4 ms·
"If you're really in favor of free speech, then you're in favor of freedom of speech for precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favor of free
by Jack4E4B 9y ago
"If you're really in favor of free speech, then you're in favor of freedom of speech for precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you're not in favor of free speech." Noam Chomsky. A smart man, worth listening too, even if you disagree.
- evanlivingston 9y ago"Well what’s called libertarian in the United States, which is a special U. S. phenomenon, it doesn’t really exist anywhere else — a little bit in England — permits a very high level of authority and domination but in the hands of private power: so private power should be unleashed to do whatever it likes. The assumption is that by some kind of magic, concentrated private power will lead to a more free and just society. …that kind of libertarianism, in my view, in the current world, is just a call for some of the worst kinds of tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny. Anarchism is quite different from that. It calls for an elimination to tyranny, all kinds of tyranny. Including the kind of tyranny that’s internal to private power concentrations. So why should we prefer it? Well I think because freedom is better than subordination. It’s better to be free than to be a slave. Its’ better to be able to make your own decisions than to have someone else make decisions and force you to observe them. I mean, I don’t think you really need an argument for that. It seems like … transparent." Noam Chomsky
- ttoinou 9y agoThere's so much wrong about NC and mainstream perception of classic liberalism I don't even know where to begin. There are some interesting topics of dispute between NC / Proudhon-like anarchists and libertarians, but I don't see how this kind of quote achieves anything in this regard. Libertarians don't advocate "concentrated" powers or "tyranny" but acknowledge that hierarchy and subordination can develop in a voluntarily way and think about the best meta-rules with which each society groups can co-exist. Yes, large entities can occur - proof is with nation states and big companies. But I don't see how Chomsky fans can replace them with anything better, do you ? Theirs solutions generally involve the state taking a monopole about some product / service or over regulations, leading to an even growing state and big co (all of which are "tyranny", "concentrated powers", "domination", "authority" they supposedly despise)
- evanlivingston 9y agoBut libertarian thought paves the way for concentrated power and even relies upon it. Wealth, which libertarians believe can gotten from self-determination alone, does not accrue without legally enforced property relations (state monopolized justice/violence). Self-determination without other anarchist values of mutual aid and solidarity creates classist society. I don't want to live in a classist society. I don't have an interest in a political critique which remains imminent to capitalist values and society. I'd also add that libertarian thought in practice leads to abhorrent entities such as the Cato institute and the Atlas Network.
- valuearb 9y agoYou can't have liberty without "state monopolized justice/violence".
- evanlivingston 9y agoI didn't mean to imply otherwise, rather I just wanted to point out that one of the principles of Libertarianism as I understand it (freedom from government regulation of things) is counter to the libertarian value of wealth accumulation.
- valuearb 9y agoThere is no libertarian value of wealth accumulation. There is only the libertarian value of individual liberties such as being able to own personal property without limits. If some accumulate wealth, as long as they don't take it from others that's fine.
- ttoinou 9y agoCould you care to explain how we could reduce "concentrated powers" ? It's not enough to simply claim that libertarian or neoliberal are not anti-business and hence facilitate concentrated powers, you have to explain to me a better solution, how you would approach this issue. values of mutual aid and solidarity Isn't that what exchange, association and charity are about ? Theses are core libertarian values.
- valuearb 9y agoChomsky thought the world would be better if any person that ever figured out a better way to do things was beaten to death before their idea becomes a large corporation that millions of people would willingly chose to patronize.
- thinkfurther 9y agoLovely projection I have to say. Chomsky is the guy with the good ideas (though he'd be the first to point out they're not original, but he still understands and holds them so the sentence is correct as is), you're the one biting his ankles with a straw man.