin it on that; he ultimately more-or-less blames all of us.

For me, these are blazingly contradictory positions. What amazes me is that Hedges, who is religiously trained and clearly a believer in some major shape or fashion, who repeatedly points to the "corrupted" or imperfect (and unperfectible) nature of man, doesn't see suffering and war and class structure and racism and environmental degradation as the products of imperfect (to say the least) human systems made up of imperfect humans. He sees them as moral failings. Okay, so that is not surprising in light of his religious leanings. It seems surprising *to me*, as a nonreligious person, who takes from religion and some philosophy the "crooked timber" lesson/idea about humanity.

Hedges deeply wants humanity to be perfectible but understands that it is not, and in fact understands how deep the hell-hole is if you fall for the myth that humanity is perfectible. As a compassionate person who has seen some real shit in person, I think his desire for this is deeper than someone like me can really understand. But there's that gulf, you can't get there from here. I suspect that is a real problem for him, personally, and that the gaps and contradictions in these articles and essays are part of that gulf. I suspect that is why he so easily and frequently casts others as craven sell-outs and moral monsters (and, at least in previous books, as mentioned up top, even resorts to outright lying.)

A more interesting book, a more searching book, a better book, would be a collection of essays of him exploring that gulf. What would happen if we as a society, a nation, an economy, a people, a culture, as individuals, took that gulf seriously and paid more heed to our position on one side of it?

Hedges's books and articles tend strongly toward polemics and the final chapter here on Occupy Wall Street and Zuccotti (Liberty) Park certainly is. But the first four chapters on Pine Ridge, Camden, West Virginia, and Immokalee are solid pieces of reportage - made even better by Joe Sacco’s excellent graphic strips. Read it and weep.

This book brings up a lot of good criticisms against capitalist societies but it is certainly not without flaws. Hedges' biases are obvious and he seems to have a grudge against those he calls the "elites", that is, the wealthy and powerful capitalists that his book rails against. I get it, money takes over for morals, corporations are destroying America (and the rest of the world by extension) due to their unbridled thirst for profit, and our society is flooded with slick images selling ideology that may hurt us rather than help us. He paints a very dark image of present day America with his messages of doom.

But what about the people themselves? There is no discussion of individual agency, no sympathy or understanding towards the people or the elites that govern them; instead Hedges chooses to rant about how much he hates capitalism and the entertainment industry. He obviously thinks the general public is too stupid so it's up to him to tell them that they're being duped. And then confusingly, in the last two or three pages, Hedges says that it is human love that will save us.

While I don't think his complaints are wrong, this book is hardly a critical look at the problem. It reads more like a rant against a few specific things that Hedges dislikes (non-print media, porn, elitism, positive psychology), which are all examples/symptoms of a much bigger issue that he never quite addresses directly. I am also surprised and curious as to why he hasn't mentioned the works of theorists such as Guy Debord and Jean Baurdillard, who have written what can be considered seminal works on the the same topics. Hedges was definitely onto something in this book but he executed it poorly.

Every generation has someone who truly understands the horror of war, and tries to warn us all. And always to no avail. How could it be otherwise when just 30 years after the Civil War, the soon to be president, Teddy Roosevelt, said “What this country needs is a good war.” And went looking for one. He found several. Despite Stephen Crane’s universally lauded The Red Badge of Courage, it only took 30 years for the horror of the Civil War to be forgotten, and war itself to become an attraction to would-be warriors once again.

There is a brain defect that makes people forget what their grandparents tell them about war. They think it is honorable, glorious, heroic, and even fashionable. They say it builds men. In the Civil War, families dressed in their Sunday best and flocked to picnics overlooking the battlefield to enjoy the show, and compliment their family’s soldiers afterward. At least that was the intention, until the hell of noise, from guns, cannons, horses, and men in agony took center stage. The bloodletting interrupted the picnics. The spectators fled, and the country settled in for several years of horror. Without picnics.

In 1914, young Americans flocked across the border to Canada, which was already involved in World War I because it was a member of the British Commonwealth, and the US was “neutral”. They enlisted with grand enthusiasm. The stories of the trench wars, shooting deserters and would-be deserters, and all the permanently maimed or gassed soldiers returning home to nothing, did not have much effect, as a new and improved war began less than 20 years later, killing 75 to 90 million more.

This era’s anti-war scribe is Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, who has written The Greatest Evil Is War. It is eloquent and forceful, brimming with immediacy. This is far from the first time he has written about it. He had been a war correspondent for two decades, and has seen it all up close and personal, narrowly escaping death, having his friends and co-workers killed beside him, and trekking through the stench and endless blood of pointless conflicts all over the world. “I was beaten by Iraqi and Saudi police. I was taken prisoner by the Contras in Nicaragua, who radioed back to their base in Honduras to see if they should kill me, and again in Basra after the first Gulf War in Iraq, never knowing if I would be executed, under constant guard and often without food, drinking out of mud puddles.” And all for the New York Times.

