any of you read this? is it good? chomsky is based so i assume so

File: 1443299541282.jpg (37KB, 537x360px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 537x360px

>Chomsky is based

>>9078957
nice dfw meme, nerd

>>9078948
"X" is terrible.... now let me tell you how America is to blame!, every fucking thing I've ever read by Chumpsky.

>>9078969
kind of true, he's a pretty harsh critic but its never without context. he's very good at pointing out the hypocrisy of the US

>>9078948
Read Tom Wolfe's article about Chomsky

File: chomp.png (52KB, 727x285px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 727x285px

> $16 for 128 pp

just look at the contents. it can't even be called a book.

Chomsky's political philosophy is laughably erroneous: absolute equality with absolute liberty is a ludicrous and unrealizable ideal because people are fundamentally unequal.

Thus, only authoritarianism can achieve absolute equality in which Chomsky necessarily must renounce anarchism and admit he is actually an authoritarian or Chomsky must embrace absolute liberty (anarcho-capitalism) which necessarily implies comprehensively abandoning egalitarianism as a cardinal ideal.

One can renounce liberty and achieve equality via authoritarianism or one can renounce equality and achieve liberty via anarchism. To assert both liberty (anarchism) and equality (authoritarianism) simultaneously as cardinal ideals (as allegedly anarchic Leftism so fallaciously does) is either intentionally mendacious or simply symptomatic of cognitive impairment by intrinsic imbecility, self-deception, or influence of pernicious propaganda of some kind.

>>9081222
Authoritarianism doesn't make everyone equal either because it still comes down to people being fundamentally inequal. It's true that there is some cognitive dissonance on Chomsky's line of thinking

File: 1486295886265.gif (962KB, 171x172px) Image search: [Google]

962KB, 171x172px

>>9081222
you're dumb. read Humboldt, then stfu forever.

>>9081267

>Authoritarianism doesn't make everyone equal either because it still comes down to people being fundamentally inequal.

True: I was more asserting egalitarianism necessarily implies authoritarianism.

>It's true that there is some cognitive dissonance on Chomsky's line of thinking

'Some'? More like his entire political philosophy is merely instantaneously recognizable authoritarian Leftism falsely purporting itself as anarchism: an irony of unparalleled immensity: enslavement as liberation and an authoritarian state as anarchy. Democracy has an affinity with despotism and every revolutionary tyranny ultimately derives from one palaeo-progressive arch-myth: demotic equality, The Tyranny of The Vulgus which is sacralized as democratic equality which Chomsky so superlatively reveres.

>>9081303

Explain.

>>9081360
if that needs explaining then I wonder if you've interacted with Chomsky's work at all, bc he mentions Humboldt constantly.

idk where you get this "Chomsky wants absolute equality hurr" shit from. he believes, following Humboldt, that each person should be able to develop their interests and skills as widely and thoroughly as possible, and free from illegitimate coercion. if you don't believe in freedom, that's fine. (I mean that seriously: there are defensible respectable anti-democratic positions.) but you can't just ascribe ridiculous made-up beliefs to him and then call HIM ridiculous...

>>9081393

>idk where you get this "Chomsky wants absolute equality hurr" shit from. he believes, following Humboldt, that each person should be able to develop their interests and skills as widely and thoroughly as possible, and free from illegitimate coercion.

Chomsky despises anarcho-capitalism which would imply he believes in a coercive egalitarian state (otherwise, why would he oppose anarcho-capitalism when voluntary anarcho-syndicalism is possible under anarcho-capitalism?).

>if you don't believe in freedom,

I believe in freedom which why I oppose a communistic despotism such as Chomsky's politics seemingly necessitates.

>I mean that seriously: there are defensible respectable anti-democratic positions.

Of course.

>>9081431
>why would he oppose anarcho-capitalism?

bc it allows for the creation of unaccountable private conglomerates of power. states aren't the only entities that can be illegitimate and coercive.

