The thoughts of Chomsky
- This topic has 14 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Some extracts from an interview
http://truth-out.org/news/item/22819-noam-chomsky-ecology-ethics-anarchism
(Parecon), for example?
"That's a well-worked out, detailed proposal for one form of democratic control of popular institutions – social, economic, political, others. And it is particularly well-worked out, in extensive detail. Whether that's the right form or something other, I think it's a little early to tell. My own feeling is that a fair amount of experimentation has to be done to see how societies can and should function. I'm a little skeptical about the possibility of sketching it in detail in advance. But that certainly should be taken very seriously, along with other proposals.
we shouldn't assume that revolutionary struggle is the only option. What we've just been discussing, for example, you can call reformist if you like: it's taking the institutions, reshaping them, reconstructing them, turning them into democratic institutions, and carrying out actions that are quite feasible and would be beneficial for all of us. Is that a revolution, is it a reform? Who knows?
you can't say direct action is good or bad. Sometimes it can harmful, sometimes it can be beneficial; sometimes it can be revolutionary, sometimes it can be reformist. You simply ask yourself what can be achieved now. So these developments in, say, northern Ohio, really are reformist – they're even supported by Republican governors and by some sectors of business, because it sort of fits their right-wing, libertarian conceptions. Fine, let's pursue that – nothing wrong with it.
The Spartacists are a good case in point. Rosa Luxemburg went along with the Spartacist uprising, though she was opposed to it. She was opposed to it not in principle but because she realized it was going to fail, was going to be crushed. But out of solidarity she went along with it, and she was killed.
Privatization is the tragedy of the commons. We can see that in fact: When you privatize the commons, it gets destroyed for private profit. If the commons are kept under common control, they are cultivated and nurtured, because people care about each other, and they care about the future. "
I have noticed that Chomsky is very amenable to interviews. He done one for the Dublin anarchists and various small magazines.
Can i suggest we approach him, offering the Mattick and Kliman interviews so he has an idea of what to expect. I'm told he is quite accessible by email.
chomsky@mit.edu
tel: 617-253-7819.
Mailing Address:
MIT Linguistics and Philosophy
77 Massachusetts Avenue, 32-D808
Cambridge, MA 02139
USAPerhaps we could use snail mail to furnish Chomsky with a Standard or an Imagine…
alanjjohnstone wrote:Some extracts from an interviewhttp://truth-out.org/news/item/22819-noam-chomsky-ecology-ethics-anarchismRosa Luxemburg went along with the Spartacist uprising, though she was opposed to it. She was opposed to it not in principle but because she realized it was going to fail, was going to be crushed. But out of solidarity she went along with it, and she was killed.That's a point we've often made. Significantly, the Socialist Standard of the time associated this uprising rather with Karl Liebkneckt who was also killed in it.
i forget what biography i read it in but it concurred with that view, describing Liebknecht as somewhat romantic and gung-ho about it and Luxemburg doing her utmost to discourage it. I think we should also be wary of calling it the Spartacus Uprising…The Revolutionary Shop Steward organisation was more in the fore and if i recall correctly they were pressed into it as self-defence by mounting provocations.
Quite a few threads on Chomsky on this forum. So i randomly chose this one.http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/36819-noam-chomsky-on-anarchism-communism-and-revolutions
Quote:Marx had very little to say about post-capitalist society, but the basic thrust of his thinking about long-term goals seems quite compatible with major strains of anarchist thinking and practice…As the Marxist theoretician Anton Pannekoek observed, "This goal is not reached and cannot be reached by a new directing and governing class substituting itself for the bourgeoisie," but can only be "realized by the workers themselves being master over production." Mastery over production by the producers is the essence of socialism… .the essential element of the socialist ideal remains: to convert the means of production into the property of freely associated producers and thus the social property of people who have liberated themselves from exploitation by their master, as a fundamental step towards a broader realm of human freedom. The Leninist intelligentsia had a different agenda. They fit Marx's description of the "conspirators" who "pre-empt the developing revolutionary process" and distort it to their ends of domination… For the Leninist, the masses must be strictly disciplined, while the socialist will struggle to achieve a social order in which discipline "will become superfluous" as the freely associated producers "work for their own accord" (Marx)…Before seizing state power, the Bolshevik leadership adopted much of the rhetoric of people who were engaged in the revolutionary struggle from below, but their true commitments were quite different. This was evident before and became crystal clear as they assumed state power in October 1917…I do not take very seriously the opinions of Chomsky. He spend the whole year , or several years raising hell against capitalism, and then , he asks the US to vote for the lesser evil, for the Libertarian party, or the Green Party, he calls himself an Anarchists,and then he gives support to the so called socialist government of Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. He is like a pendulum . He is just a good book seller. Why he does not join a real socialist party ? The case of Luxembourg also repeat itself with the tragic case of Manolo Tavares Justo, he did not want to become part of a guerrilla group, but following the others members of his party, he went to the mountain to fight against a force stronger than them, and then, he recognized that it was a mistake and tried to compromise with the military forces and they killed him when he surrender himself to save the others
Here he is endorsing the belief "that Jeremy Corbyn can help to provide a way out of the mess we are in."http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/08/labour-jeremy-corbyn-and-the-search-for-the-partys-henry-viiHe's all over the place or, at best, a curate's egg.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/20/language-and-revolution-a-modestly-proposed-no-futures-exchange/The humour of this satirical essay may appeal to some folk…making jibes at Sanders and Chomsky
He already changed the switch from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton
"He already changed the switch from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton"That was totally expected and will not surprise anybody. He is a lesser evil voter and Clinton for Chomsky is the lesser evil to the alternative Trump.He himself may very well vote Jill Stein of the Green Party as he is in a safe Democratic state but for those in the swing states, Chomsky will advocate that they give a Hilarity Clinton their vote.
alanjjohnstone wrote:"He already changed the switch from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton"That was totally expected and will not surprise anybody. He is a lesser evil voter and Clinton for Chomsky is the lesser evil to the alternative Trump.Isn't Chomsky just making a judgement about the class consciousness of the current world proletariat?That is, to those already having a revolutionary class consciousness, he'll say 'build for socialism/anarchism';Whereas, to those not presently class conscious, he'll say 'vote for the lesser of two evils'.I do this myself, regarding Corbyn. To fellow Communists, I make it plain that a Corbyn government will break strikes, just as all previous Labour governments have. To workers who ask my opinion about who to vote for, in both the leadership election and a future general election, I say 'vote for Corbyn'. If they press me for a deeper, more politically profound answer (and they already know my Communist views), I discuss Democratic Communism, and the dangers of Corbyn.
It's surprising how many people who should know better take that view on Corbyn. The triumph of hope over reason, I suppose
The Communist Party of the US ( CPUSA) is supporting Hillary Clinton, and they have spent around 8 years supporting Barack Obama
Chomsky defends his vote for the lesser evil stancehttp://www.alternet.org/election-2016/noam-chomskys-8-point-rationale-voting-lesser-evil-presidential-candidate
alanjjohnstone wrote:Chomsky defends his vote for the lesser evil stancehttp://www.alternet.org/election-2016/noam-chomskys-8-point-rationale-voting-lesser-evil-presidential-candidateHe is just a Charlatan
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.