This also makes his book a very visceral, stomach-churning read. Hedges makes unarguable point after unarguable point in very personal terms. For Hedges, this is as romantic as war gets: “Legs blown off. Heads imploded into a bloody, pulpy mass. Gaping holes in stomachs. Pools of blood. Cries of the dying, sometimes for their mothers. And the smell. The smell of death. The supreme sacrifice made for flies and maggots.”

War changes everyone who participates in it. Civilians die and are injured far more than soldiers, and more of their families are victims. But soldiers see more action and suffer accordingly. And none of them ever forgets. Hedges says 22 US veterans commit suicide every day. They famously suffer from PTSD, the current name for an incurable mental state described in every major war going back to ancient Rome.

The book has a chapter on veterans back home. The hypocrisy of “Thank you for your service” shows up whenever a veteran turns out to be anti-war as a result of that service. The thanks turn to insults and abuse. The natural hatred of Americans comes to the fore when war is criticized. The country is euphoric over war and the military, despite the bad results continually posted by both.

It gets so twisted that a soldier who was depressed over his coming deployment to Iraq asked for anti-depressants (as a majority of soldiers now take) and was required by the doctor to see the chaplain first. The chaplain told the soldier: ”I think you will be happier when you get over to Iraq and start killing Iraqis.” This is the morality of war. You will be doing God’s work killing the people we’re liberating. This particular soldier ended up a quadriplegic and died at the age of 43, following two decades of agony and suffering. Hedges devotes a chapter to him and even helped him write a last letter - to President Bush and Vice President Cheney, who sealed his doom over precisely nothing.

The military is right in there pushing and shoving. Hedges cites the Office of the Surgeon General’s Textbook of Military Medicine, which even deals with fatal exposure to nuclear radiation. It specifies that even though they are terminally ill, such soldiers should receive any and all medication, including narcotics “to prolong their utility … The soldier must be allowed to make the full contribution to the war effort.”

The book divides into short chapters, focusing on some horrific aspect or another. There’s a chapter on corpses, and one featuring a female US marine whose job it was to pack and ship bits of body parts and personal effects back to the family. Dressed in a hazmat suit, she would proceed to landmine explosion sites to collect all the debris that could be determined to be human. Where she could not get to, others would send them to her for transshipment. She had to get out when she received a large bag of heads, eyes wide open, staring up at her. There’s a chapter on killing, the wholesale slaughter of the Vietnamese Americans there to defend them, and one on the differences between worthy and unworthy victims. He interviews a Holocaust survivor about her story of surviving imminent death several times, losing all of her family along the way. And there is a chapter on permanent war, as promoted by the military and its industrial contractors. These are neverending wars no one ever wins. They keep getting added to world maps as various regimes attack their own or the nearby. They are lifetime business opportunities for American profiteers.

He accurately describes some in government as Dr. Strangeloves, always eager to send others to their deaths or at very least, ruined lives. And despite continuing convictions for corruption and fraud, the same military contractors come back for more and bigger contracts, supplying not just arms but services, replacing government soldiers with a civilian contractors. It is just a business – a nearly trillion dollar annual feast. Hedges points out how the bloated military budget ($850 billion), which achieves little or nothing for society, crowds out social services and infrastructure projects because the country is constantly on a war footing. No matter the cause, these contractors are the only real gainers in war. He says their stocks rise at the mere mention of it.

He also has it in for the West, reneging on its deal with Mikhail Gorbachev not to expand NATO eastward from Germany if Russia did not interfere with the reunification of that country. NATO is now attempting to encircle western Russia by admitting Ukraine as well as all the Baltic states it agreed to leave alone. This is precisely why Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine. He clearly could not allow this to go on. He said so specifically. I pointed this issue out in a piece a month before the invasion, and it resulted in the most criticism I have ever received, including threats to me personally. Despite my being against the invasion, as Hedges is. So I have a small inkling of how Hedges feels about being anti-war in the USA.

But Hedges has seen it for himself: “There is no such thing as getting used to combat. Everyone in combat eventually reaches a breaking point, from the most sensitive and the most cowardly to the hardest combat veteran. Combat is a form of psychological and physical torture. Once you break down, as I did in the last war I covered in Kosovo, all appeals to duty, honor, patriotism and manliness are useless. After 60 days of combat 98% of surviving soldiers are psychiatric casualties.” Hedges himself was fired from the New York Times for opposing the soon-to-be war in Iraq. That’s all it took in the bloodlust country that claims freedom and liberty above all else.

