Hegemony Or Survival By Noam Chomsky
Hegemony Or Survival By Noam Chomsky - Reagans contribution to horrible massacres in Nicaragua, In addition to all of this, Chomsky delivers a critique of U.S. Hypocrisy in a manner that is both satirical and reflects in some ways, the frustrations of an old man. How, for instance; could anyone speak of a "New Europe" when citizens of such an entity (created ostensibly to reflect acquisence to American intents) not only oppose the United States, but also oppose their own Governments on critical issues - such as the War in Iraq? Readers are welcome to submit comments at the following discussion thread: Similar products Customer Reviews Chomsky Is Not 'Anti-American' More American than your beloved media Chomsky is not a 'liberal', he is radical, his criticism is for the entire system and its track record. He does not have a 'master plan', and he would reject anyone who claims to. Notice he's been called everything under the sun: Marxist, Nazi, Stalinist, Communist, anti-American, deranged, etc, etc, etc. His answer? Yeah, you DO have to be deranged to pay attention to things like elementary morality, and to actually have concern for your fellow man. Highly recommended reading for anyone who wants to think about current events, to seriously think, and to look outside the very narrow spectrum of debate in this country that is favored by the media and intellectuals.
Reviewed by NEOP, member Nigerian Village Square
Chomsky's message in this work is simple. The United States; in a quest for global dominance has chosen a part of International Hegemony even though such a course might threaten the future of the globe.
Expanding on previous themes from some of his earlier works; Chomsy takes the author through American engagement in South America to the War in Iraq. Some of the territory covered is familiar.
- American support for the "Esquadrones de la muerte" in Salvador,
- Terrorist Attacks on Cuba, Terrorist attacks on Haiti,
- The United States disdain for the Rulings of International Institutions, War Profiteering etc.
Chomsky posits that within the Imperial Grand Stratgy of America lies a disdain for the very populism that is supposed to be at the heart of democracy. He harks to Alexander Hamilton and considers contemporary neoconservative dismissals of France and Germany - as well as International Institutions of Law as reflective of a certain brand of idealism which when combined with Militarism of the worst sort is a sure recipe for the Horrors of Imperial adventures.
And what horrors they are.They are little known outside of dissident circles but they are known anyhow - Murder in Guatemala, Murder in Nicaragua, Murder in Chile, Murder in Korea, Murder in Indonesia, Murder in Iraq and the nauseous attitude of saintly righteousness - are documented in this book.
America is to be forgiven for its mistakes - while other dictators must be taken down and removed for theirs - all at America's convenience. Dictators are "Solid Gentlemen" a la FDRs assessment of Mussolini; but as soon as they cross Uncle Sams line; they are evil and a scourge. Despots are the "best hope" for their country - a not so wise assessment of Saddam Hussein by Top American officers - but when they disobey or perhaps misunderstand orders - they become "threats to civilization" possessing weapons of mass destruction that are imaginary for the most part and American supplied for the lesser.
It is not beneath the Guardian of Civilization, for instance, to support Apartheid armies - so long as the hundreds of thousands they are killing are Black Africans who are on the deadly road to Communism.
The Land of the Free has no problem propping up a Marcos or a Suharto so long as the Millions they steal and the millions they kill do no threaten the pocket books of a CitiGroup, a Halliburton or a BechTel.
Fundamental to Chomsky's analysis is that Terrorism, like all other weapons is primarily a weapon of the Strong - Ergo, the United States is the Number One terrorist State in the World - given its constant record of trying to undermine the Policies of States with whom it has a disagreement through foul and covert means.
I find Chomsky's satirical take on the comments of some of the defenders of the Imperial establishment witty and provocative.
This is certainly not Chomsky's best work. But it is undeniably timely and it comes with high reccomendations from me. It provides a fundamental grounding for an understanding of America's role in the world of today and Dr. Chomsky certainly does no injustice to the Book's chosen theme.
Post your comments
Customer who bought this product also bought:
--> Explore similar items
Look to the Center of the Stars 
This is a graph of the star ratings that had been posted as of 3.12.2004:
-------------------------------
(12) 1************
(03) 2***
(04) 3****
(10) 4**********
(24) 5************************
-------------------------------
Total 53 reviews
Mean 3.59 stars
The distribution of ratings shows a polarized audience. Clearly, this book is very controversial, due to the unabashed criticism of US foreign policy. Thus, such division among reviewers is to be expected. Look to the center! For a more objective review, check out Ted Rushton's review that totes a 3 star rating. (Click "view all reviews" towards the end of the first page of reviews. Then select from the drop down menu "3-star ratings only." Go!)
It is difficult for many to accept that his assertions are even plausible. However, careful review of his facts reveals that his arguements are well founded. His work is quite impressive.
Read some Chomsky. Then think about his ideas as you watch the news, keeping in mind the limitations of the media (check out the Censored series by Project Censored). Rethink Afghanistan. Rethink Iraq. Rethink Haiti. Oh, and if Chomsky isn't enough for you, check out Cardoso & Faletto's Development and Dependency in Latin America (originally in Spanish) for a taste of dependencia theory. That will get your juices flowing. 
