I've had disagreements with anarchists but no serious anarchist would say the shit he did. Chomsky doesn't even think revolution is possible.
What the fuck has Chomsky's style of socialism got us in the last 40 years? Everything he's done and the "socialists" that worked like him has delivered us to 4, possibly 8, years of Trump and shitty Obama and shitty Biden. Fuck off Chomsky, your input isn't needed.
" Chomsky doesn’t even think revolution is possible." I mean he points positively to the Anarchist revolution in 1930s Spain as an example of a viable anarcho syndicalist society. If you can't even get people to vote for Bernie in sufficient numbers, how do you think the "Revolutionary" left is going to win an armed proletarian insurrection lol?
He pointed to the one that infamously lost as a viable society? And why is his input or analysis valuable?
Yeah the situation isn't ripe for immediate insurrection but doing the vote blue no matter who thing has not worked at all and it's precisely people like Chomsky that has led the left into this no-win scenario between Trump and Biden when the enemy has always been and remains the liberal bourgeois democratic system. Bernie was the last shot and we were defeated on that liberal bourgeois electoralist terrain - no surprise because voting and campaigning for Bernie didn't require mass class consciousness nor did it require militancy nor internal discipline and so when it was faced with an organized opposition it fell as all siloed off individual leftist projects are wont to do.
Chomsky has never argued that elections are the end-all-be-all of politics. He rightly calls them circus events that come around every 4 years and considers extra-electoral politics as infinitely more important. You seem to accuse him of reducing politics to electoralism, which he doesn't do.
If voting has no effect on politics, as you claim bc it doesn't fundamentally alter bourgeois "democracy," then what does it matter if leftists (like Chomsky) advocate for people to vote or not if it supposedly doesn't matter, in the end?
"voting and campaigning for Bernie didn’t require mass class consciousness nor did it require militancy nor internal discipline " WDYM? Salvador Allende's Popular Front won precisely bc of mass class consciousness and political militancy.
Yeah he says that bc he rightly recognizes that the rules of the game under Trump are worse for the left than under his opponent. I was responding to TemporalMembrane's argument that voting doesn't matter because it doesn't challenge the bourgeois order. If this is the case then why give a shit one way or the other about Chomsky advocating to vote for the lesser evil given that he clearly supports extra-electoral politics that everyone on the left agrees we ought to pursue. Incidentally, Engels adopted a position quite similar to Chomsky's:
"[The proletariat] cannot require that the bourgeoisie should cease to be a bourgeoisie, but it certainly can require that it practices its own principles consistently. But the proletariat will thereby also acquire all the weapons it needs for its ultimate victory. With freedom of the press and the right of assembly and association it will win universal suffrage, and with universal, direct suffrage, in conjunction with the above tools of agitation, it will win everything else.
It is therefore in the interests of the workers to support the bourgeoisie in its struggle against all reactionary elements, as long as it remains true to itself. Every gain which the bourgeoisie extracts from reaction, eventually benefits the working class, if that condition is fulfilled. And the German workers were quite correct in their instinctive appreciation of this. Everywhere, in every German state, they have quite rightly voted for the most radical candidates who had any prospect of getting in."
si, pero en cierto punto esta dirigiendo a los "activistas" a solo hacerle el mandando al DNC, es ridiculo no crees?
esta claro que si la burguesia logra mantener el capitalismo aqui, y el golpe trumpista es derrotado, no sera a través de acumular otras decena de millón de votos para el candidato burgues mas tradicional.. entonces apoyar a la burguesia no implica adoptar su visión politica en este caso, porque claramente es uno erronea, plagada de excepcionalismo (tipicamente gringo) y incapaz de comprender las condiciones materiales cambiantes del capitalismo en crisis como lo que son, creyendo por su septima decada consecutiva que esta es la buena y cayendo vez tras vez tras vez
"está claro que si la burguesía logra mantener el capitalismo aquí, y el golpe trumpista es derrotado, no será acumulando otros diez millones de votos para el candidato burgués más tradicional…"
No estoy de acuerdo. El éxito de un golpe trumpista, lo cual sería difícil de llevar a cabo, no es una conclusión inevitable. Por lo tanto, no sería una pérdida de tiempo votar por el candidato burgués viable de oposición en los "swing states."
Puede ser que no haya entendido tu argumento, pero Chomsky no está diciendo que la izquierda debería castrarse, convirtiéndose en lacayos del DNC. Engels argumentó, como he citado anteriormente, que los trabajadores deben apoyar a la burguesía contra sus elementos más reaccionarios mientras se aseguran de luchar por sus propios intereses ("remain true to itself"). Qué hay de malo en este argumento?
