3

Click here to load reader

Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

8/14/2019 Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chomsky-what-we-say-goes-2007-synopsis 1/3

UFPPC (www.ufppc.org) Digging Deeper LXXVIII: April 6, 2009, 7:00 p.m.

Noam Chomsky, What We Say Goes: Conversations on U.S. Power in aChanging World—Interviews with David Barsamian (New York: HenryHolt/Metropolitan Books, October 2007). [The book’s title comes from wordsspoken by President George Herbert Walker Bush in a speech on Feb. 1, 1991:“When we win, and we will, we will have taught a dangerous dictator, and anytyrant tempted to follow in his footsteps, that the United States has a new

credibility and that what we say goes, and that there is no place for lawlessaggression in the Persian Gulf and in this New World Order that we seek tocreate.”]

Ch. 1: What We Say Goes [Feb. 10,2006]. The U.S. “is a leading outlawstate, totally unconstrained byinternational law, and it openly says so”(1). The principle of the U.S. governmentand of media like the New York Times is“service to power” (2; 2-4, 6-7). Civilobedience is a greater problem than civil

disobedience (4-5).

Ch. 2: Lebanon and the Crisis in theMiddle East [Aug. 15, 2006]. The justifications given for the July 2006 war(a cross-border attack & capture of soldiers) were spurious (9-12). Hamasand Hezbollah to Israel are prepared toaccept a two-state solution (12-14).Chomsky visited Lebanon and met withNasrallah (14-15). Hezbollah is justifiedin seeking and having deterrent weapons(15-17). The U.N. has interfered inLebanon (17-18). The U.S. was involvedin Israel’s war (18-20). Despite the 2000withdrawal, Israel’s posture towardLebanon remained aggressive (20-21).Israel’s regional military power remainsoverwhelming (22-23). The U.S. isn’tconcerned about Islamism, it’s concernedabout obedience (24-27). In Iraq, theU.S. has created a pro-Iranian Shiite-dominated state (27). “[A] sovereign,mildly democratic Iraq would be an uttercatastrophe for U.S. planners” (30; 28-30). The U.S. is refusing to negotiatewith Iran (30-32). Of many threats weface, nuclear war is the greatest (32-34). The 9/11 truth movement is “almost akind of religious fanaticism” and is “aterrible drain of energy away from muchmore serious problems” (35; 36; 34-40).

Ch. 3: Latin America: Stirrings in theServants’ Quarters [Sept. 29, 2006].Endorses Thucydides’s Melian Dialogue(41-42). Hugo Chávez’s proposals havenot been given serious attention (42-47).Criticism of Thomas Friedman and theWashington Consensus (48-52). In

general, U.S. media ignore policyproposals (52-54). A lack of “realelections” is more of a problem thanvoter fraud (55-56). The oppressedremember history, the oppressorspromote amnesia (56-59). Telesur, “an A Jazeera in Spanish” (59-63). Mercosur isa “very significant” move towardeconomic integration in Latin America(64-67). Americans should look in themirror (67-71).

Ch. 4: The United States versus theGospels [Dec. 12, 2006]. The U.S. wasdeeply involved in overthrowingdemocracy in Chile (73-79). Nicaragua is“a sad place” subservient to IMF rules(79-82). Ecuador (82). Mexico (82-83). The Grameen Bank and microcredit are“sensible” but “not the answer toeverything” (84). Liberation theology isguilty of taking the Gospel seriously (84-85). Liberals are not really opposed tothe Iraq war (85-86). “[T]he Afghan waritself was a major war crime” (86; 86-88)Books by Michael Walzer and Jean BethkeElshtain are intellectually “horrible” (89;88-89). GI coffeehouses “were veryeffective” in the Vietnam War era (90).“[T]he nuclear-armed states are criminalstates” (91; 90-92).

Page 2: Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

8/14/2019 Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chomsky-what-we-say-goes-2007-synopsis 2/3

Ch. 5: The Framework for ThinkableThoughts [Jan. 29, 2007]. Dissent,and discussions of Israel and imperialism,are easier now than in the 1960s (93-94).Eugene McCarthy “would be regarded asa charlatan” by today’s standards (94;94-95). In the U.S., there is a “majorfissure” between “the public” and “the

country’s real power sectors” (95; 95-96). The decline in labor unions can bereversed (96-97). About “the future of the economy,” no one “really knows” (97;97-100). There is an acceptance by “theintellectual class” that the U.S. act as “anoutlaw state,” e.g. vis-à-vis Iraq and Iran(100; 100-02). The U.S. bombing of Cambodia and its role in the genocide(102-04). Historical parallels with the1930s or with Vietnam tend to be

superficial (104-10). Setting debateparameters is an effective tool of power(110-12). The “Israeli narrative”overwhelms discussions of Palestinianrights (112-13). What’s happening inPalestine is not colonization, “[i]t’sannexation . . . It’s conquest ” (114,emphasis in original; 114-15). U.S.media are always subservient to U.S.power (115-18).

