Chomsky is what zero materialism does to an MFer. Here he is, literally arguing for MLism in a completely different context:
I'm not in favor of people being in cages.
On the other hand I think people ought to be in cages if there's a saber-toothed tiger wandering around outside and if they go out of the cage the saber-toothed tiger will kill them. So sometimes there's a justification for cages. That doesn't mean cages are good things.
State power is a good example of a necessary cage. There are saber-toothed tigers outside; they are called transnational corporations which are among the most tyrannical totalitarian institutions that human society has devised. And there is a cage, namely the state, which to some extent is under popular control. The cage is protecting people from predatory tyrannies so there is a temporary need to maintain the cage, and even to extend the cage.
Who knows? Who cares to find out? Chomsky is an ideological windvane.
He's... fine when he's criticizing the US empire but there are much better sources out there and Chomsky is only useful for his prominence but much like Richard Wolff he's got some really trash takes (barely) below the surface.
Is it because he's an op? Is he a reflection of the ideological hangover from the New Left era? Is he just an opportunist? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Chomsky is what zero materialism does to an MFer. Here he is, literally arguing for MLism in a completely different context:
🥴
Is this an argument for neolib governments? Lmao. As long as no hammer and sickle it's fine.
Who knows? Who cares to find out? Chomsky is an ideological windvane.
He's... fine when he's criticizing the US empire but there are much better sources out there and Chomsky is only useful for his prominence but much like Richard Wolff he's got some really trash takes (barely) below the surface.
Is it because he's an op? Is he a reflection of the ideological hangover from the New Left era? Is he just an opportunist? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