>coercive egalitarian state
>communistic despotism

[citation needed]

Yeah it would be good but it wouldn't be anything he has sat down and written it would be collected from interviews and lectures, probably a lot of it from a big interview he had on the BBC in the 1970s

It won't lay down in concrete how an anarchist society should be shaped and function, Chomsky does not like to give people orders and believes it should be self organised - cause he's an anarchist, duh

>>9078969
We are responsible for the predictable outcomes of our actions
Not someone else's
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qnGyImubRp0

>>9080406
You need to have a concussion for it to make sense
>>9081222
No edgelord

>>9081431
>Chomsky despises anarcho-capitalism which would imply he believes in a coercive egalitarian state
>I shall apply my own ideas and interpretations to the few words I recognise

>>9081431
>I believe in freedom
No, you don't

>>9081462

>bc it allows for the creation of unaccountable private conglomerates of power.

Private companies are accountable by market forces. In anarcho-capitalism, you can choice any or exit any sovereign services provider.

>states aren't the only entities that can be illegitimate and coercive.

Like proletarian revolutionaries seizing The Means of Production?

>[citation needed]

Okay: describe how Chomskyite anarchism functions in your own words.

>>9081481

How is private property and private commerce abolished in absence of governmental coercion?

>>9081222
>absolute equality with absolute liberty is a ludicrous and unrealizable ideal because people are fundamentally unequal.
And being unequal some must have less liberty than others I suppose?

What is going on is not the rightwing myth of a government forcing everyone to be equal, propping up some people and capping others, but everyone having the opportunity to develop their skills and pursue their interests without coercion
Be it a brick layer or a brain surgeon, it will come from your fundamental desires to inquiry and create - not force or class

>>9081484

Yes I do nigger.

>>9081485
>Like proletarian revolutionaries seizing The Means of Production?
How is that illegitimate and coercive? Its their work and production making the wealth
>Private companies are accountable by market forces.
Ah yes, we don't need FDA regulations. We can just deregulate it and when people get salmonella poisoning they will sue and that will fix it.
Oh the abattoir has funded their own scientific papers insisting there is nothing wrong - just like the tobacco industry did for decades - and won the case and there will be clean up.
And they're funding a rightwing noise machine to convince people that hygienic conditions are a liberal lie.
Well. Um.

>>9081488

Equality of opportunity necessarily implies coercion: public education --- for insistence --- replies upon funds plundered from people by coercion; anything imposed by The State is intrinsically coercive and leveling of 'opportunity' is only rigorously possible via The State; hence, 'anarchic' Leftism requires authoritarianism.

>>9081485
>Private companies are accountable by market forces

lool and people call leftists naive

>Like proletarian revolutionaries seizing The Means of Production?

Chomsky is not a Marxist

>describe how Chomskyite anarchism functions in your own words

how about his words? I'll just leave this here: https://youtu.be/h_x0Y3FqkEI

>>9081495

>How is that illegitimate and coercive? Its their work and production making the wealth

Labor Theory of Value is BS: labor is only one factor of production and receives just compensation as determined by free market price discovery.

>Ah yes, we don't need FDA regulations. We can just deregulate it and when people get salmonella poisoning they will sue and that will fix it.

>Oh the abattoir has funded their own scientific papers insisting there is nothing wrong - just like the tobacco industry did for decades - and won the case and there will be clean up.

I could describe how pollution is in violation of private property rights but I see you have fully renounced deontological anarchism; at least you are proffering forth philosophical honesty.

>>9081505

>lool and people call leftists naive

Private companies can be effectively checked by financial exit: a state --- in contrast --- forces contribution and compliance.

>>9078969

wahhh i don't like it when people call capitalists, the corporate media and the state out on their bullshit

>>9081222

we get it dude, you drink mountain dew

>>9081518
States can be effectively checked by voters: a private company --- in contrast --- forces contribution and compliance.

two can play your dumb game

>>9081518
>Private companies can be effectively checked by financial exit:
Nope
>a state --- in contrast --- forces contribution and compliance.
Mommy, what's an election?

>>9081518
>Private companies can be effectively checked by financial exit
But they will produce mountains of disinformation and sue their critics and fund rightwing noise machine
All of which will add up to mean for example that people believe that climate change is not happening, its a liberal myth, a Chinese hoax, a conspiracy to institute a NWO to tax our precious bodily carbons

How do you check this with financial exit?

