Will the Real
Noam Chomsky Take One Goosestep Forward
By Steven Plaut
Discover The Networks – Moonbat Central
August 23, 2005
Is Noam Chomsky a Stalinist-line communist or an anarchist?
Ordinarily anarchism and communism should be mutually exclusive concepts, at least for anyone who understands their definitions. They are diametric (might we also say dialectic? dianetic?) opposites. Anarchism seeks to abolish government and to restore humanity to the days of the war lords and the renaissance condotierre, imposing upon all humanity the life style of the cannibal tribes in the New Guinea jungles. In contrast Marxism, communism, and fascism, all essentially the same things, seek the opposite: a totalitarian government that micro-controls everything, all because they expect to be the totalitarian masters and so get to send all those mean kids from high school who made fun of them to the gulags.
Now the two concepts are commonly intertwined and confused. The ISM or International Solidarity Movement terrorists collaborating with the Hamas like to call themselves anarchists. The campus hordes of Che-shirters, the Moonbats for Marxism, and the limousine-latte lefties also frequently claim to be anarchists these days. And now Noam Chomsky has given anarchism his pontifical blessing.
Noam Chomsky is best known for being America’s leading academic Stalinist and as the MIT cheerleader for the Khmer Rouge when it was conducting its genocide of Cambodians. He is a bit less well known for having invented some silly theories in linguistics, long ago debunked and dismissed by serious scholars.
In a long and mind-numbingly stupid interview in the Marxist web rag ZNET, comrade Noam sings the praises of anarchism.
Among other things, Pol Pot’s favorite MIT prof says:
ZNET Moonbat Interviewer: On many occasions activist, intellectuals, students, have asked you about your specific vision of anarchist society and about your very detailed plan to get there. Once you have answered “that we can not figure out what problems are going to arise unless you experiment with them.” Do you also have a felling that many left intellectuals are loosing too much energy with their theoretical disputes about the proper means and ends, to even start “experimenting” in practice.
The Noam: Many people find this extremely important and find that they cannot act as, let’s say, organizers in their community unless they have a detailed vision of the future that they are going to try to achieve. OK, that’s the way they perceive the world and themselves. I would not presume to tell them it’s wrong, maybe it is right for them, but it is not right for me. A lot of flowers have a right to bloom. People do things in different ways….
ZNET: What is your opinion about so-called “scientific” anarchism – attempts to scientifically prove Bakunin’s assumption that human beings have instinct for freedom. That we have not only a tendency towards freedom but also a biological need. Something that you were so successful in proving with universal grammar (language)…
Chomsky: That is really a hope, it is not a scientific result. So little is understood about human nature that you cannot draw any serious conclusions. We can’t even answer questions about the nature of insects. We draw conclusions – tentative ones — through a combination of our intuitions, hopes, some experiences. In that way we may draw the conclusion that humans have an instinct for freedom. But we should not pretend that it is derived from scientific knowledge and understanding. It isn’t and can’t be. There is no science of human beings and their interactions or even simpler organisms that reaches anywhere near that far.
It is getting so hard to keep up with this guy…