Chomsky speaks in English intro is Nordic or some german language? I was shocked to hear him say that Ron Paul's contitutionalist direction will lead the USA to a "Corporate Tyrany" of the worst sort by giving them all the FREEDOM they need to take over completely. I only watche dpart of this video and will comment later when I review the entire video. How far down the rabbit hole does chomsky go???? Very disturbing comment also on the state of the environment. Why is this not mainstream news???
I actually think it was wrong to do the introduction in Norwegian while Noam Chomsky was present. Alright, perhaps he knew what was said in advance, but even in that case, you knew you would put up the interview on YouTube. I happen to understand Norwegian, but not all libertarians understand Norwegian. It is just too bad they can't, because Norwegian is such a beautiful language.
@RSFO The introduction was done before/as Chomsky entered the room. He did know what would be said in advance. In our own video we have subtitled everything spoken in norwegian.
He is spot on about India. But it is really strange, that NC always talked about US being a war propaganda nation through out and was always against US foreign policy in the 20th Century and yet he talks about the only candidate ( Dr Paul) in US who dares to speak the truth on every single issue, and who is a peace candidate being right on a mere few issues??whereas Paul has been correct in his economic predictions and yet his policies will lead to corporate tyranny!! We'll wait and see.
@barun432 We will have to wait and see. I think Chomsky's point is this: Right now we have corporate tyranny with government backing. With Paul we will have corporate tyranny without government backing. But without the backing, ironically, we will be thrown to the wolves sort of speak. That's the point as I understand it. However I personally don't think Paul should be dismissed so easily. I myself remain with a healthy skepticism of Paul as I have of any political leader.
@ahhhhjjjj I have some wry hope that Ron Paul actually wins so the economy can get smashed. After all, it is the corporatists' (or state capitalists') economy. Let it smash.
@RSFO That's a good way to look at it. If the state capitalist economy is smashed we (the people) would be a in a good position to take responsible revolutionary action. I think Ron Paul's plan would end up leaving the corporate heirarchy in full view and in the line of sight for the public. From there some kind of libertarian socialist agenda could potentialy (big 'if' there though) be carried out through popular movements. His social policies alone would be good enough to set the stage.
@barun432 He said Ron Paul was all right -- I think his bone to pick with Paul is that his deregulation beliefs would only empower corrupt corporations and lead to tyranny through the private sector as opposed to governmental tyranny. In that sense, he's saying Paul's liberty agenda would lead to the lack thereof. THAT SAID, Paul is WAY WAY better than all other GOP, if not all politicians.
@SalvadorBrumov You are right, Ron Paul has some screwy ideas like on climate change, deregulation but He is also against corporate giveaways. Number 1 thing He is not a War Monger.
@MamonMuch it was also very poorly shot/edited, cause the camera should be focused on Noam, not on that interviewer... also, the interviewers physical appearance is somewhat distracting.
The pandering to "Forefathers" is tiresome yet perfect state-rhetoric. Jefferson was a slave-owning rapist who advocated state-controls (by virtue, because of his political and economic Elite status, as well as the formation of constitutional protocol at the Const. Convention) and Washington PERSONALLY led the assaults against the Iroquois, only instrumental in the slaying of 15 million Native Americans to settle your stupid little country. Even "Joe Six-pack" can't stomach fucking history... :)
@maxshibui (cont'd) but STATE-capitalist economies function by churning out goods and imposing services regardless of the democratic participation of those that have contributed their labour power to such production. This is the supply and demand of the priviledged power structure that exploits poor labour to enrich elitist private investors. The so called "free-market" is bullshit, cos it has ALWAYS relied on state (public) welfare in order to steal wealth from the people.
@slckr80s You say "STATE-capitalist economies", that btw is not capitalism because there is no free market, and only an illusion of competition, doesn't work because of state intervention? isn't that state intervention the problem on capitalism? so... the problem is state intervention and not capitalism... why anarchy? No third party to at least resolve disputes? Too much faith on human kind... that's just wishful thinking IMO.
@MrFmmcosta give one example of capitalism functioning without the pampered protection and funding of the state/public sector? why anarchy? cos authority is almost always illegitimate.
@slckr80s That's not capitalism, that's crony capitalism. I'm not anti-government, I'm anti government monopolies and initiation of force. freedom to all. If people want to be taken care by the government let them be, just don't impose it on me.
@MrFmmcosta lol @not being able to give one example that i asked for. ALL capitalism is crony capitalism, you sound like Ed Miliband. I AM anti-government. I am even more so anti-corporatism, cos at least government has even minimal democratic practices, as shit as they are. Corporations have zero democratic practices. They fully make us submit our freedoms to their profit motive. Capitalism is private tyranny. ''Governments are the shadow cast by business over society'' - Dewey
@MrFmmcosta Perhaps our current societies are not true capitalism. Even Noam Chomsky has said that a few times (you can even find it on youtube), but if you want a society in which there is minimal "imposing will on others", then I think you will see that the classical libertarian socialist direction was in that direction historically. You can't get a perfect society, and hence you can't get perfect liberty. There is no libertarianism without egalitarianism.
@MrFmmcosta I agree 100%. And it shoudn't be. It should do away with the monetary price system (P$) all together. How could there then be a debt system? The great majority of Ron Paul supporters should be against the P$ altogether (and even the tea party movement and 99% of anyone else, if they ever understould anything at all). Not because Ron Paul is entirely against it, but because there is no alternative to Ron Paul.
