CHOMSKY on Capitalism, LibertarianParty, Anarchism
[Excerpts from Feb 14, 1992 appearance on _Pozner/Donahue_]CHOMSKY: ...that's why if you look at the *ideology* of the founding fathers -- notwhat they actually *believed* -- but at the doctrines that they professed, which issomething quite different, they were opposed to centers of power and authority. In the18th century that meant they were opposed to the feudal system, and the absolutiststate and the church and so on. Now those *very* same doctrines apply to the 19th century and the 20th century andthey *should*, if we take them seriously, make *us* opposed to the patterns of authority and domination that exist *now* -- like for example *corporate capitalism*,which is a system of authoritarian control that Jefferson never *dreamt* of. Or the powerful 20th century state *linked* to the corporate elite, which, again, is a systemof power and domination on a scale that, say, Jefferson couldn't have *imagined*. Butthe same *principles* would lead us to be opposed to *them*.
From CALL-IN section:
QUESTION: ...What's the difference between your [Anarchist] views and theLibertarian Party?[This, among four other back-to-back call-in quations (see below)]CHOMSKY: Well let me begin with the question about the Libertarian Party. TheLibertarian Party is familiar here -- unknown elsewhere. There's a *long* tradition of Anarchism, Libertarian thought outside the United States, which is *diametrically*opposed to the positions of the Libertarian Party -- but it's unknown here.That's the *dominant* position of what's always been considered Socialist Anarchism. Now, the Libertarian Party, is a *Capitalist* Party. It's in favor of what *I* wouldregard a *particular form* of authoritarian control. Namely, the kind that comesthrough private ownership and control, which is an *extremely* rigid system of domination -- people have to.. people can survive, by renting themselves to it, and basically in no other way.So while I share a lot of..there's a lot of shared ground with the special, U.S. right-wing anarchism, which really exists only here (and in fact have plenty of friends, andso on), I do disagree with them *very* sharply, and I think that they arenot..understanding the *fundamental* doctrine, that you should be free fromdomination and control, including the control of the manager and the owner.(Another caller asked in response to Chomksy' subscribing to Anarchy, that sure thereare abuses but wouldn't Anarchism be furtile ground for dictatorship?)