Ch. 6: Invasions and Evasions [Feb.2, 2007]. Tinkering with the system canbe as important as seeking its overhaul(119-21). The U.S. has been imperialisthistorically and racism has been thenatural accompaniment of this (121-24).Some of the best polls are by theProgram of International Policy Attitudes(PIPA) at the Univ. of Maryland (124-25).Mearsheimer and Walt seriouslyunderestimate the power of the Israellobby as they define it (though Chomskyrejects Mearsheimer and Walt’s notion of “the national interest”), and the Israellobby is broader than AIPAC, it includes“the U.S. intellectual community and themedia” (126; 125-37). The mostimportant thing in Jimmy Carter’sPalestine: Peace Not Apartheid was notdiscussed: its report that the U.S. and

Israel rejected the Quartet’s “road map”(139; 137-40).

Ch. 7: Threats [Mar. 1, 2007]. Theglobal warming disaster is not imminent;nuclear war and avian flu are (141-43). The global water situation is “extremelyserious” (143). Cooperative action is

needed, but Chomsky dismisses “globalgovernment” (143-44). Corporate andpolitical leaders are short-sighted; as aresult, automobile manufacturers are“now going into decline, maybe terminaldecline, in the United States” (145; 144-51). Internet media is abundant butdraws ignorant people into “crazedcocoons of wild interpretation” (152; 151-52). “Whether it’s in print or on theInternet, you have to know what to look

for. That requires knowledge of history,an understanding of backgrounds, aconception of the way the mediafunctions as filters and interpreters of theworld. Then you know what to look for.And the same is true on the Internet”(152-53). When it comes to archives,openness is more important than security(153-54). Alternative media has limitedreach (154-55). Activists are “extremelyatomized” (155). Social activism doesn’trequire a draft or economic collapse(155-56). Not “Al Qaeda” but the jihadi“network of networks” is what thesignificant phenomenon, and we haveadopted policies that incite it (157-58).Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilization” thesis is “ridiculous” ashistory, though he’s right that there arepeople pursuing that end (158-59).

Ch. 8: What We Can Do [Mar. 12,2007]. “What we say goes” was utteredby Pres. G.H.W. Bush in Feb. 1991 (161-64). Ed Herman has pointed out thecorrelation between U.S. aid and humanrights violations (164-67). Wall Streetturned against the Vietnam War in 1968but has not turned against the Iraq war(167-68). The only important questionfor U.S. elites is “the costs to us,” notprinciples (169; 168-69). The current

Page 3: Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

8/14/2019 Chomsky - What We Say Goes (2007) - Synopsis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chomsky-what-we-say-goes-2007-synopsis 3/3

U.S. approach to the world can be tracedto the “Grand Area” strategic planningdocuments drawn up in the 1940s by theCouncil on Foreign Relations and the U.S.State Dept., which extended the MonroeDoctrine to the rest of the world (169-71). The history of Guantánamo and itsuse as “a convenient torture chamber”

(171-73). The U.S. behaves in theinternational arena much as a Mafia dondoes (173-74). The examples of Cubaand Iran (174-77). Countries do notconcede their atrocities—e.g. Turkey(177-79). The goal of the new U.S. Africacommand is “a firmer grip on Middle Eastenergy resources” (179-81). MahmoodMamdani’s article on Darfurrecommended (182). Chomsky’s “strongimpression” is that the “right to exist”

phrase with regard to Israel was “eitherinvented or at least reached prominencein the mid-1970s” (183). In fact, “Nostate is granted a right to exist. They’rerecognized, but not granted a right toexist” (184). Chomsky and his wife cameclose to moving to Israel fifty years ago(184-85). He sees no connectionbetween his linguistic and his politicalwork (185). The U.S. public needs to beeducated; “[i]ndividuals can’t do it,” onlygroups (185-87). Chomsky favors

international institutions like theInternational Criminal Court, the U.N.Charter, etc. (187-88). The U.S. is “anorganizer’s paradise” (188; 188-89). Of Eqbal Ahmad’s saying that intellectualshave to be willing to “take risks,”Chomsky says that “being decent” is allthat’s needed, since here intellectuals’

risks are “undetectable”; but he agreesthat “love of people is central,” or “atleast commitment to them and theirneeds” (189-90).

Notes. 22 pp.

Acknowledgments. Researchassistants.

Index. 9 pp.

About the authors. Noam Chomsky,professor of linguistics and philosophy atMIT, lives “outside Boston”; DavidBarsamian, director of  Alternative Radio,lives in Boulder, CO. [Additionalinformation: Chomsky was born on Dec.7, 1928. He has written prolifically onpolitical questions since American Power and the New Mandarins (1969). NewPress published The Essential Chomsky inFebruary 2008.]