@RSFO "It" should really be the difficult move, where "left" and "right" libertarians go together an figure out how to get the tea party movement and others organized against the corporate 1%.
@MrFmmcosta Well, I think that money shouldn't exist, so it was in fact what I meant. But I think that money would not exist if a debt system does not exist, becaus I think it is virtually the same thing. The problem with money in my view is that it is not measurable by any physical or "real" measurement like say Jules (energy).
@RSFO I guess it depends of what backs the money (supposing we would use paper money). If it was backed by gold or whatever then it would have intrinsic and measurable value. I like the concept of Free Banking.
@maxshibui, I love the way you say "unfortunately articulate" as if he is that way by accident. Talk about back handed compliment. I guess college kids (among others) admire him cos of his radical thought and common sense. These used to be admirable qualities not so long ago. Your knowledge of capitalism seems quite ignorant, even simplistic tbh. Yes workers should control their own productive lives and so should consumers... damn word count limitation...
@hihellohowareyou1000 you only say that because youve been brought up in a society where you must look a certain way, conform to a certain style to belong. Its jammed in your face through advertising from the moment your mumma spat you out. Enforced throughout schooling life. I would bet money that one BIG reason he chooses to look this way is to challenge people with the very ideas your expressing here. He is him, he is an individual and is expressing himself in his way.
Well this is just one of the all too many cases on our books of Americanism. The only way that we can fight this terrible debilitating social disease, is by informing the general public of its consequences, by showing young people that it's just not worth it. So, so please give generously to this address: The League for fighting the United States of America, 55 Lincoln House, Basil Street, London, SW3.
Is your abuse of the young man really necessary? You should be grateful that his group has invited Chomsky for us to watch on Youtube. Show some gratitude and remove that comment please.
This might be the best video of Chomsky discussing LS on youtube. I've watched most of them, and the references he gives here, the discussions of Parecon and those other worker run organizations & movements both current and historical... they don't exist in any other video. Thanks a lot for uploading!
14:55 right there he says they are successful initially then they are bought, isn't that evidence that the system -all be it nice- is not sustainable, what insensitive would the workers have to continue working if they simply can sell their shares and go on holidays?
@slckr80s With emphasis on ''look like''. He's just a very confused pseudo-historian who is unfortunately articulate and popular with naive college kids. Workers should control production. Okay. So what about consumption? The whole point of production is consumption. But who consumes? Mostly workers. Workers determine what is produced when they buy stuff. That's how free market capitalism works, if not sabotaged by government intervention. Chomsky is a capitalist at heart, without knowing it.
@maxshibui err workers should control production so goods can be evenly distributed and consumed. This makes sense because the workers are the majority. When the bosses control the production, the workers are exploited in the pursuit of profits. What the worker can consume becomes narrowed and controlled by the bosses. Exploitation and any form of capitalism goes hand in hand, u cant have one without the other. There is no such thing as perfect competition.
@tommytoan Workers are human, yet their control of production will automatically result in even distribution? What if some think they should get more than others? Shouldn't there be an objective 3rd party observer, like a boss, to settle such conflicts? Profits are needed to re-invest into the business. Machines wear out or become obsolete and need to be fixed/replaced. The boss isn't exploiting the workers just b/c he wants to maintain the machines and thus his worker's productivity
@maxshibui "What if some think they should get more than others? Shouldn't there be an objective 3rd party observer, like a boss, to settle such conflicts? Profits are needed to re-invest into the business. Machines wear out or become obsolete and need to be fixed/replaced."
No, you have an agreed process to settle disputes, one that can involve things like participation and voting. This is like saying tyranny is better than democracy because the trains run on time
@ 15:00 Chomsky says there are thousands of worker-owned firms in the U.S. Does anyone have a source for this? I assume he doesn't mean self-employed individuals that own a "firm."
First off just a great interview all together with Chomsky spot on as usual. But also you can tell that the interviewer is a pretty well educated young man as well and is extremely excited to be talking to Noam. Great job on all sides.
Brilliant video. Completely destroys the myth that USSR, China, etc were communist/socialist and how people do not know or understand what communisms true principles are. He perfectly explains the evils of capitalism as well. Hopefully one day the world will wake up and realize that socialism, NOT capitalism, is the only system to achieve true democracy. Very great and informative video, thanks for uploading.
@FireIceTalon you'd probably be interested in George Orwell, he was a democratic socialist that opposed both capitalism and Leninism (USSR). In fact he went over in Spain to fight in the Spanish Civil War against the fascists and the communists (USSR backed communists).
Albert Einstein's "Why Socialism" is also a good read.
I'm not sure about Chomsky's assessment of labor militancy and the Arab Spring, Saudi Arabia had a militant labor force in the 50s but it has had the least revolution.
Although the unions were crushed beyond anything so he might mean militant unions that are viable today.
"No Society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."-Adam Smith. If he was alive today he would be appalled by what was being done in his name. I doubt if the neo liberals have even read Adam Smith.
This interviewer is useless. He's just trying to lead Chomsky along his little pre-decided sermon, and totally ignoring when Chomsky's responses don't confirm the neat little narrative he's trying to create.
Thomas Jefferson had a lot of great quotations, sheesh. As an ideologue I like Jefferson quite a bit. The society that trades liberty for security deserves neither. A lot of great comments made about the danger of a central banking system as well. Smart man, understands the plight of the common human being. Even actively took care of and was a part of the life of his illegitimate child by a slave at a time when bigotry and self-interested hate towards black slaves was the norm in America.
