Chomsky and Herman attempt to downplay the significance of child labor by claiming that "vocational training" for twelve-year-old children is "not generally regarded as an atrocity in a poor peasant society." The argument is a waste of ink. No amount of scholarly doublespeak can conceal the fact that child slavery is not "vocational training."
At this point, faced with Professor Chomsky's repeated and apparently wilful failure to grasp the simple points I was making or answer the simple questions I was asking, I almost lost the will to live.
"And as a huge fan of Noam Chomsky, I almost did too."
Without having read into it at all (sorry I'm lazy) there are SOME limited situations where child work isn't the end of the world. Luna Oi goes over this when talking about her experience in Vietnam, where she helped her family on their farm, much like almost all children in her village. She stresses that she NEVER missed school for farming, her mother would never have allowed it.
I'm not making a contrarian claim to defend Chomsky whatsoever - from my limited knowledge of the Khmer Rouge, Luna's situation in Vietnam is a completely different story. My point is more that sometimes, children helping out with non-alienating labor, such as farming, can be a good thing that teaches them life skills. It's touchy though, and kind of a risky path to take - something I think would only be possible in a society that has embraced solidarity like Vietnam (NOT the US.)
If you were too lazy to read, be aware that the Khmer Rouge implemented policies deliberately designed to break the allegiance of children to their parents, siblings, other relatives. Chomsky and Herman defended, deflected, and did their best to handwave this away.
Yeah I shamefully read a bit after I posted the comment. Horrible stuff. Also the use of child soldiers is one of the most disgusting thing anyone could ever do.
https://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm
Chomsky and Herman attempt to downplay the significance of child labor by claiming that "vocational training" for twelve-year-old children is "not generally regarded as an atrocity in a poor peasant society." The argument is a waste of ink. No amount of scholarly doublespeak can conceal the fact that child slavery is not "vocational training."
"And as a huge fan of Noam Chomsky, I almost did too."
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/noam-chomsky-george-monbiot_b_1544407
Without having read into it at all (sorry I'm lazy) there are SOME limited situations where child work isn't the end of the world. Luna Oi goes over this when talking about her experience in Vietnam, where she helped her family on their farm, much like almost all children in her village. She stresses that she NEVER missed school for farming, her mother would never have allowed it.
I'm not making a contrarian claim to defend Chomsky whatsoever - from my limited knowledge of the Khmer Rouge, Luna's situation in Vietnam is a completely different story. My point is more that sometimes, children helping out with non-alienating labor, such as farming, can be a good thing that teaches them life skills. It's touchy though, and kind of a risky path to take - something I think would only be possible in a society that has embraced solidarity like Vietnam (NOT the US.)
If you were too lazy to read, be aware that the Khmer Rouge implemented policies deliberately designed to break the allegiance of children to their parents, siblings, other relatives. Chomsky and Herman defended, deflected, and did their best to handwave this away.
Yeah I shamefully read a bit after I posted the comment. Horrible stuff. Also the use of child soldiers is one of the most disgusting thing anyone could ever do.