File: image.jpg (22KB, 512x288px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 512x288px

>>9081495
>hygienic conditions are a liberal lie.
I lol'd
Anyone who denies this is a shill for the CATO Institute

>>9081516
>Labor Theory of Value is BS
Well, you proved me wrong.
>just one factor
Yes there are the designers and engineers and scientists too, also working for wage selling the sweat of their work rather than working for their own pleasure
They would of course be part of the workers co-operative
>I could describe how pollution is in violation of private property rights but I see you have fully renounced deontological anarchism; at least you are proffering forth philosophical honesty.
I work in the food industry.
The only thing keeping the managers and bosses in check is oh&s and safe food handling regulations.
As usual the economic school theories that sound great (but incidentally add up to benefiting established wealth and power) fails when it meets the real world (except for the incidental benefit part)

There are two supermarket chains in America publix and winco that are employee owned.
Staff earn a higher wage than at other supermarkets.

File: e96.jpg (36KB, 607x608px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 607x608px

>>9081222
This.

Anarchism doesn't make sense if you do not also believe the weak should fear the strong.

>>9081222
Protip: whatever boogeyman marxist jew feminist egalitarianism Alex Jones is caterwauling about this week isn't the same thing as 'equality' from the context of politics. All this /pol/ shit is an inversion of the politics from the self-identity from the fringes of what you (sweepingly) call 'the Left'.

anarchism is the only just ideology

>>9081431
>that each person should be able to develop their interests and skills as widely and thoroughly as possible, and free from illegitimate coercion.

Which is something anyone who lives in the West right now can do without a problem.

>>9082170
tell that to the single mom without a car working at papa johns living off of food stamps, and burning every paycheck on car payments for the beater that broke down on her and rent that goes up every year

>>9082175
Not everyone who lives in the West is American white trash.

>>9082183
fair enough. I guess America is just a shithole compared to the rest of the West. A revolution will happen here if the media ever stops dividing us

>>9082183
>anyone who lives in the West right now can do
>except burgers

>>9082191
Well, the point I was trying to make is that the West and it's offshoots like Japan are comparatively better than any other society on the planet, whatever kind of anarchist criticism Chomsky might have.

There's a reason the refugees from the Syrian Civil War want to go to Sweden, Germany and Norway, and not their neighbor Saudi-Arabia.

>>9082211
>j-j-just work a little harder american!

>>9082213
>there is a reason people want to move from a war torn country to a liberal society rather than from a war torn country to an authoritarian one

really makes you think

>>9082215
as far as America's class problems go, we are on the same page. i was pointing out that your original post was hypocritical, and pretty dumb considering the Ameri-centrism of this website

>>9082213
How is Japan good? Japan is in the shitter right now. People are literally killing themselves over the amount of work they are doing for western capitalism and their economy is stagnating. Japan is one of the least free "liberal" countries in the world

>>9082224
Well it does make you think when a guy has spent his entire career shitting on the society that even Muslims who consider the society degenerate and non-believing want to flee there.

>>9082213
>There's a reason the refugees from the Syrian Civil War want to go to Sweden, Germany and Norway, and not their neighbor Saudi-Arabia.
because it's a remote possibility? Not really sure what you're getting at, unless it's just /pol/, in which case yeah ok, sure

>>9082233
want to flee to*

>>9082233
>even Muslims who consider the society degenerate and non-believing want to flee there.
i take it you don't read much

>>9082239
>i take it you don't read much

not an argument

>>9082241
>>>/pol/

>>9082234
I'm not a /pol/tard at all, and I don't get why you retards bring it up.

>>9082251
k,

if you have anything else to contribute come back

>>9082254
I did contribute right here>>9082213, but everyone is autistically screeching because they think just mentioning refugees must mean I hate them.