Imagine a hidden war, from 'God Stopping A Nuclear War'.
A hidden left brain group mind, hive mind of left brains within mankind, using its verbal abilities, to control money, law, media, and computer systems. Favoring verbal people, like lawyers, like Jews, using money to control its adversity throught money and laws.
Its rival? Right brain group mind, global. Spatial, mechanical, representing labor and working with your hands.
God vs. Satan, a hidden war which a few on Wallstreet know.
@SkyGuySunny Actually, I don't "take wisdom" from glib throw-away quotations that in reality don't really mean anything. Of course we can all agree with that quotation, but it won't actually change anything about our lives. And you obviously don't understand irony: ironically you are "showing fear of thinking for yourself" by suggesting we find "the meaning of life" in a quotation on youtube. Get educated to a higher level and then come back.
But didn't Jefferson spend a lot of time and money building himself a neo-classical palace? It's all politics: find your own way to live your life, rather than posting glib quotations.
@Callaz3 Try taking wisdom where you find it instead of insisting that its source must be a role model. Ironically you're the one showing fear of thinking for yourself by suggesting that it's even slightly relevant that Jefferson was a hypocrite.
@nickburnin8 Forced occupation leaves no one tranquil, except for the ruling class. Also, what does the Nobel prize have to do with anything? No one is talking about abandoning everything and forcing office workers to toil in the fields. The point of the quote, to me, is that creative expression and enjoying your work is more important than the wealth you may accumulate as a result of that work. I'm not suggesting that we all live on communes, just saying that wealth shouldn't be the end goal.
@HardHouseMusic4Me Thomas Jefferson was speaking in favor of an agrarian society as opposed to one where some choose to farm, and others choose to build or bank. Pol Pot was also in favor of a strictly agrarian society. What you take as the point of the quote is out of context.
@nickburnin8 Okay, what is your argument with me? I used a quote out of context? I can understand why you would want to correct that, but I found those words to be inspiring. I found a quote which resonated with me, and I posted it on a youtube video along with a message to join the occupy movement. I'm not trying to preach any dogma or convince people that I'm right. I just want people to engage in conversations about the way things are going.
@HardHouseMusic4Me By taking the quote out of context you completely miss his point. One that hasn't been en vogue since the pre-war South. His favoritism toward agrarianism comes from a time when slavery is legal. New economic realities like the costs of labor forced his ideas into extinction. It's little details like this that make people think America was founded as a democracy, when it was actually a republic. These "Bachmannisms" insult American history.
@nickburnin8 I'm not arguing with you here. I agree that if I wanted to use a quote from the past I should have looked more closely at the context of those words within the period of history that they came from. Perhaps I made a mistake, I'm not infallible. I understand that majority rule in the form of pure democracy would be chaotic, but on the other hand, a republic puts so many barriers between the different echelons of our representatives that the people's voice gets drowned out.
@HardHouseMusic4Me That was the point. By allowing the people to elect representatives but not allowing the people to directly change laws, the government is predictable and can enforce a rule of law. Unfortunately direct democracy makes dumb laws...like California which allowed people to vote on the rights of gays and lesbians.
@nickburnin8 I agree with you, on the other hand, I don't think that the people are savage masses which should be tamed and controlled, which I believe was the opinion of many of our forefathers. I do believe in the rule of law, and I also believe that the responsibility of implementing those laws should not be completely given over to the public, for fear of more absurdities like prop 22, but there has to be a more equitable way of doing things. I don't have answers, but at least I question.
@HardHouseMusic4Me I question as well. The truth is that the republic PROBABLY went off course when we started with political parties, then Jacksonian Democracy, a Civil War, federal income taxes, a military-industrial complex...then the horror of a half-century cold war, followed by political correctness and cable television. The masses need to elect representatives and then go away for 2 years.
@nickburnin8 Well if you suggest that the masses need to go away for two years after elections, what do you think corporate interests will be doing in the mean time? The public doesn't have money bags with which to lobby and bribe. We're witnessing the fall of Rome. Corruption abounds, oppression and manipulation of public opinion are as commonplace as street signs. The corporate media are our modern day gladiatorial festivals, and the slave owners of old are now our C.E.O.s and bankers.
@HardHouseMusic4Me The corporations are the masses as well...ban lobbying...hell ban private citizens from entering the Capitol building. That would keep lobbyists out. The most irritating thing is watching my party campaign for the 2012 congressional elections in February 2010...elect Congress, and don't let ANYONE talk to them or their staff until they've done their job. Unfortunately, we all know that would never happen. The closest we could get is state appointment of senators.
@nickburnin8 Well, it was nice to have a conversation with someone who doesn't sling ad hominem attacks. The only problem is that we will never have philosopher statesmen in office. I fear for the future.
@HardHouseMusic4Me You're welcome...ad hominems are the domain of the angry and inarticulate. We don't need philosophers, especially what people THINK are philosophers these days...philosophy majors...We just need people that aren't afraid to represent their constituents instead of some lobby for a union/corporation/rights group. Overturning political correctness was the first step. In that respect the tea party was a HALF step in the right direction.
@nickburnin8 Believe me, I didn't use philosopher in the context of philosophy majors. I meant people who are devoted to the truth; whether that may be economic truth, social truth, or the truth of those they are elected to represent. As for the tea party, could you clear something up for me? Does that group wish to completely deregulate industry and get rid of social programs? I guess the question comes down to this: Private, or public.
