4 ms·
Noam Chomsky, an American linguist, philosopher, and political activist, once said, "If you're in a system where you must make profit in order to survive, you a
by myshpa 3y ago
Noam Chomsky, an American linguist, philosopher, and political activist, once said, "If you're in a system where you must make profit in order to survive, you are compelled to ignore negative externalities, effects on others".
https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/economics/externalities https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/economics/externa...
Stephen Hawking criticized the economy for ignoring externalities, particularly in the context of climate change. In his book "Brief Answers to the Big Questions," Hawking wrote, "We are now learning that climate change is bringing with it not only changes to the physical environment but also to the way we think about economics. It is forcing us to recognize that many of the ways we have been measuring economic progress, based on the idea of unlimited growth, have been deeply flawed"
- AbrahamParangi 3y agoNoam Chomsky is a socialist in spite of all available evidence of the atrocities committed by most socialist states against their people. His career as a linguist is respected. His career as an economist or as a political commentator is of no worth at all.
- TeaDrunk 3y agoi don't know if its fair to conflate an economic system with a political one
- jkhdigital 3y agoPolitics and economics are virtually inseparable. There’s a reason the field of economics used to be called “political economy”.
- klik99 3y agoScience and math are in practice virtually inseparable. Math can be studied independently of science, but science can't be studied independently of math. Similarly economics can be studied independently of politics, but good luck understanding politics without mentioning economics.
- asdfgionion 3y agoAh, yes, he's one of those famous authoritarian anarchists. I'm all for criticizing Chomsky, but let's do it with a little more sophistication. He would agree with you wholeheartedly that the USSR, China, and so forth are repressive dictatorships. He rejects the use of violent revolution.
- AbrahamParangi 3y agoNoam Chomsky is so anti-US intervensionist that he is willing to give anyone who is opposed to the US the benefit of the doubt. This alone is not a criticism but a fact. The criticism comes when we look at who falls into that category. Famously starting with the Khmer Rouge, he claimed that we shouldn’t believe the refugees escaping the killing fields. After evidence emerged he also famously never admitted he was wrong. He denies the Bosnian genocide, and most recently he has said such charming things as: “we should give Putin the benefit of the doubt” (regarding the Ukraine war).
- status_quo69 3y agoShould the opposite should also hold true then, we should dismiss staunch capitalists that continue to believe in that economic theory in spite of the atrocities perpetuated by most capitalist societies against people in adverse conditions? Seems a bit knee jerk to dismiss things wholesale.
- imtringued 3y agoI don't think there exists a country that isn't socialist under your broad definition.
- fauxpause_ 3y agoSeems like a… dumb quote to me. Failure to account for externalities is a regulation policy failure and nothing more.
- ericpauley 3y agoAgreed. That rational actors ignore it is basically the definition of externality! Nobody would quote this if anyone but Chomsky said it.
- aeternum 3y agoExcept that the most successful companies have paid close attention to negative externalities. Ford Motors shortened the work week and paid workers a high wage at the cost of short-term profit. Cage-free chicken eggs and eco-friendly shoe/clothing brands are quickly becoming more popular than the alternative. Consumers generally care about negative externalities so they often do not stay externalities for long.
- gmerc 3y agoExxon? Any oil company? Nestle? Facebook? Walmart? please.
- jonahbenton 3y agoWhoa, it's fairy tale time. The idea that successful companies pay attention to in order to address what from an economic perspective are negative externalities is a complete fiction. Every single industry- energy, food, real estate, entertainment, finance, tech, clothing- exists, and the economics work- because the "costs" to nature are not accounted for. That's what an externality is.
- blargey 3y agoIt’s been a century since that period of Ford, where are those high-paying U.S. factory jobs now? Greenwashing fads come and go, it’s all built on dumb technicalities. Try navigating your way through “cage free” vs “pasture raised” vs “certified humane” and thinking about what negative externalities those actually mitigate, how they’re enforced, what that amounts to in the grand scheme of things. Restaurant and fast food and your average grocer/shopper are still picking the cheapest Tyson cut. “Organic grass fed” milk is still drawn from the exhausted teat of 24/7 artificially inseminated veal-factories. It’s all marketing campaigns built on dumb technicalities.
- lern_too_spel 3y agoNot only that, but they aren't more popular than their alternatives and never will be absent regulation.
- 3y ago
- Proven 3y ago[dead]
- TiredOfLife 3y agoYou forgot genocide denier.