>>9082257
>everyone
how would you know that we're all anonymous

>>9082257
The point you tried to make is worthless, because obviously Syrians would choose to live in a planned economy, liberal representative democracy. that doesn't mean abolishing the state wouldn't eliminate some of the evils that come with a liberal democracy

>>9082257
Because your ready acceptance of any rhetorical flourish that lets you simultaneously paint refugees as 'the other' and yourself as the noble 'we' belies your true views on them

>>9082257
yeah i know but you didn't contribute to my contribution here
>>9082234
you just said 'no I'm not /pol/'

>>9082257
go back to your safe space. This board is about literature.
>>>/pol/

>>9082270
>Because your ready acceptance of any rhetorical flourish that lets you simultaneously paint refugees as 'the other' and yourself as the noble 'we' belies your true views on them

But that's not true. It was an admonition that even Chomsky has to accept the positive value of a free and open liberal democracy even though it's not an federative anarchist utopia, but he doesn't do that.

He's literally playing the archetype of the adversary, and can't say a positive thing to save his life.

>>9082213
white biddies with big tiddies and pink nippies?

>>9082279
That's not true. He has openly stated that he supports a liberal democracy where it solves serious existential issues and is a democratizing force. It just almost never does

>>9082279
we're not talking about chomsky though

>>9081222

Go outside, Slavoj

>>9082283
>he says he supports if X
>But it never does X
>There for it's as bad as Saudi-Arabia

This is why anarchists literally aren't taken seriously by anyone. They are so blinded by ideology they don't even understand nuance.

File: hqdefault.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>9082290
what the fuck are you talking about guy, I never said anything like that and no anarchist is seriously arguing that a liberal democracy is as bad as saudi arabia

>>9082290
>There for it's as bad as Saudi-Arabia
Please post a citation to the work and passage of Chomsky that you think says anything to this effect.

>>9082298
>and no anarchist is seriously arguing that a liberal democracy is as bad as saudi arabia

So why are people like Chomsky only criticizing their own society and see the enemies of liberal democracy as freedom fighters?

>>9082307
>So why are people like Chomsky only criticizing their own society
He's not. Also, please specify who these numerous 'people' you're referring to are

>>9082315
>Also, please specify who these numerous 'people' you're referring to are

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi_vX0tknJM

>>9082319
>>>/pol/

>>9082322
Not an argument.

Also, Chomsky is doing exactly what I've said. He's never said or written a positive word about the West his entire life.

>>9082319
>Not an argument.
That only works on /pol/.

>Also, Chomsky is doing exactly what I've said. He's never said or written a positive word about the West his entire life.
probably because he believes that 'the West' hasn't been doing anything worth writing positively about during his lifetime.

>>9082338
>probably because he believes that 'the West' hasn't been doing anything worth writing positively about during his lifetime.

And that's funny considering he's a professor of linguistics at one of the most prestigious universities in the world, and is himself a part of the 1%.

The only reason he could've ever got to that position is if the West was the way it is.

But nevermind that. Lets just tear it all down.

>>9082329
>Also, Chomsky is doing exactly what I've said.
No, he's not. you're consistently being bounced around between whatever poor lummoxes are arguing with you, you're not convincing anybody.

>>9082342
>The only reason he could've ever got to that position is if the West was the way it is.
You mean the type of society that accepts refugees from regions of social turmoil?

>>9082342
>and is himself a part of the 1%.
>mfw neo-fascists adopt Occupy slogans

>>9082342
>The only reason he could've ever got to that position is if the West was the way it is.
what the fuck does that have do with his criticisms of the west

>>9082346
>You mean the type of society that accepts refugees from regions of social turmoil?

Exactly. The kind of society despite all it's faults is better than the shitholes Muslims are fleeing from.

>>9080824
That honestly just looks like Penguin is trying to rip people off lmao

File: 071712Bernanke011.jpg (648KB, 3200x2134px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 3200x2134px

>Anarchism

In all seriousness, though, Chomsky is a better linguist than he is an economist. Modern economics is based on empirical data, unlike Chomsky's work. The book may be interesting and it will certainly be well-written but it's unlikely it will reflect reality.

>>9082279
not true, read his answer to the last question of this interview: http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/noam-chomsky-kind-anarchism-i-believe-and-whats-wrong-libertarians

he actually admits quite often that the West HAS made a lot of progress. that progress is a result of criticism and resistance, which is why he continues to resist and criticise.

>>9082307
watch >>9081472

>>9082801
Ben Bernanke is more of a profiteer than an economist, really.

Same with Greenspan.

