Extract interview with Noam Chomsky on their perspective of anarchy in the society. BR: Anarchism is often criticized for being unrealistic and incapable of handling complex practical situations. One of the most complex situations is now the Middle East.
Chomsky: I think that's an example Perfect use of anarchism. What's in the Middle East is an almost classic example of the sheer absurdity of a people that is organized into state systems. That is, what do they gain the Jews of Israel, as human beings, to be identified as the group leader in a Jewish state? The only effect of such action is destructive to themselves. Consider the emergence of theocratic control all Israel. That has, at all, nothing to do with the roots of Judaism, never existed. It reflects the establishment of a state system. And for the people of the country is terribly oppressive. Many of them are not religious do not want any such nonsense. But they are attached to it, from the time they insist that there is a state system which differs in some way to everyone else. Well, in what way different? By a sort of ideology that has to be created. Obviously going to be theocratic. And that means all kinds of interference in daily life of each, for example, that they will not let marry when he pleases. So, apart from clogging the obvious common interests between, say, Palestinian and Jewish workers, or intellectuals, or anyone, besides leading to endless wars and probably end with the destruction of both sides, apart from all that precisely in their daily lives is oppressive and destructive, both for those who earn to those who lose. That is, there could be no more dramatic example of the absurdity of people who are organized into state systems, for purposes of mutual destruction. And until that is overcome, there is no hope.
BR: Do you have a project for a liberal solution?
Chomsky: Yes, I think there the only solution must be to develop a common interest to Jewish and Arab that transcended the national conflict. And such common interest exists; example, building a socialist liberal. If you want to identify nationally in such a society, fine. I do not see much interest in it, but if that's what people want, well, that's their choice. Which itwould no reason why you can not have national institutions, including the existence side by side, and that people choose to identify one way or another, if that is what the people want. And it would leave an option for people who did not want, do not like to be part of one or other of those systems. And this is perfectly feasible, ie could be done. I think really the only hope for the peoples of this region is to be able to build that kind of commitment Socialist group. There was a stream early Zionist movement insisted on it. And they were right, everything. They were right in opposing the Jewish state, and are right now.
BR: Would you say also that the global energy crisis points out the absurdity of a national control of international resources?
Chomsky: Here I think it should be very careful, because there is a line of thought that is emerging in the United States says: Why would that be for themselves, these sheiks crazy, all these resources?
BR: The next step would be to invade.
Chomsky: Yes, But do not ask: why should we have to General Motors for us all, or why we should have beans for us?
BR: The Globe has just published an editorial saying that, if not solve the problem soon, we will be at the mercy of a troop of sheikhs dresses sheet, which in view of his recent comments on racism seems ...
Chomsky: I'm sure we'll hear very soon many phrases like that.
BR: Do you think we contemplate also a corresponding growth of anti-Semitism?
Chomsky: Yes, if you look at the choices we had in Lexington. The local newspaper, one or two weeks ago, the first anti-Semitic letters I read.
BR: With regard to the campaign?
Chomsky: Actually, what happened is they have a ceremony at the Lexington Green, at Christmas, with the figure of Christ, etc. And many people objected, arguing the separation of church and state, etc. And every Christmas there fighting for that reason. So this year, the letters in defense of the ceremony had a clearly anti-Semitic, at least a couple of them, they said, well, we are criticized for making our ceremony there, but we are going to freeze to death because of you , And so forth.
But I think both can go side by side, ie anti-Semitism can grow along with racist anti-Arab sentiments. And I think that is precisely what will happen this winter.
BR: Both sides are marked for slaughter.
Chomsky: That is exactly what appears is happening. That is, they themselves have worked to create a system where they are instruments of the superpowers. And all based on a commitment to a state system. This is the whole problem there. No could represent a better argument for anarchism.
BR: What hope do you see for the future? That is, many people in the movement is depressed in recent times and has failed to act, even seems to back away. We attempted to address the situation somehow. What do you see for the future?
Chomsky: The future seems more hopeful than I thought a couple of years. That is, the movement of the last ten years had much reaction. Reacted to atrocities determined. He was never structural, never really tried to society, or knew why it should change. At least not in large part, for there were those who did. But I think that now is the time to try to rebuild really popular structures that are not based on fringe groups, marginal, such as students, but truly living communities emerge that will continue, and have a huge need overcome repressive structures.
See the full interview:
0 comments:
Post a Comment