@HardHouseMusic4Me Deregulation is a touchy subject. So the answer doesn't yield to youtube's 500-character limit. It's a yes AND no answer. The tea party is a national movement but democrats have always been better at organizing than republicans, so we have no "dogma" except small government and inalienable rights. Most believe social programs need to go or be restructured, and regulation needs to be significantly simplified.
I guess your answer is dedicated to the private sector. The aversion to regulation comes from the fact that most regulation only stifles small business that can't afford to keep accountants and attorneys on the payroll permanently to find loopholes. The more complicated we make the process to open/operate a business, the more likely those regulations are an advantage for established businesses.
@nickburnin8 And so by extension, those regulations prevent the free market competition system from working. I can sympathize with that. And that Franklin quote can be applied to corporate interests as well. At any rate, I'm going to fall asleep soon. Have a good day sir, perhaps you should friend me on youtube so we can continue these conversations.
@HardHouseMusic4Me When Franklin said it, he aimed it at the wealthy. When Franklin was speaking, only white, male, landowners could vote. They owned their land because they usually conducted business from it (farming, distilling, ranching, textiles, timber, etc.).
@AndroidPolitician Everything is falling apart because workers, and more broadly, people have completely neglected the political process. People think that by voting every now and again that they can actually exercise choice. How could we possibly employ 300,000,000 people when all the factories have moved to South East Asia? We're churning out college graduates who have no place to go, there are plenty of people who would be happy with industrial jobs, yet there is nothing available.
@HardHouseMusic4Me This is why the system needs to be replaced. With Automation 2/3rds of the population will have to stay home because there are no jobs to be had. What do you do? As many have suggested, your raise the overall standard of living of everybody to a point there they are no longer need to pay for the basics. We have to do this otherwise we'll destroy the planet, Capitalism has grown as far as it can go, we can't keep growing it.
@dj4monie Sadly, the powers that be would much rather see starvation and disease run rampant. It's much easier for the elite to let the powerless expendables die instead of providing necessities through automation. I really have no hope for the species. My wish is that a giant asteroid hits the Earth and lets mother nature restart itself. We're a failed race.
Stoked on the interviewer calling out Crimethinc, I am getting sick of anarchism in the Pacific Northwest.
IggyTheReaper 3 days ago
Damn! Adam Smith re-thunk :/
fani5000 5 days ago
Fav'ed and subbed. Thanks for uploading.
EpifanesEuergetes 6 days ago
@MrFmmcosta, In what way is criticising authoritarian and exploitative institutions, imposing my will on others...lol...clueless for you?
slckr80s 4 weeks ago
that hairdo is just stupid
Ichtiostega 1 month ago
The interviewer is annoying.
raizr 1 month ago
Chomsky speaks in English intro is Nordic or some german language? I was shocked to hear him say that Ron Paul's contitutionalist direction will lead the USA to a "Corporate Tyrany" of the worst sort by giving them all the FREEDOM they need to take over completely. I only watche dpart of this video and will comment later when I review the entire video. How far down the rabbit hole does chomsky go???? Very disturbing comment also on the state of the environment. Why is this not mainstream news???
newsworthyable 1 month ago
Comment removed
ejl610 1 month ago
I actually think it was wrong to do the introduction in Norwegian while Noam Chomsky was present. Alright, perhaps he knew what was said in advance, but even in that case, you knew you would put up the interview on YouTube. I happen to understand Norwegian, but not all libertarians understand Norwegian. It is just too bad they can't, because Norwegian is such a beautiful language.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO The introduction was done before/as Chomsky entered the room. He did know what would be said in advance. In our own video we have subtitled everything spoken in norwegian.
adamienw 1 month ago
@RSFO our upload: watch?v=kVNq8knHGew
adamienw 1 month ago
@adamienw I see no subtitles in that video. But I understand what was said anyway. =)
RSFO 1 month ago
He is spot on about India. But it is really strange, that NC always talked about US being a war propaganda nation through out and was always against US foreign policy in the 20th Century and yet he talks about the only candidate ( Dr Paul) in US who dares to speak the truth on every single issue, and who is a peace candidate being right on a mere few issues??whereas Paul has been correct in his economic predictions and yet his policies will lead to corporate tyranny!! We'll wait and see.
barun432 1 month ago
@barun432 We will have to wait and see. I think Chomsky's point is this: Right now we have corporate tyranny with government backing. With Paul we will have corporate tyranny without government backing. But without the backing, ironically, we will be thrown to the wolves sort of speak. That's the point as I understand it. However I personally don't think Paul should be dismissed so easily. I myself remain with a healthy skepticism of Paul as I have of any political leader.
ahhhhjjjj 1 month ago
@ahhhhjjjj I have some wry hope that Ron Paul actually wins so the economy can get smashed. After all, it is the corporatists' (or state capitalists') economy. Let it smash.
RSFO 1 month ago
@RSFO That's a good way to look at it. If the state capitalist economy is smashed we (the people) would be a in a good position to take responsible revolutionary action. I think Ron Paul's plan would end up leaving the corporate heirarchy in full view and in the line of sight for the public. From there some kind of libertarian socialist agenda could potentialy (big 'if' there though) be carried out through popular movements. His social policies alone would be good enough to set the stage.
ahhhhjjjj 1 month ago
@barun432 He said Ron Paul was all right -- I think his bone to pick with Paul is that his deregulation beliefs would only empower corrupt corporations and lead to tyranny through the private sector as opposed to governmental tyranny. In that sense, he's saying Paul's liberty agenda would lead to the lack thereof. THAT SAID, Paul is WAY WAY better than all other GOP, if not all politicians.
