Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 106 posts

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#31

Post by wayoutthere »

dotsam wrote: post #20

I respect Chomsky very much, and I have learned a lot from him. But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential, and a refusal or inability to accept that the the universe might be fundamentally unjust and that life is not always dignified or sacred. I would like to share his hopeful outlook (hopeful in the sense that he seems to think there ought to be a…

I think Chomsky is saying the opposite; that we should resist and thwart this will to dominate things in the world. It’s easy to forget he’s basically an anarcho-communist (and not in the pejorative context that label is often used, but as an intellectual school of thought). And before anyone calls it Marxism, ancom as a philosophical tradition derives from Kropotkin rather than Marx.

Leftist politics in general assume that most people are actually good, and society to the extent it exists is there to protect the majority of good people from the few baddies who want to hoard all the resources. Even if we take that will go power as an intrinsic feature of the world, those displaying antisocial behavior should be cast aside.

Not saying I’m 100% agreeing with this, but that optimism in the general goodness of people is a core tenet of leftist political views. And Chomsky is and has been a thought leader on the American left for the last 50 years.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#32

Post by rapsey »

dotsam wrote: post #20

I respect Chomsky very much, and I have learned a lot from him. But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential, and a refusal or inability to accept that the the universe might be fundamentally unjust and that life is not always dignified or sacred. I would like to share his hopeful outlook (hopeful in the sense that he seems to think there ought to be a…

> But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential

They definitely are. Chomsky should forever be respected for his work in linguistics, his work on the media and his research into US power. Manufacturing consent was published in 1988 and it is more relevant then ever.

His personal political views are however completely unrealistic and ignore human nature entirely.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#33

Post by ryhtgergf »

howaboutnope wrote: post #7

[flagged]

In what sense can 'totalitarianism' be measured as a moral wrong besides the amount of violence and oppression it inflicts? By that measure there's infinitely more reason to need to look inward at America's domestic and foreign policy than there is to enable the cold warrior type's fantasies of war with china.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#34

Post by devnonymous »

dotsam wrote: post #20

I respect Chomsky very much, and I have learned a lot from him. But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential, and a refusal or inability to accept that the the universe might be fundamentally unjust and that life is not always dignified or sacred. I would like to share his hopeful outlook (hopeful in the sense that he seems to think there ought to be a…

> I would like to share his hopeful outlook (hopeful in the sense that he seems to think there ought to be a counterfactual world where everyone behaves decently towards each other and the planet)

You'd see the point if you think of 'Civilization' as a evolving process rather than an single point ideal.

The world today is factually more just and decent (IOW civilised) than the era of colonial imperialism and this change didn't just come about naturally. It happened because of people who question the injustice and challenged the world to be better. I think that's the role people like Noam Chomsky play. To expect the ideal so that we move towards it, however slowly.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#35

Post by Joker_vD »

i_am_proteus wrote: post #25
a_square_peg wrote: post #8

Just finished reading 'Blind Man's Bluff' - about the American submarine espionage stories since WW2. There are fascinating stories but it was also striking how so many of the stories were about how the US, the technically and economically superior country, spied on and harassed the Soviets near the Soviet territories.

Do recall that the Soviets for a good bit had a leg up on rocketry and were more or less neck-and-neck on thermonuclear weapons. When your adversary has intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear weapons aimed at your cities, you do whatever you can to avoid those being used, including whatever espionage you can get away with.

And when the Soviets found themselves in this exact situations, those rascals too had resorted to whatever espionage they could get away with! The nerve of them!

In the early 2010 I've read a news story about Czechs finding and declassifying some old military plans from the 1970-ies (desgined in the USSR and then supplied to the rest of Warsaw Pact) which went along the lines of "launch the strategical nuclear strike, then take over the Europe with conventional troops (with possible use of tactical nuclear waeponry)". The story went into some details into how the strike directions in those plans were actually radically different from what NATO at those times expected the Soviets to use, so it was a rather interesting read.