First off, let me inform any of you reading this that I am not quite finished with Chomsky's latest book, "Hegemony or Survival"; based upon what I have so far read of this book, as well as what I have read before by him, it is my opinion that Chomsky is one of the most patriotic authors that I have read. I say this because he is committed toward our Constitutional rights of dissent and criticism of government.
Aside from the most negative reviews of this book, some of which claim that Chomsky is wholly against America, and/or that his major claim in the book is that America is the sole root of all the evil in world and is directly responsible for anything bad: Those claims are completely irrational. In fact, those who have written that or the other (or both) have altogether missed the point. As far as I can tell, Chomsky is saying that since the end of World War II, the US has looked toward expanding its influence in the world, for better or worse. More importantly, he is claiming that the Bush II administration is exploiting the tragedies of 9/11 (by the way, he often refers to the attacks as "atrocities," "tragedies," etc., which must *really* show that he is truly "anti-American," according to the logic, or lack thereof, of the 1-star reviewers) in order to assert American dominance and hegemony on the world, in the name of "fighting terrorism."
Chomsky brings to light the ironies and fallacies of the "War on Terror," and exposes to the public the ugly truth that America has, indeed, supported terrorism in the past. Chomsky himself once wrote that the "responsibility of intellectuals" is to reveal the truth and expose lies. He never states that America is an "evil empire," as some reviewers of the book claim. He does state, however, that the Bush II administration has given the world the wrong image of this great country, an image that shows us as trigger-happy, militant lunatics, which, of course, is not who the American people are: our government does not represent us anymore, and is not threatening the world to the brink of destruction. I believe that he is right in his belief that what Bush and his cronies(advisers) are doing in the name of fighting terrorism and making us safer on the home front will, in fact, end up make us less safe and will exponentially increase the probability of more terrorist attacks against us and, thus, more retaliatory attacks in the name of fighting terrorism, and on and on and so forth, until humanity is obliterated.
Agree with it or not, that is, I believe, a good approximation of Chomsky's message. He does not want America to be imperial and hegemonic; he just tells it as best he sees it, and he bases it upon careful and scrupulous research.
He is one of the true patriots.
You don't have to agree with everything Chomsky writes to find value in his work and his arguments. Before you accept any label that's been pinned on him, give his work a chance. His biggest crime just might be paying attention to facts, and questioning the praise we pour on ourselves, and actually caring about things like morality, and hypocrisy, and people.
Chomsky is the antithesis of the kind of intellectual and pundit that corporate media prefers, and he directs much criticism toward this 'establishment'; indeed, he has compared intellectuals and elite opinion-makers to the commisars of Soviet Russia.
This book is a sort of summation of material he has covered extensively before and since in different formats. The book proposes some important questions and considerations about this point in history. America finds itself in a state of unparalleled power in history. How do we use it? What is the cost of the quest for global dominance? The stakes are higher than ever. Terrorism, WMD, nuclear capability--these are things that threaten our existence. Are our current leaders really concerned with ending terrorism? Were they ever? What does the doctine of pre-emptive action mean, especially as applied to Iraq? And how long will people buy the same old stories that don't hold up under scrutiny? Who stands to really gain from global hegemony?
Chomsky reviews recent events like 9/11, world reaction, the National Security Strategy of 2002, announcing a doctrine of pre-emption, and, of course, Iraq, which is being played out as an outstanding example of hypocrisy and blind embrace of power. Once again, he goes through some useful facts about Iraq and America, namely that Saddam was a US client who had to be punished when he stopped following US orders. But of course, we now care so much about the Iraqi people, you know, we liberated them. And we cared so much about them when we supported Saddamn's reign by wrecking the country with sanctions. It's such a sham, you wonder how Bush himself can not crack up when he defends the 'reasons' for the war (WMD, democracy, etc, etc), or how he and most politicians can hide their utter contempt for the man on the street, or for anyone who actually looks at reality.
What is now clear in Chomsky's work is a very self-reflexive element, because Chomsky realizes how his work is viewed through the traditional doctrinal filters. Therefore, much of it seems like very, very bone dry humor, as he exposes the BS of politicians, elites, and ultimately ourselves. We're spreading democracy in Iraq...but are we really spreading democracy? Do we realy care about democracy, or the rights of all people, or freedom for everyone? Running through one case after another, the answer is quite different.
There's a very good reason Chomsky is often dismissed, or simply despised. His work concerns elementary moral questions, intellectual honesty, and general concern for PEOPLE, not institutions, or even states. He's anything but anti-American, if anything, he's very American. He cherishes freedom, and he routinely states that many of our American freedoms are unique and unprecedented. He reminds us that in a democracy, in a real democracy, you don't 'rally to the leader', you don't blindly worship the state. If we believe in freedom, real freedom, then we question power structures and their authority over us, and we reject them if they're not legitimate.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home