SalvadorBrumov 1 month ago 3
@SalvadorBrumov You are right, Ron Paul has some screwy ideas like on climate change, deregulation but He is also against corporate giveaways. Number 1 thing He is not a War Monger.
Gary75511 1 month ago
40:09 Noam Chomsky says that Ron Paul Advocates Pure Corporate Tyranny.
TheDAT573 1 month ago
Tusen takk!!
spekonaspek 1 month ago
lol such a cute interview
MrLovethelife 1 month ago
Comment removed
Incognitoification1 1 month ago
Comment removed
Incognitoification1 1 month ago
Comment removed
khoroshoorange 1 month ago
That freak asks some good questions. It really helps make the interview great.
DominicanLou 2 months ago
Do I see a bird's nest on his head?
solidarity2205 2 months ago
Worst interviewer ever!!!
MamonMuch 2 months ago
@MamonMuch it was also very poorly shot/edited, cause the camera should be focused on Noam, not on that interviewer... also, the interviewers physical appearance is somewhat distracting.
havabighed 2 months ago
The pandering to "Forefathers" is tiresome yet perfect state-rhetoric. Jefferson was a slave-owning rapist who advocated state-controls (by virtue, because of his political and economic Elite status, as well as the formation of constitutional protocol at the Const. Convention) and Washington PERSONALLY led the assaults against the Iroquois, only instrumental in the slaying of 15 million Native Americans to settle your stupid little country. Even "Joe Six-pack" can't stomach fucking history... :)
Bodhidharma1986 2 months ago 2
@maxshibui (cont'd) but STATE-capitalist economies function by churning out goods and imposing services regardless of the democratic participation of those that have contributed their labour power to such production. This is the supply and demand of the priviledged power structure that exploits poor labour to enrich elitist private investors. The so called "free-market" is bullshit, cos it has ALWAYS relied on state (public) welfare in order to steal wealth from the people.
slckr80s 2 months ago
@slckr80s You say "STATE-capitalist economies", that btw is not capitalism because there is no free market, and only an illusion of competition, doesn't work because of state intervention? isn't that state intervention the problem on capitalism? so... the problem is state intervention and not capitalism... why anarchy? No third party to at least resolve disputes? Too much faith on human kind... that's just wishful thinking IMO.
MrFmmcosta 1 month ago
@MrFmmcosta give one example of capitalism functioning without the pampered protection and funding of the state/public sector? why anarchy? cos authority is almost always illegitimate.
slckr80s 1 month ago
@slckr80s That's not capitalism, that's crony capitalism. I'm not anti-government, I'm anti government monopolies and initiation of force. freedom to all. If people want to be taken care by the government let them be, just don't impose it on me.
MrFmmcosta 1 month ago
@MrFmmcosta lol @not being able to give one example that i asked for. ALL capitalism is crony capitalism, you sound like Ed Miliband. I AM anti-government. I am even more so anti-corporatism, cos at least government has even minimal democratic practices, as shit as they are. Corporations have zero democratic practices. They fully make us submit our freedoms to their profit motive. Capitalism is private tyranny. ''Governments are the shadow cast by business over society'' - Dewey
slckr80s 1 month ago 2
@slckr80s So... you are for imposing your will on others... lol good for you
MrFmmcosta 1 month ago
@MrFmmcosta Perhaps our current societies are not true capitalism. Even Noam Chomsky has said that a few times (you can even find it on youtube), but if you want a society in which there is minimal "imposing will on others", then I think you will see that the classical libertarian socialist direction was in that direction historically. You can't get a perfect society, and hence you can't get perfect liberty. There is no libertarianism without egalitarianism.
RSFO 2 weeks ago
@RSFO As long as it isn't a debt based system and the government doesn't hold monopolies, fine by me.
MrFmmcosta 2 weeks ago
@MrFmmcosta I agree 100%. And it shoudn't be. It should do away with the monetary price system (P$) all together. How could there then be a debt system? The great majority of Ron Paul supporters should be against the P$ altogether (and even the tea party movement and 99% of anyone else, if they ever understould anything at all). Not because Ron Paul is entirely against it, but because there is no alternative to Ron Paul.
RSFO 2 weeks ago
@RSFO "It" should really be the difficult move, where "left" and "right" libertarians go together an figure out how to get the tea party movement and others organized against the corporate 1%.
RSFO 2 weeks ago
@RSFO What do you mean by monetary price system?
MrFmmcosta 2 weeks ago
@MrFmmcosta It is another redundant term. It is simply the system which is money, you know. Debt system is or should simply be another word for it.
RSFO 2 weeks ago
@RSFO Ok, I thought you were saying that money shouldn't exist. Yeah, central planning should end, including price planning.
MrFmmcosta 2 weeks ago
@MrFmmcosta Well, I think that money shouldn't exist, so it was in fact what I meant. But I think that money would not exist if a debt system does not exist, becaus I think it is virtually the same thing. The problem with money in my view is that it is not measurable by any physical or "real" measurement like say Jules (energy).
RSFO 2 weeks ago
@RSFO I guess it depends of what backs the money (supposing we would use paper money). If it was backed by gold or whatever then it would have intrinsic and measurable value. I like the concept of Free Banking.