And then, in the very last paragraph of the story, it makes an off-hand remark that those plans had an explicit directive in them that they are to be enacted only in the wake of the nuclear attack on a member of the Warsaw Pact. Ah. So those were plans were less of "okay, let's figure out how to set the world ablaze and then rule whatever's left" kind and more of "in case of being nuked: a) nuke back; b) ...try to take over whatever's left, I guess?" kind. Obviously, putting that remark at the beginnig of the story where every reader would read it would lessen the story's intended impression of the scary murderous Reds.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#36

Post by howaboutnope »

ryhtgergf wrote: post #33
howaboutnope wrote: post #7

[flagged]

In what sense can 'totalitarianism' be measured as a moral wrong besides the amount of violence and oppression it inflicts? By that measure there's infinitely more reason to need to look inward at America's domestic and foreign policy than there is to enable the cold warrior type's fantasies of war with china.

Even if the US was perfectly saintly, that wouldn't change the nature of the totalitarianism of the CCP, and the ambitions that are inherent in it by necessity (since you cannot control and rewrite history without controlling the globe in some way or another).

It's also not a binary choice. The same values that require resisting oppression and violence perpetrated by US administrations, would also lead a person resist the CCP, and doing either helps with doing the other. If you have two types of cancer, you don't treat the bigger one and completely ignore the other... if there is good reason to do A, having "even more reason" to do B doesn't mean you shouldn't still do A.

> cold warrior type's fantasies of war with china

That's a straw man. My fantasy would be the Chinese people successfully fighting for change, like they tried once before they got brutally slaughtered for it. Like the people in Hong Kong are fighting. If you're going to get personal in this manner, also consider the cowardice and spinelessness of those who would rather prolong their life a little (or even just increase their bank account) by not speaking out and standing up.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#37

Post by a_square_peg »

i_am_proteus wrote: post #25
a_square_peg wrote: post #8

Just finished reading 'Blind Man's Bluff' - about the American submarine espionage stories since WW2. There are fascinating stories but it was also striking how so many of the stories were about how the US, the technically and economically superior country, spied on and harassed the Soviets near the Soviet territories.

Do recall that the Soviets for a good bit had a leg up on rocketry and were more or less neck-and-neck on thermonuclear weapons. When your adversary has intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear weapons aimed at your cities, you do whatever you can to avoid those being used, including whatever espionage you can get away with.

> When your adversary has intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear weapons aimed at your cities, you do whatever you can to avoid those being used, including whatever espionage you can get away with.

Not saying there's anything wrong with espionage - just saying that Americans seem to have an overly adversarial mentality with severe inability to distinguish the difference between real vs. perceived threats. At least from the interviewed submariners, the Soviets viewed their American counterparts as colleagues whereas the Americans viewed Soviets as enemy.

Replying to an American boasting about who was 'winning' during a Soviet-US summit, a commander said through a translator: "tell this young man that when veterans get together, it doesn't matter who won or lost - it's enough that both survived."

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#38

Post by craftit »

bad_alloc wrote: post #24
dotsam wrote: post #20

I respect Chomsky very much, and I have learned a lot from him. But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential, and a refusal or inability to accept that the the universe might be fundamentally unjust and that life is not always dignified or sacred. I would like to share his hopeful outlook (hopeful in the sense that he seems to think there ought to be a…

Nature might be like this, but we can maybe build an artificial system which is not.

It is interesting to wonder what this might look like. There are still limits to what is physically possible, we only have finite resources. I also personally value having a diversity of people and views. I wonder if at least from the points of view of some of the inhabitants the world will be unfair. That said, we should always try and do better.

Re: Noam Chomsky on the cruelty of American imperialism

#39

Post by tapgnid »

rapsey wrote: post #32
dotsam wrote: post #20

I respect Chomsky very much, and I have learned a lot from him. But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential, and a refusal or inability to accept that the the universe might be fundamentally unjust and that life is not always dignified or sacred. I would like to share his hopeful outlook (hopeful in the sense that he seems to think there ought to be a…

> But I do wonder to what extent his views are based on a possibly over-optimistic view of the world's potential They definitely are. Chomsky should forever be respected for his work in linguistics, his work on the media and his research into US power. Manufacturing consent was published in 1988 and it is more relevant then ever. His personal political views are however completely unrealistic and ignore human nature…

Are you familiar with Rutger Bregman and his book Humankind? That gives a fresh perspective into humanity. One that I believe to be true. We're just too deep into the illusion of evilness, that's mandatory for status quo.
Post reply on HN