Janet Yellen took far too long for the interest rate hike as well, so probably she is also a profiteer.

>>9081535

>States can be effectively checked by voters:

JohnJonahLuaghing.avi The State has grown corpulent and despotic precisely of democracy. Democracy does not check The State; democracy grows and empowers The State.

>>9081551

>Mommy, what's an election?

The incentive under democracy is a larger more avaricious state. How is that remotely controversial?

>>9081576

>Yes there are the designers and engineers and scientists too, also working for wage selling the sweat of their work rather than working for their own pleasure

And machinery and 'means of production' are provided by capital. Labor and capital are factors of production justly compensated in a free market.

>They would of course be part of the workers co-operative

Nothing is stoping worker co-operatives under anarcho-capitalism.

>I work in the food industry.
The only thing keeping the managers and bosses in check is oh&s and safe food handling regulations.

>As usual the economic school theories that sound great (but incidentally add up to benefiting established wealth and power) fails when it meets the real world (except for the incidental benefit part)

I am not disputing that. Just be aware that such injunctions prelude deontological anarchism.

>>9081589

Exactly: nothing is stoping voluntary socialism.

>>9082175

Good; single mothers are human garbage.

>>9082801

>Modern economics is based on empirical data

Which is why it's bullshit.

>>9083239

Except 'voluntary socialism' being a contradiction in terms

>>9083261
I volunteer.

What now, hmm? smartass

>>9083242
nice opinion there m8 did sam hyde tell you to think that way?

why does every discussion of radical leftists get derailed by /pol/lacks who have actually no working knowledge of the world

>>9081222
Absolute liberty is of course impossible.

Maximum liberty is possible, but only for one man. And that man will certainly not be beholden to capitalism. And that man is you.

>>9083668
For the same reason you just posted.

Butthurt. Who can silently bear discussion of that which they disagree with? No one.

It's why the Daily Mail and Buzzfeed alike both release the occasional article which they know will rile up their readers.

File: 1458599914718.png (577KB, 682x708px) Image search: [Google]

577KB, 682x708px

>>9081485
>Private companies are accountable by market forces

>>9081485
>In anarcho-capitalism, you can choice any or exit any sovereign services provider.
At some point, probably merely a few weeks after implementing Anarcho-Capitalism, all land would be owned by someone. So what's with people who are born afterwards? How do they have a freedom? They de facto live in a world consisting solely of dictatorships.

>>9083956
I know where do they come up with this shit. His post reads like Atlas Shrugged 2: Electric Boogaloo

>>9081485
By the way, you can just write Chomsky an e-mail where you explain your concerns about his philosophy: [email protected]
He answers almost anything

>>9083956

And The State --- an entity you are forced into funding and complying with --- is somehow more accountable?

>>9084683
Where did I say this?

>>9084116

>At some point, probably merely a few weeks after implementing Anarcho-Capitalism, all land would be owned by someone.

And?

>How do they have a freedom?

They have absolute property rights.

>They de facto live in a world consisting solely of dictatorships.

And? Did I mention: I am also a neoreactionary: so a world of techno-feudal autocracies is precisely my ultimate political objective.

>>9084690

You imply a superior alternative when critiquing commercialism, right? Or do you have no alternative and are just whining?

>>9084125

Not an argument.

>>9084702
I am saying that private companies are not accountable by market forces, and to believe this is childish. You are the one that got massive butthurt, and the burden of proof is upon your shoulders. You are no Atlas.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (200KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 960x1280px

>>9084692
> neoreactionary

KEK why didn't you lead with that? a lot of time could've been saved instead of wasted talking to you as though you were a rational person or something.

>>9084711

I am asserting: private companies are more accountable compared with The State.

>I am saying that private companies are not accountable by market forces

That is a claim which contradicts an enormous swath of economic literature and requires rigorous elaboration.

>>9084725

Not an argument.

>>9084726
That was not the original claim. And you can talk of theories and literature, and you can talk of reality. In reality, companies are not "accountable" to market forces. It is only under regulation from an administrative body that any type of considerable labor law, wage, or affordable commodity price developed. Anarcho-capitalism is an insane idea that goes against reality and human nature. It is pure imagination.