MrFmmcosta 2 weeks ago
@maxshibui, I love the way you say "unfortunately articulate" as if he is that way by accident. Talk about back handed compliment. I guess college kids (among others) admire him cos of his radical thought and common sense. These used to be admirable qualities not so long ago. Your knowledge of capitalism seems quite ignorant, even simplistic tbh. Yes workers should control their own productive lives and so should consumers... damn word count limitation...
slckr80s 2 months ago
@hihellohowareyou1000 you only say that because youve been brought up in a society where you must look a certain way, conform to a certain style to belong. Its jammed in your face through advertising from the moment your mumma spat you out. Enforced throughout schooling life. I would bet money that one BIG reason he chooses to look this way is to challenge people with the very ideas your expressing here. He is him, he is an individual and is expressing himself in his way.
tommytoan 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Well this is just one of the all too many cases on our books of Americanism. The only way that we can fight this terrible debilitating social disease, is by informing the general public of its consequences, by showing young people that it's just not worth it. So, so please give generously to this address: The League for fighting the United States of America, 55 Lincoln House, Basil Street, London, SW3.
FireEyedMaidOfWar 2 months ago
Talk about naive arguments...
tigleysify 2 months ago
In my opinion the interviewer talks way too much.
I've read a comment on another of Chomsky's videos exactly captured how I feel about this:
"When talking to Chomsky you just ask a question as quickly as possible and then shut the fuck up and let him educate you."
DesTRo539h 3 months ago
@hihellohowareyou1000 ahahahaha...that's what Noam was thinking.
tstruss912 3 months ago
@hihellohowareyou1000
Is your abuse of the young man really necessary? You should be grateful that his group has invited Chomsky for us to watch on Youtube. Show some gratitude and remove that comment please.
MenOfLetters 3 months ago
This might be the best video of Chomsky discussing LS on youtube. I've watched most of them, and the references he gives here, the discussions of Parecon and those other worker run organizations & movements both current and historical... they don't exist in any other video. Thanks a lot for uploading!
AndrewHansenDotName 3 months ago 20
@AndrewHansenDotName where else can i find any information on LS and how it would work, thanks
MrLovethelife 1 month ago
Comment removed
nonners21 3 months ago
awsome haircut!
efsun06 3 months ago
Great interview! Dude has epic hair x:D
Freedomremoved 3 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
14:55 right there he says they are successful initially then they are bought, isn't that evidence that the system -all be it nice- is not sustainable, what insensitive would the workers have to continue working if they simply can sell their shares and go on holidays?
Ijustasking 3 months ago
Comment removed
Ijustasking 3 months ago
The close up shot of Chomsky @32 mins, as he talks about Bakunin, makes him look like a genius.
slckr80s 3 months ago
@slckr80s With emphasis on ''look like''. He's just a very confused pseudo-historian who is unfortunately articulate and popular with naive college kids. Workers should control production. Okay. So what about consumption? The whole point of production is consumption. But who consumes? Mostly workers. Workers determine what is produced when they buy stuff. That's how free market capitalism works, if not sabotaged by government intervention. Chomsky is a capitalist at heart, without knowing it.
maxshibui 2 months ago
@maxshibui err workers should control production so goods can be evenly distributed and consumed. This makes sense because the workers are the majority. When the bosses control the production, the workers are exploited in the pursuit of profits. What the worker can consume becomes narrowed and controlled by the bosses. Exploitation and any form of capitalism goes hand in hand, u cant have one without the other. There is no such thing as perfect competition.
tommytoan 2 months ago
@tommytoan Workers are human, yet their control of production will automatically result in even distribution? What if some think they should get more than others? Shouldn't there be an objective 3rd party observer, like a boss, to settle such conflicts? Profits are needed to re-invest into the business. Machines wear out or become obsolete and need to be fixed/replaced. The boss isn't exploiting the workers just b/c he wants to maintain the machines and thus his worker's productivity
maxshibui 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@maxshibui "What if some think they should get more than others? Shouldn't there be an objective 3rd party observer, like a boss, to settle such conflicts? Profits are needed to re-invest into the business. Machines wear out or become obsolete and need to be fixed/replaced."
No, you have an agreed process to settle disputes, one that can involve things like participation and voting. This is like saying tyranny is better than democracy because the trains run on time
arfived4 1 month ago
@ 15:00 Chomsky says there are thousands of worker-owned firms in the U.S. Does anyone have a source for this? I assume he doesn't mean self-employed individuals that own a "firm."
Americaleb 3 months ago
First off just a great interview all together with Chomsky spot on as usual. But also you can tell that the interviewer is a pretty well educated young man as well and is extremely excited to be talking to Noam. Great job on all sides.
dancetotheriddim 3 months ago 8
39:00- 41:30, KEY
Graffitis0ul 4 months ago
Oh no... poor Noam is already asleep at 2:13
DeePhlat 4 months ago
Brilliant video. Completely destroys the myth that USSR, China, etc were communist/socialist and how people do not know or understand what communisms true principles are. He perfectly explains the evils of capitalism as well. Hopefully one day the world will wake up and realize that socialism, NOT capitalism, is the only system to achieve true democracy. Very great and informative video, thanks for uploading.
FireIceTalon 4 months ago 24
@FireIceTalon you'd probably be interested in George Orwell, he was a democratic socialist that opposed both capitalism and Leninism (USSR). In fact he went over in Spain to fight in the Spanish Civil War against the fascists and the communists (USSR backed communists).
Albert Einstein's "Why Socialism" is also a good read.
andyx1205 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@41:20 the awkward moment when nobody laughs along with you..
