Noam Chomsky on the economy and democracy Pt.4

[thejuicemedia]

chomsky is profound

[terrygand]

The problem with working for `Money` is, as the stock brokers"Gamble", every day buying & selling different currencies; this `alters` the value of my money(My reward for work done),if the world had a `Gold standard` currency, then many of our "boom & bust" economic problems might be solved; of course `finance traders` would not be needed.They would not agree with this idea,as they would not get their `Cut`. I do wonder if we can `create` a reward method for `work done` that is `interchangeable?

[OpticCarlton]

I think Noam Chomsky is smart, but to say that business is less accountable than government is the most ass backwards, illogical thing Ive ever heard. Your dissatisfied with business, you take your money elsewhere. dissatisfied with government, wait 4 yrs to have your candidate lose.

[nasri1011]

@OpticCarlton

Why do you have to wait 4 years for change?

your definition of democracy is different to Chomsky.

and you can boycott some institutions and businesses but not all.

government is a reflection of the people. large business is a reflection of narrow financial interests.

[MonsieurEm]

lol @ chomsky calling obama a totalitarian model

pure awesome

[arzoyan]

Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a politically tyrannical Market system of artificial scarcity to perpetuate the bondage and servitude of the working class in the interest of the owning/ruling class. A hostile minority imposition of PROFIT DRIVEN SYSTEM for the criminal oligarchy across the world. We need to reclaim our lives and our Earth for a world of cooperation for our common needs and well being in harmony within and without. CAPITALISM IS EVIL

[colourmegone]

The best definition of the American Dream I ever heard was by a working man called Hrbenak (pronounced: her' buh nack). He said, "The American Dream is to make a lot of money, buy a Cadillac and drive down the street and give everybody the finger." The second W election wasn't stolen (the first was), nor were the previous elections of the far right; people didn't want to pay taxes to support the poor, they wanted Cadillacs. And Americans don't need a culture, they have MacDonald's & Disneyland.

[PNACATTACKdotCOM]

YO man/woman! Where's part 1? :)

[wda013]

pt 1 = "Chomsky on Geithner", watch?v=x1re9yBzqgY

[PNACATTACKdotCOM]

@wda013 :D Thanks Man :) Have great Weekend. from me - wizard Merlin and l i will move my magic stick and I'll send a'magic documentary' link for you  =)

[Bellantoni]

@PNACATTACKdotCOM "chomsky on geitner" is part one

[PNACATTACKdotCOM]

@Bellantoni Thanks Man/woman (?) :) Have great Weekend.

from me - wizard Merlin and l i will move my magic stick and I'll send a'magic documentary' link for you =)

[scuppersoh]

Entrepreneurship is its own reward in terms of the results: freedom for the entrepreneur. The way the current system was supposed to work was encourage innovation by fostering entrepreneurship. But companies now don't want to innovate with their own money -- they want the taxpayer to prop up innovation. The results are devastating for U.S. innovation. Entrepreneurs are held back by the current system, and existing corps. are pushed forward and bailed out.

[allthemorestill]

the bit about exploit obama if you can or else find another way misses the point - it gives tacit support to the very problem of apathy that he identified. in his model there can be no "obama"

but the distinction between democratic and totalitarian models is apt. just perverted by even engaging the potential of obama.

the racial implications do dramatically affect this particularity. but that's not his jive.

[bebopbopbebop]

What do we say about China's human rights violations in Xinjiang? Being the engine of world economy doesn't excuse China from its moral & political responsibilities. We have to be wary of any rising economic & political powers anywhere in the world. No country or individual in the world has the special right & privilege to do anything it/she/he wants to do just because it/she/he is politically & economically powerful. What would Chomsky say about China's bullying behavior in Asia?

[blakiplops]

"Corporate taxes should be 0%. Personal income taxes on the highest income earners account for 89% of federal revenue"

where the hell did u pull this out from lol

corporate tax should be the highest. It makes the most profits without reinvesting it back.

so if u had it ur way the "peasants" wud just be left to rot then?