>>9081393
Humboldt? More like humDOLT! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>9084748

>That was not the original claim. And you can talk of theories and literature, and you can talk of reality. In reality, companies are not "accountable" to market forces. It is only under regulation from an administrative body that any type of considerable labor law, wage, or affordable commodity price developed.

Seriously? I assumed your objection would be reasonable like pollution so I could explain how pollution is in violation of property rights but you decided upon going full-retard:

>labor law

Why should The State dictate contracts between two consenting adults?

>wage

Wages should be decided by a free market not governmental dictum. The minimum wage prices low-skilled people out of a job and unnecessarily distorts prices upwards or otherwise impedes techno-economic progress.

>affordable commodity price

You have no understanding of price economics, do you? Market prices are an emergent calculation and distorting a price downwards causes shortages invariably. 'Affordability' is a bullshit and subjective criterion; no one 'deserves' an 'affordable' product, dumbfuck.

>>9084786
You are delusional. Good day.

>>9084791

Wow, what a rigorous and convincing argument; you refuted all my points in detail! (sarcasm).

>>9084786
>'Affordability' is a bullshit and subjective criterion; no one 'deserves' an 'affordable' product, dumbfuck.

No one 'deserves' the product of their labour but it is guaranteed by the state.

>>9084809

The product of your labor is basically all you do deserve. Now you are just being retarded on purpose.

>>9084819
I'm not the guy you were talking to before.

But no, there is literally nothing in this world that guarantees you the product of your labour other than a governmental body i.e. private property laws. Don't get spooked now.

I honestly don't get the appeal of anarcho-capitalism since it's the literal opposite of the kind of emancipatory, rational societies argued by the classic liberals. Efficient moving of money is really beside the point.

>>9084830

>But no, there is literally nothing in this world that guarantees you the product of your labour other than a governmental body i.e. private property laws. Don't get spooked now.

The principal politico-economic innovation of The Dark Enlightenment is precisely such a recognition: private or 'secondary' (deontologically justified) property cascades down from (practically sovereign) 'primary' property. The key of aligning both forms of property is through formalizing and commercializing primary property: a politico-economic model we call 'neocameralism'. I am a neocameralist. Your argument may have been effective against an AnCap but is useless against neoreactionaries like me.

>>9078948
>chomsky is based

Lib arts brat detected

>>9084879
I activated your trap card?

The only property that can be called practically sovereign is the self, and even sovereignty over yourself is not guaranteed just by existing; we can use slavery as an example of this, and of the idea that product of labour is not guaranteed.

I don't know how 'formalizing' involves anything other than a governmental, or at least mediative body. But with mediative bodies one has to enter a consenting contract with that body before they could be held accountable to the stipulations of that contract.

And consenting, in terms of contract theory, requires two or more equal, rational, and free subjects, else it is a form of exploitation which is what anarchism tries to avoid (in that it prevents the emancipatory system of liberal contract theory to be effectively realised)

>>9084830
Not even governments can guarantee the product of labor

>dont get spooked now

>>9078969
t. Foucault

>>9084981
True, but I was speaking in terms of government theory rather than critiquing it.

>>9084926

>The only property that can be called practically sovereign is the self, and even sovereignty over yourself is not guaranteed just by existing; we can use slavery as an example of this, and of the idea that product of labour is not guaranteed.

Rights of property and person are ethico-philosophical: enforcing such rights --- as you note --- requires a higher or 'practical' sovereignty: a sovereignty whose envelope of instantiation is reality. This sovereignty is primary property which (ethico-philosophical) secondary property practically cascades from.

>I don't know how 'formalizing' involves anything other than a governmental, or at least mediative body. But with mediative bodies one has to enter a consenting contract with that body before they could be held accountable to the stipulations of that contract.

Hence, neocameralism: formal commercialized governance and formal exit.

>And consenting, in terms of contract theory, requires two or more equal, rational, and free subjects, else it is a form of exploitation which is what anarchism tries to avoid (in that it prevents the emancipatory system of liberal contract theory to be effectively realised)

Of course: hence our technological focus: equalizing government and governed though geopolitical exit options and cryptographic techno-finance instead of demotic voice.

