Re.: Chomsky cheers the popular uprising in Serbia: Noam Chomsky on Serbia

Jim Farmelant farmelantj at
Sat Oct 14 07:31:58 MDT 2000

On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 19:48:44 -0400 Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at>
> >In a message dated 10/13/2000 3:56:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> >chris_brady at writes:
> >
> ><< ut his solutions
> > are typically anarchist, or as he sometimes refers to them
> "libertarian
> > socialist."  He is always anti-state, no matter the state of the
> state. >>
> >
> >BUt do anarachist support Imperail state interventions, which this
> so
> >obviously is?  And why does Chonmsky, who denounced Serb
> apramilkitaries for
> >years, accused he Serbs of atrocities (NOT the same way he talked
> about the
> >KLA, by the way) - why does he now gloroify a putsch led by -
> paramilitaries?
> >
> >He is not, in my opinion an anarchist.  He is a former critic of US
> policy
> >who is now a semi-apologist.
> >
> >Best regards,
> >Jared
> Chomsky seems unable to see that autonomy and self-government --
> fundamental principles of anarchism -- are impossible under imperial
> domination.

If we look back at the classical anarchists we can see that some of them
took similarly problematic positions on the issues of their day.  Thus,
Pierre Proudhon
supported the Confederate side in the American Civil War because he found
the Southerners' doctrine of states rights consistent with his own
philosophy.  The Russian anarchist Petr Kropotkin took a "social
stance during the First World War.  Chomsky's blindness concerning the
impossibility of autonomy and self-government under conditions of
imperial domination is symptomatic of the anarchist tradition.

Jim F.

> Yoshie

Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:

More information about the Marxism mailing list