[blakiplops]

"The people who profit the most of the system either are the best entrepreneurs or are assisted by the state to circumvent market dynamics" all bullshit. They make great profits on a system based on debt and as such growth is blow out of proportion. the state helps them to do so because business and politics are one and the same. as for them contributing the "most", corporate tax is approx 10% of federal revenue in the states. the flaws are there because business is in politics. its makes sense

[blakiplops]

"Wealth in thecurrent government is the one defined by government."

what do u mean by that? value of currency is defined by gvrnment? the federal reserve? but that isnt even a state institution! and yes we are all in debt, but why should those who profit the most out of the system therefore pay the least back into it? it just doesnt make sense to me maybe youd care to elaborate?

"Democracy is a flawed system because it thrives on the ignorance of a populace"

absolutely, education is the answer.

[blakiplops]

extremes of poverty and income are barriers to education. influence of business in state affairs is also a danger, another danger is of course the state itself, which has to be truly democratic in such things as choosing curriculum (as in representational democracy might not be sufficient for such decisions)

[blakiplops]

I agree with A) but theoretically the state is held to account as it is representational.Its motives are also not to make money but to uphold principles necessary for the function of democracy. again all in theory.

for B) I would say thats what you get when business makes inroads in politics. It shouldnt come as a surprise that those who profit the most out of this system would want there to be laws and institutions that favour their accumulation.

[blakiplops]

wealth=power, power is used to legitimise the accumulation of wealth, even if it means putting democratic and truly capitalist principles in danger.

[blakiplops]

IF competition keeps them in line. this would be the logical option if the markets were stable and if competition was authentic. Its far from that on both accounts. Some things should be guaranteed no matter what the market dictates as they are precious and necessary to the preservation of democracy. It seems to me your in favour of anarcho capitalism? how is it that monopolies are created by the state?

[blakiplops]

Im not ignoring entrepreneurship, and the rewards for them are that he has higher income than his workers. the conflicts between wealth/power & democracy however are very real, and that is one of the reasons y taxation is there. equality of opp. means having basic human needs catered for by the state. the other reason for taxes: this goes from public infrastructure to health care, things that ensure human interaction has a strong basis on which to flourish(...)

[blakiplops]

this granted, means the state is a big part of peoples lives, but if the state=people, isnt that what democracy is about anyway? of course this is all theoretical, as wether we live in a true democracy or corporate/commercial oligarchy is crucial to this reasoning being applied practically in reality.

[blakiplops]

its far from violating his rights...he has the privilege of being able to organize labour in his favor, and to draw profits from it. He is wealthy because of other people, theoretically at least, in a democracy, those "other people" = the state. the wealth generated gives great power, so it is normal for a proportion of it to be given back through taxes so that no man or group becomes a threat to the republic. thats all in theory. Your supply and demand point is true of course, but rather...

[blakiplops]

than have cheap everythings, wouldnt it be better if there was a little more equality of opportunity? there would be less extremes of income and less social conflict, things that are self reinforcing

[blakiplops]

how is that denying him inalienable rights? yes of course it goes without saying that he has managed to accumulate wealth because society gave him the means to do so...4 u to assert that only the individual exists is both false and presumptious.

"Supply and demand provides all the necessity for "proportional" giving back"

what you mean like the trickle down theory where wealth from above creates opportunity(jobs, more wealth) below?

[blakiplops]

I agree with you but:

although not everyone is equal, why should a person suffer because he is less able to excel in certain things than his fellow man? the rewards should exist, but they have to be a point where enough is enough. the rich man also has to realise that he has gotten where he is because of society has allowed him to, and therefore he owes society a proportional fair amount back. the risks of not doing so mean theres danger to democracy and danger to equality of opportunity.

[6of6]

Well I voted for Ralph Nader!

[gat6000]

Chomsky is a stupid commie, someone should give him a lesson about the soviet union..

[ogjimkenobi]

And who exactly is going to give the Professor this "lesson" about the Soviet Union? You?

How many degrees in education do you hold? Are you sure Chomsky's the one in need of a lesson?

[overmind25]

Chomsky is an anarcho syndicalist anyway. He has criticized the Soviet Union many times by the way and its so called leaders like Lenin and Stalin he despises.

[JJJadm]

you judge people based on your own condition gat6000

[sqharawa]

Sure, the father of modern linguists and author of over 100 scholarly books on topics as diverse as linguistics, politics, and economics needs the lesson. You clearly no little to nothing about Chomsky, gat6000.

