Chomsky on Anarchism (sidenote; education)

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are there property rights in the sort of anarchism that Chomsky describes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. In fact, individual rights aren't recognized at all, and you would be just a drone in the Borg.

The closest example of the practical manifestation of Chomsky's political "philosophy" is the former Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia in the late 1970's -- which Chomsky, not surprisingly, supported.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any shame about being an outright liar?
Chomsky didn't support the KR, and the KR was absolutely not a libertarian socialist group.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
However, if the only valid argument against the government that ACists can make is criticizing the coerced distribution of wealth by the gov't then we have a problem.


[/ QUOTE ]

No its not the only arguement ACists make. It just that most people that are worth arguing already get how brutal and immoral state sponsored wars are. It the false morality of the welfare state that can be hard for people to see at times, so this is what most people are going to argue about.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Jesus, go away. Everyone here is well equipped at doing google searches and can realise for themselves that Chosmy did not support the Cambodian genocide- or deny it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just used google, and yes, he did.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're just freely giving away any remnants of credibility you may have had with posts like this.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your correct. Most people also favour some form of egalitarian reform, universal healthcare, etc. but thanks to private powers manipulation of government and the nature of the constitution the democratic opinion of the majority is inept without major pubblic stuggle.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who do you think wins this struggle when you give all the guns to one institution in society? Those people with the money and resources to manipulate the political process and the media.

So you guys can continue to claim that we need government to do this or that but understand that the ultimate consequence is that government is going to get controlled by those with money. Its irrational to claim we need government and then complain when your social programs get co-opted by interests that care nothing about the poor and only care about their monopolistic control of society. Its the natural consequence of the structure you want for society.

But mabey you could elaborate on exactly which point I missed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe government is beneficial when citizens are vigilant about remembering what the phrase "public servant" means. Servant, not master.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your correct. Most people also favour some form of egalitarian reform, universal healthcare, etc. but thanks to private powers manipulation of government and the nature of the constitution the democratic opinion of the majority is inept without major pubblic stuggle.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who do you think wins this struggle when you give all the guns to one institution in society? Those people with the money and resources to manipulate the political process and the media.

So you guys can continue to claim that we need government to do this or that but understand that the ultimate consequence is that government is going to get controlled by those with money. Its irrational to claim we need government and then complain when your social programs get co-opted by interests that care nothing about the poor and only care about their monopolistic control of society. Its the natural consequence of the structure you want for society.

But mabey you could elaborate on exactly which point I missed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe government is beneficial when citizens are vigilant about remembering what the phrase "public servant" means. Servant, not master.

[/ QUOTE ]

In other words, you're a utopian dreamer.