>>9084981

>Not even governments can guarantee the product of labor

Well, democratic governance certainly does a shit job at it.

>>9081431
>I believe in freedom which why I oppose a communistic despotism such as Chomsky's politics seemingly necessitates.

In Understanding Power he clearly says he doesn't believe that a Leninist communistic social arrangement cannot work, but "maybe if the factories were actually owned by the workers and the community it could. Maybe"

>>9085036
can*

>>9085036

I can sympathize with voluntary anarcho-socialism wherein workers voluntarily combine resources and thereby accumulate capital and form co-operative businesses. My issue is specifically with authoritarian socialism.

>>9085024
Interesting but this seems like an end rather than a means.

>>9085093
>>9085024

Also do you know where I can read more about this? Even if I don't agree with it it's still something to contend with.

>>9078948
no. He has lots of ramblings about why people turn to anarchism and counter culture but does not addressee the flaws of the ideology or how it can only work as a leech. inb4 that guy who says no country is pure x ideology, well yes but I think its clear why average citizens would not want leeches

>>9085117

Nick Land at XenoSystems.net. The works of Hans-Hermann Hoppe are also critically catalytic.

>>9084786
>Wages should be decided by a free market not governmental dictum
>Why should The State dictate contracts between two consenting adults?
than what is stop stop people desperation for employment to be exploited?

>>9085149
Thanks.

>>9085158

>>9085158

I don't believe in 'exploitation' as an ethico-philosophical category. Theories of 'exploitation' only have rigorous usage in formal Marxian economics where 'exploitation' has a precise formal meaning; once Marxism necessarily becomes demotic, 'exploitation' is irreparably vulgarized and made utterly useless as a economic concept.

>>9085169

You are welcome; I like Lefties who have intellectual fiber.

Bump. This thread has been a blast for me.

>>9078969
>now let me tell you how America is to blame!, every fucking thing I've ever read by Chumpsky.

none of you can ever give examples how he is wrong though. he gives countless examples of how the US has instigated and invaded countries for little to nothing

>>9082329

>He's never said or written a positive word about the West his entire life.

Well, he is a Jew after all.

>>9085323

There is a peculiar overlap between radical Rightism and radical Leftism concerning geopolitical interventionism; I would typically concurwith radical Leftism where it criticizes expansive Cathedralism as epitomized by neo-imperial Judaeo-conservatives.

>>9085394
>neo-imperial Judaeo-conservatives
>he speaks fucking Klingon and expects to be taken seriously

>>9082329
Chomsky focuses his critiques on the west because he knows no one in Sudan or Kyrgyzstan is going to listen to him.

If you think he doesn't see anything positive in the western ideals of enlightenment liberalism, you haven't read his work or have poor comprehension.

>>9085570

You mean what, mate?

>>9085394
>this wasn't an actual argument against any points, just labelling his views as radical. you gotta do better than that

>>9084692
Ok, no problem, but couldn't you at least be honest then and identify yourself as a feudalist instead of further bastardizing the term anarchist? Thanks

>>9083277
I don't.

What now? smartass

>commie """literature""""

*pukes*

>>9086120
wtf im a nationalistic post-fascist neo-monarchist now

>pick a subject nobody gives a fuck about
>talk about it in an exasperated, condescending voice for 2 hours
chomsky is far from based

>>9086868
it's a collection of interviews and essays, and if you think Chomsky is condescending you're probably just offended by what he has to say

>>9086128
Noooo! Don't do that all of a sudden out of nowhere.

>>9086868
Don't forget the subtle airy hand gestures.

THE MEANINGLESS GESTICULATIONS. THEY MUST BE FOR SOME REASON YET IT ISN'T APPARENT BECAUSE HE ISN'T REMARKABLY EXASPERATED OR FRUSTRATED.

File: 020909d56f4dbc9d107757ce3253e49a.jpg (14KB, 292x323px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 292x323px

>>9085394
>expansive Cathedralism as epitomized by neo-imperial Judaeo-conservatives

File: 413321.jpg (56KB, 500x534px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x534px

>>9081476
It made enough sense to the editors of America's most prominent literary magazine for them to publish it. It made sense to me. Where did you start to feel concussed?