[anonimf]

bullbunnies- hes talking about national health care not charitable institutions, which exist in the u.s. as well. see Health care in Canada Wikipedia

[bullbunnies]

One small thing

health care in Canada started in Quebec in the 1800's before the industrial revolution

[jessicaanimal]

im not donating money. cant trust this, cant trust anything. aaaaaah!

[DoctorMeh]

3:45 Can someone explain this to me, especially where Abraham Lincoln was against wage labor that he really wanted free labor. What is this free labor?

[KentAllard]

check his dotinfo website, search for 'wage slavery'

[KentAllard]

bbburton and others here is what I am talking about: currently Melbournes rail contract is up for renewal having been privatised 10 years ago, in the society I and Noam and others talk about the decision regarding this just might be made by the people of Melbourne or all of Victoria instead of the Minister for Transport or some faceless bureaucracy in total disregard for the population (and in spite of their own admittance that privatisation has saved not one cent!)

[KentAllard]

not to mention deciding - in conjunction with workers - on its running and building of new lines & extending electrification of existing lines.

Couldn't be any worse than both the Liberal and Labor governments for the past 40+ years alternating between running it into the ground; neglecting it in favour of roads, roads, and more roads; and finally selling it to an incompetent operator.

[KentAllard]

and you're working for a thesaurus

[DoctorMeh]

Given the weakness of his grammar, I'd say you were right. I also find it funny that he equates your amusement at using dead words in an odd light with being stupid.

[blackiron60]

American society has become a reflection of the business world.

[VaQm10]

So wealth inequality bothers you too?

[livinginlux]

Chomsky's vision just doesn't make sense to me. It ignores the fact that leadership is not a quality equally distributed among the population, and leadership is what is required to get anything worthwhile done. I don't want policies being set and decisions being taken by committees of ignorant people who don't know what they're doing. It's high time we brought out the guillotines and got rid of our master class the efficient way, but replacing them with a mobocracy is no better.

[utubejelmer]

Chomsky is absolutely not against leadership. What he says is that leaders should always be held accountable for their actions! The reason why many people seem ignorant is because they are not given any responsibility. In our system the responsibility's for our actions are given to the state. If everyone was to be held accountable for there actions they could not afford to be ignorant.

[livinginlux]

If someone is being held entirely accountable for their actions, they are not a leader; the person holding them accountable is. I

n reality, most people avoid responsibility, because responsibility comes with burdensome obligation and the chance of failure.

And nobody really wants to be held accountable for all their actions. Not really.

[utubejelmer]

I agree with you. But still I don't see what's wrong with the people being able to hold their leaders entirely accountable for their actions, and thus be in power?

I'm not claiming that a free society wouldn't be hard work. But it also comes with great human dignity. Being responsible is not a question it's a duty. Because giving your responsibility out of your hands (and in to the hands of the state) always leads to fascism and oppression. It leads to people saying: 'wir haben es nicht gewusst'

[DevBlazed]

this guy is a nonsensical liberal douche

[utubejelmer]

Above all he despises liberals.

He is the only one out there that makes any sense at all.

[goldwealth]

Nice man, too bad he cant see 9/11

[utubejelmer]

Well there is not really a point in the 9/11 thing. Compared to crimes committed by US presidents and western elites, 9/11 is a minor thing. Millions and millions (if not more) of people have been killed by US and western powers. If you want to find a criminal act committed by the bush administration just look at the invasion of Iraq. It killed, injured and displaced 2 million people and it's a very easily proven crime. That the victims are mostly non-Americans doesn't make it less of a crime

[greatbroad]

5:51 I did a video on this topic. A response to naomi some months ago.

I'm glad Chompsky points this out (electric mass transit destroyed on purpose)

[bbburton]

I take it Chomsky has never read the US Constitution. You don't get a vote to steal another person's property, and if the gov decides to take your property it must give you just compensation. Socialists just believe they have a right to your property and you don't. Chomsky ignores the right each individual has to pursue their own happiness, and that gov should keep out of your way. It's this type of mindset that brought Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin to power. You all know how well that turned out.

