And to all would be free and moral people, study this man and his methods closely and forever beware of people like this who try to frame debates in this way. Its counterproductive to the cause of natural justice and freedom. perhaps mr chomsky is innocently destroying the cause of freedom unwittingly, or perhaps he is a paid performing seal of the oligarchs we so need to remove from the levers of power.
With all due respect mr chomsky, i dont think you understand anarchism or freedom or natural justice at all so for you to talk in this way, framing the debate within YOUR predefined historical boundaries, is useless to the cause of freedom and morality. in fact the way you talk mr chomsky i can only assume that you are working to perpetuate the system you pretend to oppose by framing the debate in this dishonest fashion. Principles govern, not intellectualised predefined dogmatic theorising.
The thing that mr chomsky, being an armchair intellectual who never experienced a true synergy with his fellow man by working towards a common goal, will never understand is that freedom is the birthright of every person on this planet and people who would acheive true freedom will gladly give their lives and so so much more to insure its survival. and once one group of people acheived freedom it would have such a cascade effect round the world that it would be unstoppable.
The only way to take over switzerland is house by house, which makes even the toughest invading soldier shudder in their boots, or a large scale nuclear attack or carpet bombing which would eliminate most of the people and destroy everything of value. A society without a government can never be truly subdued, and such a people would most likely fight to the death down to the last man. In switzerland in ww2 grannies were manning the anti aircraft guns and moms training kids to shoot - awesome...
Hierarchical statist societies are easy for large armies to take over. A country without a centralised government is almost impossible to take over and the cost of doing so would be prohibitive to any would be invaders. All that would be needed to insure the survival of a governmentless society would be all the citizens armed with rifles and competent in their use. eg switzerland, it is impossible to take over, defeating the federal government would mean nothing to the individual cantons.
also, the satisfaction of middle class and upper class jobs is the self-management and self-control. If lower class jobs receive more self management, i wont be surprised that it can actually become more enjoyable.
If my memory serves me correctly Orwell in Homage to Catalonia gives a very good description of an egalitarian military structure where people were motivated to fight rather than ordered. Having said that, that was on a much smaller scale and ultimately proved ineffective. For the revolution to be successful it would inevitably have to be international. This would require much hard work in dissolving the cultural hegemony of nationalism and culture through debate and consciousness raising.
@djboony It would be a fairly major detterent to attack certainly. The primary defence from US attack would still be the domestic threat of workers refusing to cooperate.
@technatezin The point he's trying to make is that if it came to a fight against a centralized professional military of the strength of either the United States or Russia, there would be little hope in the fight. That system of armored vehicles, jet fighters and now satelites just coulndn't be matched in a place like Western Europe.
Granted you could fight a guerrila war against such a force but those kind of conflicts are won when the dominant side loses the will to fight politically.
And to all would be free and moral people, study this man and his methods closely and forever beware of people like this who try to frame debates in this way. Its counterproductive to the cause of natural justice and freedom. perhaps mr chomsky is innocently destroying the cause of freedom unwittingly, or perhaps he is a paid performing seal of the oligarchs we so need to remove from the levers of power.
sidvidkid 5 months ago
@sidvidkid You just just waffling disinfomation against Chomsky. Please hush up.
brownie1982ad 4 months ago 2
With all due respect mr chomsky, i dont think you understand anarchism or freedom or natural justice at all so for you to talk in this way, framing the debate within YOUR predefined historical boundaries, is useless to the cause of freedom and morality. in fact the way you talk mr chomsky i can only assume that you are working to perpetuate the system you pretend to oppose by framing the debate in this dishonest fashion. Principles govern, not intellectualised predefined dogmatic theorising.
sidvidkid 5 months ago
The thing that mr chomsky, being an armchair intellectual who never experienced a true synergy with his fellow man by working towards a common goal, will never understand is that freedom is the birthright of every person on this planet and people who would acheive true freedom will gladly give their lives and so so much more to insure its survival. and once one group of people acheived freedom it would have such a cascade effect round the world that it would be unstoppable.
sidvidkid 5 months ago
The only way to take over switzerland is house by house, which makes even the toughest invading soldier shudder in their boots, or a large scale nuclear attack or carpet bombing which would eliminate most of the people and destroy everything of value. A society without a government can never be truly subdued, and such a people would most likely fight to the death down to the last man. In switzerland in ww2 grannies were manning the anti aircraft guns and moms training kids to shoot - awesome...
sidvidkid 5 months ago
Hierarchical statist societies are easy for large armies to take over. A country without a centralised government is almost impossible to take over and the cost of doing so would be prohibitive to any would be invaders. All that would be needed to insure the survival of a governmentless society would be all the citizens armed with rifles and competent in their use. eg switzerland, it is impossible to take over, defeating the federal government would mean nothing to the individual cantons.
sidvidkid 5 months ago
also, the satisfaction of middle class and upper class jobs is the self-management and self-control. If lower class jobs receive more self management, i wont be surprised that it can actually become more enjoyable.
neonaction 1 year ago
i like his point about onerous physical task: better reward, more self control can make onerous tasks more enjoyable.
neonaction 1 year ago
Imagine watching this at 4:30 am, drunk.
EclecticSceptic 1 year ago 7
@EclecticSceptic Same boat, only its 0502
ionpal 6 months ago
@EclecticSceptic Only 15 minuets away from that reality............
PrivateLsd 3 months ago
If my memory serves me correctly Orwell in Homage to Catalonia gives a very good description of an egalitarian military structure where people were motivated to fight rather than ordered. Having said that, that was on a much smaller scale and ultimately proved ineffective. For the revolution to be successful it would inevitably have to be international. This would require much hard work in dissolving the cultural hegemony of nationalism and culture through debate and consciousness raising.
CosmosLoyal 1 year ago
maybe the threat of mutually assured destruction would keep them at bay
djboony 2 years ago
@djboony It would be a fairly major detterent to attack certainly. The primary defence from US attack would still be the domestic threat of workers refusing to cooperate.
DuffmanIRL 1 year ago
With regards to an anarchist/social revolution in Western Europe, Chomsky's following points are spot on:
* Europe's Military wouldn't be able to fend off an attack from Russia/America.
* The best option would be to appeal to the working classes in the attacking countries (Russia/America).
* If we have to resort to tanks. The revolution will fail.
CapitalistHolocaust 2 years ago 13
@CapitalistHolocaust "* If we have to resort to tanks. The revolution will fail."
ha ha! Tanks are NOT the invincible metal monsters they are portrayed to be. Every weapon systems has a weakness.
technatezin 1 year ago
@technatezin The point he's trying to make is that if it came to a fight against a centralized professional military of the strength of either the United States or Russia, there would be little hope in the fight. That system of armored vehicles, jet fighters and now satelites just coulndn't be matched in a place like Western Europe.
Granted you could fight a guerrila war against such a force but those kind of conflicts are won when the dominant side loses the will to fight politically.
majordbag2 1 year ago
@CapitalistHolocaust thanks for recapping dickhead
marxistmanglermango 7 months ago
Comment removed
absurdao 2 years ago