Forum Post: Occupy Wall Street - Chris Hedges shuts down CBC billionaire Kevin O'Leary
Posted 11 years ago on Dec. 6, 2012, 1:37 p.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic
(5827)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Chris Hedges schools shit-talking billionaire on CBC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAhHPIuTQ5k
"Financial corporations don't manufacture. Goldman Sachs doesn't produce anything. These financial institutions just gamble. We're dismantling our manufacturing base over the boarder into Mexico and slowly into the full embrace of China." - Hedges
Kevin O'Leary can't hold a candle to Chris Hedges when it comes to intellectual thought. LOL. What a moron.
The most interesting thing about this piece is the date of it. October 10, 2011, very early on in the Occupy movement. Think people, about how far we have come in intellectualizing and explicating these ideas. Hedges is at the front line here in the earliest stages of creating a framework for the ideas behind this movement. We have come a long way.
I completely agree. Fantastic video clip. Anyone who hasn't seen it should really check it out.
You are correct sir!
Chris Hedges has been bringing real issues to the table. He's direct, honest, and he knows his facts. A lot of respect for the guy. It's not easy to discuss unpopular ideas with people who often react in a disrespectful manner.
Awesome - Simply - AWESOME. Tweeted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAhHPIuTQ5k
Please - people - share/circulate.
Wow!!! Hedges did a fantastic job. That was such an articulate response and summary of what this movement is about. Thanks so much for posting this. (Hedges is like Chomsky only more concise and he has more piss and vinegar. Don't get me wrong. Chomsky is superb as well and putting this all in perspective. In the film Manufacturing Consent, Chomsky really gets to the heart of things).
Anyway, I'm going to share that link with many people. Hedges nails it.
You know where the phrase "full of piss and vinegar comes from?
Nope
Nevermind. I was confused by the movie Harsh Times. I saw it a while back.
And I like your comparison to Chomsky. I'd say Hedges has a bit more moxie for sure. Much respect for Chomsky though. It's not easy to talk unpopular truths with people who aren't ready to hear them. They often face ridicule and disrespect, as we saw in the Hedges interview.
So true. If you think about how intelligent those two are, they (and other's like them) could have easily cashed out and taken the comfortable road. But they didn't. Chomsky was asked about this and his response was basically "Well, I think its about being able to look yourself in the mirror every morning." Admirable men who have sacrificed much. Imagine what they and their families go through. But then imagine the great benefit to others and humanity in general. A voice of sanity in this nation. We're lucky they're speaking up so powerfully. Would love to hear more of them on mainstream media.
great quote!
He wrote a book on Occupy. I need to read it.
Hey Trevor, here's something from The daily KOS I think we can agree on, use it if you want.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/28/1165294/-Cut-the-Military-Budget-First
As O'Leary says:
"Don't take this the wrong way but you sound like a left-wing nutbar. If you want to shut down every corporation and every bank, where are you going to get a job, where are you going to work, where's the economy going to go?"
Hedges: Corporations don't produce anything.
O'Leary: Oh really? (incredulous)
Hedges: I'm talking about corporations on Wall St
(O'Leary stops on his misinterpreted point about a car manufacturer after Hedges gets his point in about Wall St, but he did say: "Do you drive a car?" but he gives up this point)
Then Hedges continues with some great points about the financial sector and speculators, and then Lang says that it seems like Hedges and O'Leary could get into a real heated discussion. Hedges then finally says some great stuff about what had just happened, about how the antics are like Fox News and that he doesn't go on Fox News, and that he thought different of the CBC with having guests on like John Raulston Saul, and that he'll never go back on this show. Hedges says a lot of great stuff here, but I just feel that something is left out in how to deal with these bullies, because this stuff happens all the time to progressives, and the way they seem to handle it seems to fit into two or three familiar camps, with Hedges approach being one of those ways in a lot of respects. The way O'Leary started off talking was kind of foretelling how he was about to behave, unleashing his inner dog from the chain. O'Leary gave Hedges a few early red herrings, like calling the event "pretty nothing-burger so far. Just a few guys, guitars, nobody knows what they want. They can't even name the names of the firms they're protesting against. Very weak, low budget." This is said as the first point from O'Leary's mouth and its kind of like, Hedges should have asked : "so is this interview basically going to be attack politics?" and something more could have been determined right there.
Also nobody on the show mentioned anything outside of Wall St firms and their regulation. What I think undoubtedly also needs mentioning is the overall macroeconomic fiscal and monetary policies being directed from out of Wall St. Austerity measures and deficit cuts and matters of this caliber are wrapped up in those concerns and demands of protesters at Occupy Wall St. To not address how these measures need redirection is to leave a lot aside from the Occupy movement. Hedges doesn't really talk about macroeconomics and guys like Keynes I've noticed, so he kind of sticks to Goldmann Sachs specifically.
I have to say that I think Hedges underperformed in this interview. Kevin O'Leary calls the guy a left-wing nutbar and Chris Hedges just sort of brushes this off. O'Leary was clearly bullying the guy but Chris still gets starstruck more from being on TV than kind of dropping his talking point for a minute to resolve what just happened. IT is character assassination to attack someone on National TV in a purely insult oriented manner such as calling a guy a name unrelated to any point. I would be like, "what are you actually doing right now?" "You are calling me names are you?" You know, address it.