[AminCad]

Well said. I don't know why Noam Chomsky gets it so wrong on economic/rights. What's wrong with him?

[utubejelmer]

There is no doubt weather Chomsky has read the US Constitution. He has. What he says about it is that it's written by slave and land owners, whose main reason to write it was to protect their huge property and to keep the elite where they belong; in power.

[bbburton]

And that is a preposterous conclusion given the state of affairs today. They could have very easily created a monarchy if that was their goal. It is true that many who signed the Declaration of Independence were land owners as well as slave owners, but the history behind its creation and signing speaks of a far greater purpose. Chomsky is looking at the constitution through the lens of a socialist, not through the eyes of a patriot.

[JTsmiley14]

Whether that's true or not, look at the purpose that has played out. I think your last sentence is exactly right. My response is: what's wrong with that? Pride in one's country (or community, or whatever) should be be directly dependent on the moral and utilitarian value of that country/community/etc. We don't start from "I love my country." We start from our principles, and if our country's system is evil and antisocial, we stand by our PRINCIPLES.

[bbburton]

Utilitarianism is as useless as tits on a boar hog. There is no morality in the greatest good for the greatest number. The result is nothing less than a society of do-noting-freeloaders. There are only three things that a great nation can do for it's citizens; maximize freedom and liberty, enforce contracts, and provide for the common defense against foreign enemies. Apparently your system include stealing from one person to give to another. That is an evil system without any principles.

[VaQm10]

HAHAHAHA, this is not about socialism you idiot. No-one here is a socialist (although that is a hell of a lot beter than capitalist)This is about responsability.

When will you get it through your skull that: Capitalism is anti-democratic & States are repressive, by their nature.

[bbburton]

Hey fucktard you better take that penis out of your mouth when trying to put together something intelligent to say. Chomsky is all about socialism, and capitalism is what makes this medium and everything else you have possible. You want to respond to me, asshole, you better be respectful.

[VaQm10]

Ok, I'm sorry I called you an idiot. Now I'll say this as respecfully as I can: Chomsky is NOT a socialist. Look it up. When he's pressed he say's he favours Anarcho-Syndicalism. Capitalism is not what makes this medium and everything else WE have possible, people are. Livinginlux is right: There is no freedom without accountability. Im trying to do my part to end occupation and capitalism, believe me.

Now excuse me while I put that penis back in my mouth.

[utubejelmer]

If your system choice would be capitalism (and I guess it is). That's exactly what capitalism is. It steals from Peter and gives it to Paul. But Peter probably lives in Africa and is called Youssouf. Capitalism had proven to be an evil system without any principles.

[utubejelmer]

Well there's no they in a monarchy, because a monarchy is hereditary rule (which means that rulers come from one royal bloodline) . There would've been absolutely no point in creating such a system. Chomsky to my knowledge is a great patriot and looking with the eyes of a patriot he doesn't like what he sees. He's looking to the constitution through the lens of principles and basic human values (the way he looks at basically everything) and not with the blindfold of patriotism.

[bbburton]

And George Washington declined to be a king. The sole purpose of the constitution was to delineate the powers of gov and to give the people the right to abolish gov if it fails. What on heavens earth do you think elected officials take an oath of office to uphold? Their pants? Your pants? Socialism is no more principled than anarchy. Freedom and liberty are the things gov should be protecting and upholding, not robbing Peter to give to Paul. That's what Chomsky is advocating, and you apparently.

[VaQm10]

"The sole purpose of the constitution was... to give the people the right to abolish gov if it fails."

Hundereds of thousands unemlpoyed, masive poverty, an enormous amount of people in prison at least two wars that the majority do not wish... your governement HAS failed. Now go and abolish governement.

[bbburton]

No, millions unemployed. So how many jobs have you created? What's your record on giving to the needy? 2.4 million in prison and three times that number on probation, parole, or supervision. The majority who are non-violent drug criminals. Who have you called to end the war on drugs? 700 military bases in over 130 foreign countries. Who have you called to end foreign occupation? I am doing my job. How about you?

[KentAllard]

"[government] ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority." - James Madison

Theres your individual pursuing happiness, theres your government keeping out of your way.

[bbburton]

So what? What do you think the bill of rights guaranteed? The rights of everyone.

