Chomsky quote re: American right-libertarianism

[© tweed]

taken from "Anarchism, Intellectuals, and the State"




"If you actually pursued the ideals of the Libertarian Party you would create the worst totalitarian monster the world has ever seen."

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'd recommend either making this a poll (FQ or HQ) or actually, you know, asking some sort of question to construct a discussion topic.

Freedom Quote, by the way.

[courts]

Wow. It's difficult to sum up how incoherent that statement actually is.

[tpfkaw]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

[courts]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

What a disgusting statist!

[© tweed]

Some context would be nice, too. Not sure what I think without it.

look around

[courts]

he doesn't provide enough background for me to make sense of what he means.

Nothing of value was lost.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

Considering he's eighty-three years old, the fact that you think that he might have to work for a living is illuminating.


Also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sound_Pattern_of_English
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformational_grammar

He's worked for a living more than most of us probably have already.

Rethinking the original question a bit, lean HQ, but only because of excessive hyperbole.

[Associate Justice PiT]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

Considering he's eighty-three years old, the fact that you think that he might have to work for a living is illuminating.


Also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sound_Pattern_of_English
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformational_grammar

He's worked for a living more than most of us probably have already.

Rethinking the original question a bit, lean HQ, but only because of excessive hyperbole.

     Interestingly, the influential works of his that you have cited have nothing to do with politics.

[Phony Moderate]

He's correct, as there's little difference between the 'Libertarian' Party Establishment and the Republican Party Establishment. 

[Tetro Kornbluth]

He´s not fundamentally wrong (though perhaps the language is too extreme) but he doesn´t argue well...

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

HQ. Chomsky's a bit off his nut.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

Considering he's eighty-three years old, the fact that you think that he might have to work for a living is illuminating.


Also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sound_Pattern_of_English
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformational_grammar

He's worked for a living more than most of us probably have already.

Rethinking the original question a bit, lean HQ, but only because of excessive hyperbole.

     Interestingly, the influential works of his that you have cited have nothing to do with politics.

True, but the implication was that he hasn't been/hadn't been doing 'real work', which is absurd.

[© tweed]

He´s not fundamentally wrong (though perhaps the language is too extreme) but he doesn´t argue well...

he's not writing an essay, he's being interviewed.  he's not in a situation where is he going to rigorously defend a thesis (and if he were, I agree, the language would be less hyperbolic).

[Insula Dei]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

Considering he's eighty-three years old, the fact that you think that he might have to work for a living is illuminating.


Also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sound_Pattern_of_English
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformational_grammar

He's worked for a living more than most of us probably have already.

Rethinking the original question a bit, lean HQ, but only because of excessive hyperbole.

     Interestingly, the influential works of his that you have cited have nothing to do with politics.

Yeah, non-politicians should just shut the hell up about politics. (?)

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'd recommend either making this a poll (FQ or HQ) or actually, you know, asking some sort of question to construct a discussion topic.

Freedom Quote, by the way.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

He´s not fundamentally wrong (though perhaps the language is too extreme) but he doesn´t argue well...

he's not writing an essay, he's being interviewed.  he's not in a situation where is he going to rigorously defend a thesis (and if he were, I agree, the language would be less hyperbolic).

Okay, fair enough, wasn´t aware of the context. Will write more on this soon.

[Associate Justice PiT]

If you followed the ideas of the Libertarian Party there's an outside chance that Noam might have to work for a living, so he might have to move out of his multi-million dollar house or sell his multi-million dollar Cape Cod vacation home.  Of course he thinks it's "totalitarian."

Considering he's eighty-three years old, the fact that you think that he might have to work for a living is illuminating.


Also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sound_Pattern_of_English
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformational_grammar

He's worked for a living more than most of us probably have already.

Rethinking the original question a bit, lean HQ, but only because of excessive hyperbole.

     Interestingly, the influential works of his that you have cited have nothing to do with politics.

Yeah, non-politicians should just shut the hell up about politics. (?)

     I didn't say that. My purpose was to say that he has not contributed much to the arena of politics, which actually had nothing to do with the post I was responding to. Eh, that stuff happens.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

He's correct, as there's little difference between the 'Libertarian' Party Establishment and the Republican Party Establishment. 

Really?
GOP
Pro Gun
Anti Gay Marriage
Anti Drug
Pro war
Pro PATRIOT act
Favor Keyensian economics.


Libertarian
Pro GunPro Gay Marriage
Pro Drug
Anti war
Anti PATRIOT Act
Anti Keyensian

Their is barely anything between the two party's establishment..Yeah, Ron Paul, Wayne Root, and Bob Barr are more moderate and favorable to the GOP, but they are not the establishment. Mary Ruwart, for example, is the Libertarian establishment.

[Nichlemn]

For the benefit of everyone else, here is the passage from which the quote is drawn:


One dream of Anarchism-and the only kind that survived-was ultra-right anarchism, which you see in the Libertarian Party, which is just loved by the big corporations and the investment firms and so on.  Not that they believe in it.  They know perfectly well that they'll never get rid of the state because they need it for their own purposes, but they love to use this as an ideological weapon against everyone else.  So the Libertarian Party is very warmly accepted within mainstream business circles who really ridicule it privately because they know perfectly well they're not going to survive without a massive state subsidy, so they want a powerful state.  But they like the libertarian ideology which they can use as a battering ram against everyone else.  If you actually pursued the ideals of the Libertarian Party you would create the worst totalitarian monster that the world has ever seen.


In context, I lean HQ. Chomsky sounds like a conspiracy theorist, and he doesn't provide enough background for me to make sense of what he means.

Wait, the Libertarian Party is "very warmly accepted within mainstream business circles"? My impression is that they get the vast majority of their funding from individual donors, like Ron Paul. Does anyone have evidence of lots of corporate influence in the Libertarian Party (and I don't mean one big corporation gave a donation once)?