Chomsky versus liberty

My father once wrote Noam Chomsky to alert him to my anarchist website. I told my dad, “Nope: wrong kind of anarchist.”

Later someone wrote me about my BlackCrayon : people section to ask why I hadn’t included Noam Chomsky among the diverse shortlist of important anarchists.

I never replied, but the answer is this: because Noam Chomsky is not an anarchist!

To quote Joe Peacott, of the Boston Anarchist Drinking Brigade,

“Government is force and should be done away with. People can act for themselves and take care of themselves. That is the anarchist attitude to the state, and Chomsky rejects it … Chomsky seems not to be able to envision any means of offsetting the power of private tyrannies other than increasing the power of public tyrannies.”

Chomsky has no grasp of economics and seems to be hostile to learning any. He talks about tax cuts as subsidies and simultaneously acknowledges that the force of political capitalism comes from the State while calling on the power of the State to curb the coercive power of political capitalism. Without going into all the reasons he’s wrong, it’s simply a matter of rudimentary logic to see that this makes him a statist, not an anarchist.

Now I learn from the libertarian critter that Chomsky has come out in favor of a more egalitarian military based on reinstating the draft!

THE DRAFT, people. Come on!

Chomsky is for freedom in precisely the same way that Alan Greenspan is for the gold standard. But if history is any guide, Chomsky will be remembered as a great champion of liberty. Him and George Dubya Bush.

I’ll close with a quote from the critter’s comment section:

born to run said…

This shows what I consider Chomsky’s (and many other socialist thinkers) biggest fault: He fails to respect individual rights. Although Chomsky, and the left in general, offer many good views (being anti-war, opposing the “morality police”) their ultimate flaw is failing to recognize that freedom can only occur when individuals are free.

8:54 PM