Paul1979RUFC 4 months ago in playlist Liked
Comment removed
Paul1979RUFC 4 months ago in playlist Liked
Thank you Youtube.
ornabels 4 months ago
the moderator is kind of cooky..
Arlosrep 4 months ago
I'm not sure about Chomsky's assessment of labor militancy and the Arab Spring, Saudi Arabia had a militant labor force in the 50s but it has had the least revolution.
Although the unions were crushed beyond anything so he might mean militant unions that are viable today.
AndroidPolitician 4 months ago
I LOVE NOAM CHOMSKY
papescape 4 months ago 3
"No Society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."-Adam Smith. If he was alive today he would be appalled by what was being done in his name. I doubt if the neo liberals have even read Adam Smith.
MrMadPsyntist 4 months ago 2
This interviewer is useless. He's just trying to lead Chomsky along his little pre-decided sermon, and totally ignoring when Chomsky's responses don't confirm the neat little narrative he's trying to create.
Rhuddlan 4 months ago
Thomas Jefferson had a lot of great quotations, sheesh. As an ideologue I like Jefferson quite a bit. The society that trades liberty for security deserves neither. A lot of great comments made about the danger of a central banking system as well. Smart man, understands the plight of the common human being. Even actively took care of and was a part of the life of his illegitimate child by a slave at a time when bigotry and self-interested hate towards black slaves was the norm in America.
wspsaves 4 months ago
Imagine a hidden war, from 'God Stopping A Nuclear War'.
A hidden left brain group mind, hive mind of left brains within mankind, using its verbal abilities, to control money, law, media, and computer systems. Favoring verbal people, like lawyers, like Jews, using money to control its adversity throught money and laws.
Its rival? Right brain group mind, global. Spatial, mechanical, representing labor and working with your hands.
God vs. Satan, a hidden war which a few on Wallstreet know.
mikeymensa 4 months ago
This was so worth the hour and 18 minutes. He definitely piqued my interest for further reading on libertarian socialism, Spanish Revolution, etc.
missionaryhollywood 4 months ago 5
@missionaryhollywood Right and this involved the Moors though he didn't talk much about it.
dj4monie 4 months ago
Social wealth is aided by considerable oil wealth from off shore oil in Norway
iUbookz 4 months ago
SPEAK ENGLISH this is AMERICA... fuck!
csadens777 4 months ago
@csadens777 Are you joking?
wspsaves 4 months ago
@csadens777 Huh? She can't speak Norwegian? This happen in Oslo, I believe. I've been there, you should try it sometime.
dj4monie 4 months ago
@csadens777 This interview took place in Oslo, Norway. For subtitles watch our upload:
/watch?v=kVNq8knHGew
adamienw 1 month ago
@SkyGuySunny Actually, I don't "take wisdom" from glib throw-away quotations that in reality don't really mean anything. Of course we can all agree with that quotation, but it won't actually change anything about our lives. And you obviously don't understand irony: ironically you are "showing fear of thinking for yourself" by suggesting we find "the meaning of life" in a quotation on youtube. Get educated to a higher level and then come back.
Callaz3 4 months ago
Nice up. Awesome.
soliptic32 4 months ago
But didn't Jefferson spend a lot of time and money building himself a neo-classical palace? It's all politics: find your own way to live your life, rather than posting glib quotations.
Callaz3 4 months ago
@Callaz3 Try taking wisdom where you find it instead of insisting that its source must be a role model. Ironically you're the one showing fear of thinking for yourself by suggesting that it's even slightly relevant that Jefferson was a hypocrite.
SkyGuySunny 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me
Fuck yeah.
elspoono 4 months ago
Comment removed
elspoono 4 months ago
"It is neither wealth nor splendor; but tranquility and occupation which give you happiness." ~Thomas Jefferson~
Join The Movement
Occupy Everything
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago 29
@HardHouseMusic4Me if tranquility and occupation gave you happiness, Pol Pot would have a Nobel prize...