Chomsky is a liberal, no two ways about it.
I've had disagreements with anarchists but no serious anarchist would say the shit he did. Chomsky doesn't even think revolution is possible.
What the fuck has Chomsky's style of socialism got us in the last 40 years? Everything he's done and the "socialists" that worked like him has delivered us to 4, possibly 8, years of Trump and shitty Obama and shitty Biden. Fuck off Chomsky, your input isn't needed.
He pointed to the one that infamously lost as a viable society? And why is his input or analysis valuable?
Yeah the situation isn't ripe for immediate insurrection but doing the vote blue no matter who thing has not worked at all and it's precisely people like Chomsky that has led the left into this no-win scenario between Trump and Biden when the enemy has always been and remains the liberal bourgeois democratic system. Bernie was the last shot and we were defeated on that liberal bourgeois electoralist terrain - no surprise because voting and campaigning for Bernie didn't require mass class consciousness nor did it require militancy nor internal discipline and so when it was faced with an organized opposition it fell as all siloed off individual leftist projects are wont to do.
Chomsky has never argued that elections are the end-all-be-all of politics. He rightly calls them circus events that come around every 4 years and considers extra-electoral politics as infinitely more important. You seem to accuse him of reducing politics to electoralism, which he doesn't do.
If voting has no effect on politics, as you claim bc it doesn't fundamentally alter bourgeois "democracy," then what does it matter if leftists (like Chomsky) advocate for people to vote or not if it supposedly doesn't matter, in the end?
"voting and campaigning for Bernie didn’t require mass class consciousness nor did it require militancy nor internal discipline " WDYM? Salvador Allende's Popular Front won precisely bc of mass class consciousness and political militancy.
he literally says in the interview: youre job as activists is to get people to care (about voting for biden)
Yeah he says that bc he rightly recognizes that the rules of the game under Trump are worse for the left than under his opponent. I was responding to TemporalMembrane's argument that voting doesn't matter because it doesn't challenge the bourgeois order. If this is the case then why give a shit one way or the other about Chomsky advocating to vote for the lesser evil given that he clearly supports extra-electoral politics that everyone on the left agrees we ought to pursue. Incidentally, Engels adopted a position quite similar to Chomsky's:
"[The proletariat] cannot require that the bourgeoisie should cease to be a bourgeoisie, but it certainly can require that it practices its own principles consistently. But the proletariat will thereby also acquire all the weapons it needs for its ultimate victory. With freedom of the press and the right of assembly and association it will win universal suffrage, and with universal, direct suffrage, in conjunction with the above tools of agitation, it will win everything else.
It is therefore in the interests of the workers to support the bourgeoisie in its struggle against all reactionary elements, as long as it remains true to itself. Every gain which the bourgeoisie extracts from reaction, eventually benefits the working class, if that condition is fulfilled. And the German workers were quite correct in their instinctive appreciation of this. Everywhere, in every German state, they have quite rightly voted for the most radical candidates who had any prospect of getting in."
si, pero en cierto punto esta dirigiendo a los "activistas" a solo hacerle el mandando al DNC, es ridiculo no crees?
esta claro que si la burguesia logra mantener el capitalismo aqui, y el golpe trumpista es derrotado, no sera a través de acumular otras decena de millón de votos para el candidato burgues mas tradicional.. entonces apoyar a la burguesia no implica adoptar su visión politica en este caso, porque claramente es uno erronea, plagada de excepcionalismo (tipicamente gringo) y incapaz de comprender las condiciones materiales cambiantes del capitalismo en crisis como lo que son, creyendo por su septima decada consecutiva que esta es la buena y cayendo vez tras vez tras vez
"está claro que si la burguesía logra mantener el capitalismo aquí, y el golpe trumpista es derrotado, no será acumulando otros diez millones de votos para el candidato burgués más tradicional…"
No estoy de acuerdo. El éxito de un golpe trumpista, lo cual sería difícil de llevar a cabo, no es una conclusión inevitable. Por lo tanto, no sería una pérdida de tiempo votar por el candidato burgués viable de oposición en los "swing states."
Puede ser que no haya entendido tu argumento, pero Chomsky no está diciendo que la izquierda debería castrarse, convirtiéndose en lacayos del DNC. Engels argumentó, como he citado anteriormente, que los trabajadores deben apoyar a la burguesía contra sus elementos más reaccionarios mientras se aseguran de luchar por sus propios intereses ("remain true to itself"). Qué hay de malo en este argumento?