The problem with this argument is that it can be easily interpreted to mean that the fact that Volker, Clinton, Kissinger, et. al. are responsible for the LOSS of hundreds of thousands of lives should not disqualify them from having authority over our lives.
I understand that your position is that there is no argument for anyone having any authority over anyone's life. I'm sympathetic to the position. However, taking a hard line interpretation makes it impossible to distinguish between completely legitimate exercises of authority-preventing a small child from running into traffic or preventing corporations from turning large bodies of water into toxic sewers-and illegitimate authority-sending thousands of young males to their deaths in a third world country. In between these there is a huge grey area, and we should be discussing that.
> BTW, Mother Teresa sucked ass.
Indeed she did, as C. Hitchens points out. (I loved the book too). But so does anyone who attempts to exert even minimal control over or even create any sort of organizational structure, influence anyone's opinions, or exercise any sort of authority.
So C. Hitchens sucks, MT sucks, Nader sucks, and, when we find out more about them, Joel Kovel sucks, you suck, I suck, we all suck. Where does that get us other than the state of paralysis that we are in now.