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 Forced occupation leaves no one tranquil, except for the ruling class. Also, what does the Nobel prize have to do with anything? No one is talking about abandoning everything and forcing office workers to toil in the fields. The point of the quote, to me, is that creative expression and enjoying your work is more important than the wealth you may accumulate as a result of that work. I'm not suggesting that we all live on communes, just saying that wealth shouldn't be the end goal.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me Thomas Jefferson was speaking in favor of an agrarian society as opposed to one where some choose to farm, and others choose to build or bank. Pol Pot was also in favor of a strictly agrarian society. What you take as the point of the quote is out of context.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 Okay, what is your argument with me? I used a quote out of context? I can understand why you would want to correct that, but I found those words to be inspiring. I found a quote which resonated with me, and I posted it on a youtube video along with a message to join the occupy movement. I'm not trying to preach any dogma or convince people that I'm right. I just want people to engage in conversations about the way things are going.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me By taking the quote out of context you completely miss his point. One that hasn't been en vogue since the pre-war South. His favoritism toward agrarianism comes from a time when slavery is legal. New economic realities like the costs of labor forced his ideas into extinction. It's little details like this that make people think America was founded as a democracy, when it was actually a republic. These "Bachmannisms" insult American history.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 I'm not arguing with you here. I agree that if I wanted to use a quote from the past I should have looked more closely at the context of those words within the period of history that they came from. Perhaps I made a mistake, I'm not infallible. I understand that majority rule in the form of pure democracy would be chaotic, but on the other hand, a republic puts so many barriers between the different echelons of our representatives that the people's voice gets drowned out.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me That was the point. By allowing the people to elect representatives but not allowing the people to directly change laws, the government is predictable and can enforce a rule of law. Unfortunately direct democracy makes dumb laws...like California which allowed people to vote on the rights of gays and lesbians.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 I agree with you, on the other hand, I don't think that the people are savage masses which should be tamed and controlled, which I believe was the opinion of many of our forefathers. I do believe in the rule of law, and I also believe that the responsibility of implementing those laws should not be completely given over to the public, for fear of more absurdities like prop 22, but there has to be a more equitable way of doing things. I don't have answers, but at least I question.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me I question as well. The truth is that the republic PROBABLY went off course when we started with political parties, then Jacksonian Democracy, a Civil War, federal income taxes, a military-industrial complex...then the horror of a half-century cold war, followed by political correctness and cable television. The masses need to elect representatives and then go away for 2 years.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 Well if you suggest that the masses need to go away for two years after elections, what do you think corporate interests will be doing in the mean time? The public doesn't have money bags with which to lobby and bribe. We're witnessing the fall of Rome. Corruption abounds, oppression and manipulation of public opinion are as commonplace as street signs. The corporate media are our modern day gladiatorial festivals, and the slave owners of old are now our C.E.O.s and bankers.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me The corporations are the masses as well...ban lobbying...hell ban private citizens from entering the Capitol building. That would keep lobbyists out. The most irritating thing is watching my party campaign for the 2012 congressional elections in February 2010...elect Congress, and don't let ANYONE talk to them or their staff until they've done their job. Unfortunately, we all know that would never happen. The closest we could get is state appointment of senators.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 Well, it was nice to have a conversation with someone who doesn't sling ad hominem attacks. The only problem is that we will never have philosopher statesmen in office. I fear for the future.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me You're welcome...ad hominems are the domain of the angry and inarticulate. We don't need philosophers, especially what people THINK are philosophers these days...philosophy majors...We just need people that aren't afraid to represent their constituents instead of some lobby for a union/corporation/rights group. Overturning political correctness was the first step. In that respect the tea party was a HALF step in the right direction.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 Believe me, I didn't use philosopher in the context of philosophy majors. I meant people who are devoted to the truth; whether that may be economic truth, social truth, or the truth of those they are elected to represent. As for the tea party, could you clear something up for me? Does that group wish to completely deregulate industry and get rid of social programs? I guess the question comes down to this: Private, or public.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me Deregulation is a touchy subject. So the answer doesn't yield to youtube's 500-character limit. It's a yes AND no answer. The tea party is a national movement but democrats have always been better at organizing than republicans, so we have no "dogma" except small government and inalienable rights. Most believe social programs need to go or be restructured, and regulation needs to be significantly simplified.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
I guess your answer is dedicated to the private sector. The aversion to regulation comes from the fact that most regulation only stifles small business that can't afford to keep accountants and attorneys on the payroll permanently to find loopholes. The more complicated we make the process to open/operate a business, the more likely those regulations are an advantage for established businesses.
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@nickburnin8 And so by extension, those regulations prevent the free market competition system from working. I can sympathize with that. And that Franklin quote can be applied to corporate interests as well. At any rate, I'm going to fall asleep soon. Have a good day sir, perhaps you should friend me on youtube so we can continue these conversations.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me When Franklin said it, he aimed it at the wealthy. When Franklin was speaking, only white, male, landowners could vote. They owned their land because they usually conducted business from it (farming, distilling, ranching, textiles, timber, etc.).
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me and the dislike of social programs comes from this gem from Benjamin Franklin:
“When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
nickburnin8 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me
That's almost a pun because Jefferson meant "occupation" as work and there's massive unemployment right now.
AndroidPolitician 4 months ago
@AndroidPolitician Everything is falling apart because workers, and more broadly, people have completely neglected the political process. People think that by voting every now and again that they can actually exercise choice. How could we possibly employ 300,000,000 people when all the factories have moved to South East Asia? We're churning out college graduates who have no place to go, there are plenty of people who would be happy with industrial jobs, yet there is nothing available.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me
True dat, although I wouldn't blame the workers too much since their not the ones who outsourced the jobs.
AndroidPolitician 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me This is why the system needs to be replaced. With Automation 2/3rds of the population will have to stay home because there are no jobs to be had. What do you do? As many have suggested, your raise the overall standard of living of everybody to a point there they are no longer need to pay for the basics. We have to do this otherwise we'll destroy the planet, Capitalism has grown as far as it can go, we can't keep growing it.
dj4monie 4 months ago
@dj4monie Sadly, the powers that be would much rather see starvation and disease run rampant. It's much easier for the elite to let the powerless expendables die instead of providing necessities through automation. I really have no hope for the species. My wish is that a giant asteroid hits the Earth and lets mother nature restart itself. We're a failed race.
HardHouseMusic4Me 4 months ago
@HardHouseMusic4Me I don't think that's what he meant by occupation, but go ahead and occupy.
htiberian 3 months ago
@htiberian Yeah, I know the historical context of the quote, but it sounded nice and I wanted a sound bite that would fit the overall message.
HardHouseMusic4Me 3 months ago
1:40 - Skip Introduction
cocconutz 4 months ago 42
@cocconutz Thanks!
erikbmyname 4 months ago
@cocconutz skip that dude's hair
grosdootie 4 months ago