In answer to Teddy Roosevelt, Hedges cites Yugoslav writer Danilo Kis, saying “The nationalist is by definition an ignoramus. Nationalism is the line of least resistance, the easy way.” It is based on a self-centered, amoral lack of knowledge or insight. The book’s message is to never romanticize war. It jeopardizes people for the wrong reason or no reason, and the outcome is always negative. If you think war is a worthy opportunity to look forward to, this is your book.

David Wineberg

Eerily prophetic. Chris Hedges saw the writing on the wall 10 years ago.

Enlightening AND damning. Chris Hedges can PREACH.

A classic, read all of his books.

I originally bought this book for a course on American politics in a media age that I took during the spring semester of the 2001/2002 school year, but I never read it then. The book was written on the eve of the war on terror and is probably best described by one of the quotes on the back: "while one may disagree with [the author] along the way, his basic message is irrefutable: that we should always feel sickened by war, even though we periodically have to wage it." The book points out how war only works as long as both sides see their selves as good and the other side is evil. Once people begin to acknowledge that their side commits atrocities and the other side may have some good reason for their hatred, people will start to realize the horror of what they are doing. As the author says at one point, there is no right side and wrong side, just an immoral side and a less immoral side. Overall, a very good and thoughtful read.

This was a sometimes interesting screed against all that has gone wrong culturally in the US, from the TV obliteration of literary culture, to the pornography industry, to the educational systems, to the gimmickry of happiness salesmanship, to the incestuous collapse of the halls of governance in the embrace of Wall St, corporate America, and the mass media.

Sounds like it would be right down my alley, but the author lives in a left-wing bubble that dwarfs in density the bubble I operated in 20 years ago. His world's biggest problem seems to be "corporations". He mentions at points that sometimes even Democrats make bad moves (i.e. act like Republicans). If I were to tell this guy that the problems he mapped out with American culture almost exactly aligned with the problem set identified by Sarah Palin - except that her explanations and proposed mitigations are far more subtle and intelligent, I'm sure his head would explode. Just sayin…

I maybe should have given this session a D grade, since I don't know if I could recommend the book, but it was haunting in parts.

*Was a library borrow at the time: late summer, 2013*

Chris Hedges has written a sober and grim analysis of American decline characterized by welfare for the wealthy and unending sacrifice for the majority of Americans, who are divided into the poor and a middle class that is confronted with upheaval caused by technological dislocation in the transportation, manufacturing, and service industries. This stratification provides a rich breeding ground for discontent and the rise of fascism among those who feel most threatened by transformations that they little understand and are unable to change.
Anyone optimistic about MAGA should read this book, but won’t.

really well done and interesting. what a class this must have been to be a part of. so many terrible stories of false convictions (not that prisoners who are guilty largely deserve to be treated the way these men are treated) and lives lost. this is moving, both for the stories we learn of these men, and the way they relate to literature. (there's a good reading list built in, as well.)

the audio reader is very good.

"White women suffered, and continue to suffer, discrimination in patriarchal America. But they have always had the power to weaponize white hatred toward black men."

"'We know what they don't want you to know. We know the control of black bodies been seamless from slavery to the black codes to convict leasing to the Jim Crow laws to the so-called War on Drugs. We know promotions, quotas, money from the Feds. The money they take off of us is what makes prisons a business. A body ain't worth nothing on the street, but once inside, once you locked in a cage, you worth 50 thousand a year to all them prison contractors, food service companies, phone companies, medical companies, and prison construction companies. And they got to keep them cages full if they gonna make their money. And once you get out, once you done your time, they make sure you got no job, no food stamps, no public housing, so you end up right back in where you can make them some more money. People say the system don't work. That's cause they don't get it. The system works the way it designed to work. Inside, you meant to be a slave.'"

"'You go to schools like the one I went to and you enter a pipeline straight to jail. When I walked into the mess hall in prison, it looked like my old school lunchroom, including the fights. When I walked into the yard in prison, it looked like my old playground, including the fights. When I was in the projects, it looked like prison. When guys get to prison, the scenery is familiar. If you grow up poor, then prison is not a culture shock. You have been conditioned your whole life for prison.'"

"There are issues of personal morality, and they are important. But they mean nothing without a commitment to social morality."½

This is an interesting book about Pine Ridge, Indian Country; Camden, NJ; a mining town; farm laboring wage slaves; and Occupy Wall Street. The best parts are the personal stories, Studs Terkel-style, which are illustrated into comic book panels. They show the incredible dignity and humor that people can have despite being mired in poverty, sexual abuse, and addiction in the USA. It's all interesting information that you need to know, but it was so bleak and depressing that I had to skim some parts. At the end when we get to the Occupy movement in Zucotti park, it gets a bit more cheerful. And I had to smile at the earnest descriptions of how decisions are reached in the general assembly (the stack, hand signals, etc), as if all those things were brand new instead of well over a decade old. I also rolled my eyes at a few other things. (The authors say agents provacateurs started the Black Bloc. Please! And also that the best tactic, still, is to have peaceful demonstrations that goad the police into rioting because the world will be dismayed and horrified to learn about it.) Overall, though, I liked this book.