This interview is over a year old, and so I've had time to think about how professionals interact with professional bullies. The progressive sometimes ignores the insult and tries to keep on point, but this is reminiscent of the kind of bullying that can and does happen in some workplaces all the time, and its not cool to just not address it when it comes up in the moment in which it happens. At the end of the interview Hedges generally addressed the tone of the interview and why he wouldn't go back on again, but he didn't address the specific insults when they were actually made and I think this is a big fault, especially for big former boxer Hedges, just saying.
I think the left and progressives should learn how to grow a spine, and not flip out like their opponent and sink to the same low, but be confident that they can address the stupid games that are being played when they occur. Bill O'Reilly is way worse than O'Leary with the way he puts his hands in people's faces when he's angry at them but its all stuff like that, and once the hand starts coming into it and getting stuck in my face, I at least would make note of the unprofessional nonsense being perpetuated on national television.
Thanks
Watch it again - he does go after him for the insult - but he does it while staying in control - making the other guy look even worse. ( IMO )
Naw, he doesn't, Hedges is clearly innervated, after the guy calls him a nutbar, while O'Leary is galavanting about with more of a 'people take me more seriously than you' tone strewn with insults.
You have to laugh at that stuff and not get affected by it, but pretending its not happening or that you can work your way around it with your other smart points won't do it.
I get the sense actually from Hedges is that he's seen tough stuff and been kind of tough with his boxing past but when it comes to some of these other matters of people interaction he kind of flails about and doesn't know quite how to handle it. He's a smart guy, and has the confidence to face some big issues but he just seems a little unsure of how to handle himself when being berated with insults, its a different big issue to deal with in the world and requires more than the generalized tone to be addressed, it requires specifically addressing these things as they occur and not later.
It requires more than commenting on the bullying stuff, it requires responding to each incident that occurs at the moment in which it occurs. This is how you address a bully.
ie:
"did you just call me a nutbar? Have I called you any names, like any other breakfast on the go snacks like a fruitbar or bag of nuts? No? So what the hell are you doing then?"
"what are you doing, you sticking your hand in my face? You want to poke my nose on national television? Go ahead, try it, its your professional name at stake there bud."
Freakin awesome interview!!
I find it interesting how FOX news is used on air and in the apology.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/olearys-nutbar-remark-breach-of-policy-cbc-ombudsman-says/article1355380/
As a journalist I guess Chris doesn't think he should be involved in the solution, killing the GOP, too bad I think he would be useful to the cause.
Obviously you've never read his book The Christian Right And The Rise Of American Fascism.
Hedges interview on the Christian right, or as you call them the GOP - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Thn9Hnu__pU
Your party politics are annoying. Go read his other book The Death of the Liberal Class. You could use the insight.
I'm waiting for his book about how Nader helped Bush beat Gore.
Why would I want to read him whine about the liberal class when all he has done is help to kill it.
You are the death of the liberal class.
Seriously read that book.
blaming Nader is a shadow that covers the real reasons why people like Bush win. Nader voters are not the same as democrats. The republicans are why Bush won. Corruption is why Bush won. Propaganda is why Bush won. Corporate control is why Bush won. Nader had nothing to do with it. Open your eyes.
shitheads with their heads stuck in the sand is why Bush won walking around with their chests puffed out thinking they know better than everybody else, these are not people that believe in democracy, I "blame" no one I simply state the truth the truth is if the people who voted for Nader had voted for Gore there would be NO Iraq War or CU,. so don't tell me you hate these things then defend the actions that got us here. Actions Matter
What's ironic is you demonizing the creator of OSHA and the EPA and then trying to call me right wing.
here's a post just for you - http://occupywallst.org/forum/16-banks-under-investigation-for-libor-fraud/
Uh-oh better downvote me because I don't support politricks that vote to give billions to Goldman Sachs.
It is said that if a butterfly flaps its wings in New York a hurricane hits India, I don't know if people who say that mean to "blame" the butterfly.
Billions will die because Nader put his name on the ballot in New Hampshire, it is just what happened that's all.
You are insanely ignorant to the real problems in government. If you think people are dying because Ralph Nader, you are not only ignorant, you are an asshole for demonizing a man who has done so much to create a better workplace for the middle class.
I'm simply stating the facts, if that "demonizes" him that's your judgement, it is a fact that if Gore had carried New Hampshire there would have been no Iraq War but more importantly we would have done something about climate change, now I very much doubt that we will. at least not until it is far too late, and billions will die as a result.
there would have been an Iraq war. They were bombing Baghdad throughout the 90's. Joe Biden himself said they had WMD's and were a threat to the USA dating back to 1998. He also voted for the war in Iraq. Instead you choose to create this theory where people like Nader need to be blamed for all the worlds problems.
In 2000 Saddam was setting things in place via oil trade that could have hurt the US dollar. There are puppet masters behind puppets like Bush. Gaddafi was trying the same thing. Which is why they took him out in the US and NATO war against Libya. In 2011, US and NATO bombs killed more civilians than Gaddafi.
But go ahead and keep on thinking war only happened because of Nader. You solve nothing and only shadow the real problems when you do that.
Demonizing the creator of OSHA and the EPA is fucked up.
You can keep replying with your "Blame Nader" crap. All you're doing is bumping my post in the forum. I'm fine with it.
I'm sure people working in the bank lobbies are annoyed from time to time by things OWS does, but revolution is not always polite business.
Killing the GOP an political party know as the Republicans is the one thing that all citizens can rally to that would do the most good toward bring fairness and opportunity back to American, it is the responsibility of movements like OWS to rally the people to do what they can to make things better, and that is kill the GOP!!!
Yup, a very conservative guy.
Thanks to the unions