>>9086868
>Chomsky
>knows just about everything
>revolutionised linguistics
>been BTFOing bitch niggas for the past 99+ years
>NOT based

motherfucking kill yourself

>>9087394
not him, but he isn't based

chomsky tries to talk about so many topics. i'll give him he's good at foreign policy since he reads the NYTtimes every day for decades, but he is so antediluvian and in his own bubble when he speaks on certain current events there is no value. for example post-snowden he tried to speak about privacy and any undergrad could point out he has no idea what he was talking about

>>9087544
>he's wrong sometimes

lol sure ofc

>>9081222
But holding two dissonant ideals can lead to making a more perfect balance between the two. I would say that all political philosophy understands this dissonance, and indeed, has been attempting to temper these conflicting goals since Sparta ruled itself in a mixture of despotism, oligarchy, and democracy with varying success. Most deep truths are messy so I believe that Chomsky, sometimes isn't dissonant enough. Isn't messy enough. I believe this to be a fundamental flaw of political thought today. The very idea that a pure form of any type of government is good is foolish.

>>9085570
Fuck off, sub 100 brainlet.

File: 1486704574918.jpg (108KB, 476x534px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 476x534px

>>9087867

Has Chomsky ever engaged an AnCap in a debate?

>>9089055
https://youtu.be/_XyacsQAucc

not exactly, but he talks about Rothbard in this video

>>9089210

Although I have made my detestation of all Leftism explicit ITT, I respect anarcho-socialism, anarcho-syndicalism, and anarcho-communism, more so than explicitly authoritarian variants thereof. All anarcho-Leftism becomes less detestable as it diverges from implicit authoritarianism and converges upon actual anarchism as I have identified ITT.

The structure of politics it identifies subsists upon an authoritarian-anarchic spectrum which renders all other ethico-political concerns orthogonal.

>>9078948
i read part of imperial ambitions. good writer, too factual though, sense of hyper realism about something very amalgamated

bamp-oo

>>9078948
>Chomsky is based.
Each and every bit of his writing on politics is dog urine tier

>>9091128
impressively strong argument

>>9085323
its just a one sided and naive version of history. anyone can go around memorizing stats about every genocide and terrible thing but the US is huge and it's history is elaborate and does have some positive happy events that he neglects to mention or be interested in because thats not the narrative his cynical anti systemic hipster pseud audience wants to hear about.

he's a meme

>>9087394
this is the most reddit comment ever written in the history of comments and reddit.

stop posting and read a book

>>9091850
It's funny how naive he comes off. Would think seeing so much in his lifetime would've made him less so.

>>9091863
impressively strong argument

>>9081222
you are... 17 years old

>>9092426

19.

>>9078969
America is "to blame" but Chomsky thinks the US operates in some special antimoral zone which just comes off as laughable.

The powerful do what they can and the weak suffer what the must. Chomsky's only worthwhile geopolitical critique is that we get little from what we do.

File: 880.jpg (20KB, 474x528px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 474x528px

>>9093858
>The powerful do what they can and the weak suffer what the[y] must

>>9079036
> implying it takes more than five seconds to find something wrong with America

>>9082329
>The duty of a political writer is not to criticise, but to write positive things about the country where he is living in

This was literally the official Soviet way of thinking. It's not a desirable one by any means.

>>9094781

How will he ever recover?

anarchism is an infantille disorder
>>9094800
he will never

>>9081486
So, yes, you're that stupid. Thank you for showing me why I shouldn't waste my time.

Chomsky has me convinced that libertarian socialism is the logical conclusion of classical liberalism. There are decent defenses of statist collectivism, but pretending you can achieve maximum liberty under capitalism is an illusion. Private corporations dominate the global market far more than states ever did, and classical liberalism was precisely an answer to the domination of state actors in the functioning of economies. Adam Smith wouldn't fucking stand for neoliberalism at all.

>>9093524
stop using ten dollar words and stop talking about abstract bullshit like "absolute equality". It's not just stupid but also not actually a position endorsed by anyone who I've heard of (certainly not Chomsky), you're making yourself look stupid.