[VaQm10]

The "Bill of Rights" is piece of paper.

[bbburton]

And your brain is nothing but a mass of cells.

[KentAllard]

so what indeed

[KentAllard]

yeah "so what" if society is structured to maintain the position of the powerful and wealthy

[bbburton]

So what are you suggesting? Ignore the constitution? Forget about the BOR? Screw society. It's the individual that matters and the protection of individual rights that guarantee a free and open society. Your focus on power and wealth blind you to the opportunity to become the best you can be in your own right. Apparently you just seem to want to blame the shortcomings of some on the successes of others. I urge you to get a life of your own and cease attacking those of us who have.

[utubejelmer]

I suggest you stop insulting people and focus on your own shortcomings. And please DO ignore the constitution and the BOR for the reasons I and others have stated before. Everyone in power seems to do anyway. We do not live in a free and open society. It's people that make all things work, capitalism corrupts and perverts it all. It will happen to youtube too.

We all have life's of our own.

[bbburton]

You don't like what I have to say, keep your own mouth shut, and don't tell me what to do. It's your shortcomings that have put you in the position that you obviously inhabit, not mine. Grow a spine and learn to stand on your own two feet instead of trying to occupy the shoes of those who know how to take responsibility for their own lives. The only thing perverted here that I can see is you and those who believe the pathetic crap you've been trying to spew. People like you are parasites.

[utubejelmer]

I rest my case.

[bbburton]

You have no case.

[KentAllard]

while your case is psychopathy

[bbburton]

Coming from a retard, I take no offense.

[MindlessGlitch]

Yes, let's abandon the rights of the people in the BOR, no more freedom of speech, no more right to due process of law, just give it ALL up to the government. Let's march in a single file line behind this dipshit into the Brave New World simply because the people who wrote the constitution happened to own slaves.

That is the most idiotic thing I have ever heard. If you are honestly suggesting to abandon the rights laid out in the bill of rights, than you, sir, are one naive son of a bitch.

[VaQm10]

The Bill of Rights is a piece of paper. It doesn't GIVE you rights because rights are not given ( certainly not by pieces of paper). If you don't fight for your rights, the Bill of Rights is void. You can take it as a guide line, sure. But the Bill of Rights, The Constitution don't mean anything in themselfs, regardles of what they teach you in school.

[utubejelmer]

I completely agree with VaQm. I do recognize there are some interesting ideas put forward in the US con. and bor but from the start these 'pieces of papers' have never prevented the mass killing of Native Americans, enslavement and discrimination of blacks and human right violations in the Philippines, Vietnam, Iraq and many other places. Every form of the recognition of basic rights of the people mentioned above has been fought for by the people themselves and where certainly not given to them

[bbburton]

You really are a dip shit. The BOR, if you've ever bothered to read the amendments, starts out with the phrase "Congress shall make no law . . .. Do you even know what that means? Christ, if you can't even relate to what is being discussed, get the fuck out of here.

[MindlessGlitch]

I agree with VaQm, the Bill of Rights IS just a piece of paper. If it wasn't, then government wouldn't be ignoring it to the extent that it is now.

Democracy is really might makes right, so yes, you are also right in that we DO have to fight for our rights. The problem now is simply that not enough people are willing to.

[KentAllard]

successes? wheres the success in inheriting immense wealth and then in your adult life funding think tanks and lobby groups to ensure progressive taxation messures are curbed?

[MindlessGlitch]

"successes? wheres the success in inheriting immense wealth and then in your adult life funding think tanks and lobby groups to ensure progressive taxation messures are curbed?"

What does that have to do with capitalism or the constitution?

Privatization doesn't = lobbying groups. Everything can be private while at the same time lobbying can banned.

The constitution doesn't include the right to lobbying.

What you said is a complete non-sequitur attack.

[KentAllard]

"blind you to the opportunity to become the best you can be in your own right. Apparently you just seem to want to blame the shortcomings of some on the successes of others."

Responding to that missy.

[KentAllard]

admit it, you just dont like the idea of people organising

[bbburton]

You really are a douche bag. Have you even read the Constitution and the Amendments? "Congress shall make no law . . . respecting freedom of association." What you can't do is associate with others to deprive anyone of their rights. Read the Constitution, asshole, and you just might have something reasonable to say. Otherwise get the fuck out of here.