Fiction is my favorite genre - it's a great escape to get lost in a book. That being said, I do also like to read non-fiction titles that challenge my beliefs, expose me to lives outside of my own perspective and have an impact on society. It is books about people that draw me in the most. Chris Hedges' new book, Our Class: Trauma and Transformation in an American Prison is my latest listen - and its powerful.

Hedges is a Presbyterian minister, a former war correspondent and a Pulitzer prize winning author. In 2013 he started teaching in the college degree program offered by Rutgers University at the East Jersey State Prison. In that first class at the prison, the students started reading Black American playwrights, poets and leaders, with the goal being to write and stage their own play.

The students share their own histories, hopes, dreams and disappointments and these experiences form the basis of the play. Their recounting of life in the prison system are hard to listen to. The treatment inside the prison walls is degrading, cruel, racist, appalling and dehumanizing. The writing of the play, the learning, the discussion, the interior soul searching and being part of a dynamic group with the same goal, and the continued success of those who took part is a testament to the program and the ideology behind it. And cathartic for the participants.

I enjoyed hearing each man's story - they are raw and powerful. Hedges weaves other articles, history and other leader's lives into the book. "It exposes the terrible crucible and injustice of America’s penal system and the struggle by those trapped within its embrace to live lives of dignity, meaning, and purpose."

I've said it before and I'll say it again - there are times when listening draws me deeper into a book, rather than reading a physical copy. Our Class is one of those cases. Prentice Onayemi was the reader and his performance was excellent. Onayemi has a rich, full, resonant tone to his voice that is so pleasant to listen to. His speaking is modulated and his pacing is perfect. There are many emotional elements to this audiobook and Onayemi captures them without losing that resonance or becoming strident. Instead, that low tone seems to underline and emphasize the work with quiet power. He was the perfect choice for the narrator.

Chris Hedges points out why both religious fundamentalists, and the crop of recent atheist authors, are wrong in their belief system. Unless you're making a study of these subjects, however, you may find it hard to stay focused, as I did, at least in the audiobook format. It seemed as if Hedges quoted every philosopher and author, ancient and current, in making his point(s), but other than showing why the absolute fundamentalists and atheist's are both wrong, I'm not sure I understood what Hedges was telling me was "right". I think he was saying that man is complex, with social norms and instincts, and that religion in society can help us make better decisions, but I zoned out too often to be sure. To fully grasp his message, I probably needed the hardcover edition.

I find myself really taken with the idea that society has gone to dogs, and so I love reading all this stuff about how we really are living in the Kali-yuga. Effective illiteracy is a very real phenomenon, most literate people really don't read anymore. And porn of course is really magnifying the worst aspects of their sexuality for most men. I am yet to read the last chapter on America, I might not read it though, it seems to be too narrow in scope to be applicable to me.

A book that belongs on a list of necessary books to read in these times.

Sort of interesting memoir by a journalist (leftist, but one who has had contact with reality as a war zone reporter, so actually worth listening to even if he's largely wrong). Oversold itself by claiming to be "unspeakable" vs. fairly mainstream (if leftist-colored) ideas, not very long or in depth on any points, and in a weird quasi-interview format which didn't really add anything to the story.

Chris Hedges has done the impossible. He has breathed on the embers of my interest in Federal politics. I would have never believed a Harvard seminarian could speak to me so directly. This book is so piercing; I have to believe ANY world weary political road kill will feel they are not alone. He argues the generation spanning "political/social/economic A.D.D."(my quotes) is not only a by-product of the Military/Industrial Complex, but an actual GOAL.
In my mind this book is a primer for a new truly "united" States. It is not so much a call to arms but a call for recognition of the responsibility that the dwindling Literati have to their fellows.

If you know:
The two party system has been bought and paid for by big corporations.
That reading is considered static and boring by the majority of Americans and consequently they have little or no exposure to the tools of analytical thought necessary to expose "Treasonous Greed"(my quotes).
That we have reached rock bottom in the disparity between the Illusions of the American Way and our actions:
Buy this book. Give copies to the readers in your life. Speak out. Organize.

It's a strange format for an interview, it tries to keep natural speech patterns in even though it's edited. Beyond the awkward format it's an interesting interview with (despite the burning zeal) coherent, even if not very persuasive, arguments. Critiquing the elites is not very hard, so no kudos for that.

I feel duly patronised.

The author thinks that liberals are being too selfish and instead of saving humanity they concentrate on personal success. The unspoken assumption of liberals being saviours of humanity is humorous but the contempt for "the working class" who are presumably some subspecies of man is downright sad.

But the section about the Internet cheered me up - what a load of misinformed rubbish.