[KentAllard]

sure cloak your fear of the masses in 'constituionalism'

you're not fooling anyone fascist

[bbburton]

What a waste. You're as informed about freedom and liberty as an amoeba is about the universe. Take a hike, asshole.

[KentAllard]

what about that giant amoeba from that original star trek series episode?

[bbburton]

What about that shit you call your brain?

[MindlessGlitch]

"yeah "so what" if society is structured to maintain the position of the powerful and wealthy"

You're absolutely right, so let's rely on the powerful and wealthy to bring down the powerful and wealthy!

Let's rely on the powerful and wealthy to structure society in such a way that makes the powerful and wealthy less powerful and wealthy!

Wait a minute...

[KentAllard]

yeah thats exactly what I've been talking about isn't it

[MindlessGlitch]

Well if you're suggesting that we should increase government intervention to deconstruct the position of the powerful and the wealthy, then yes, that IS exactly the implication of your position. Government officials GIVE the powerful and wealthy their power, because they ARE part of the powerful and wealthy.

[ubuibiok]

***** another Chomsky Home Run Hit, right out of the Ball Park !

[tarnopol]

Key message to the confused Obama Army at 6:50.

[digiring]

He leaves out that the bottom up democracy is strongly encouraged by the Obama campaign. They have also set up a very open and usable system for grass roots movements, but unfortunately most people are sheep and don't take initiative.

[MopacMurtaza]

They always say the Obama army, why do they call it the Obama army?

Cause an army takes orders, it doesnt get to decide policies, on the other hand a grassroots movement would have their demands, and the candidate has to follow those demands, thats grassrootsmovement.

Not an army of people just working for the election of Obama, but have nothing to say in his policies, thats an army.

No dont believe in Obama mania, he is and admitted CFR.

[DoctorMeh]

"They always say the Obama army, why do they call it the Obama army?"

Because the author wanted to make up yet another useless term that has a wildly adjustable meaning to demonize opponents. Moonspeak is cute, but I'd prefer to stick with hard issues.

[bullbunnies]

It's more than that. People who can't handle reality all together are attracted to catchy bullshit b/c it lets them avoid thinking rationally. I think it's something people don't understand yet and people have to talk about more.

Understanding why someone else doesn't understand something is at least as important as understanding it yourself

[DoctorMeh]

Ah well, I see your point. People being not understanding is a hard issue.

[tarnopol]

What are the specific means of bottom-up democracy in the Obama campaign? The website? They ignore it. Something else? Do large self-organized groups of Obama supporters have, say, budgetary control? What decisionmaking power do they have? I'm on the lists; I see the meet-ups: it's cheerleading.

[KentAllard]

how is it encouraged? Where is the democratic process? Some guy, able to campaign because of large corporate donations, comes to people and says "vote for me".

If there was any semblence of democracy they'd be selecting from among their own ranks a representative.

[digiring]

They did, they selected a nobody from Chicago.

[KentAllard]

just goes right over your head

[digiring]

You know, whatever floats your boat and is convenient to your argument at the time. He's a powerful insider - He's doesn't have any experience. He listens to much to the left or to his opponents. Blah blah blah, flipity flopity. Holding one man responsible for the ineptitude of a whole populous, is incredibly stupid.

[KentAllard]

really? are the American people being blamed or the elite interests wishing to curtail democracy being blamed?

[digiring]

This is the part where I tell you that you aren't making any sense and you turn that into a golden badge of honor signifying that you have understanding your opponents don't have. Have at it hoss.

[joewilder]

Actually, Los Angeles is considered to have one of the most useful transportation systems in the country. You can get a certain distance in LA faster than just about any other big city. The smog and cost of it is another story. But personal transportation shouldn't be thrown out altogether. Hydrogen and/or Lithium batteries may still make it possible.

[spartan2600]

"transportation systems"

an army of suv's doesn't make a useful transportation system- they are only useful to those who own them.

[mikezephyr]

you seem to have your head in the right place. see: 'revolutionary road' by my man zzz33333.

[charr05]

if you want to find out more about the economy, check out economyincrisis. org and search "economyincrisis" on YouTube