Noam Chomsky and Marxism

[Scottish_Militant]

Whilst one does not find in Noam Chomsky any specific critique of Marx’s writings (he admits he is not a Marx “scholar”), there are a number of inferences that Marxism represents an authoritarian tradition, although this is qualified by regular references to a supposed “left libertarian tradition”. Heiko Khoo looks at some of the ideas of Chomsky, showing how he misrepresents – or doesn’t even understand – genuine Marxism.

Noam Chomsky and Marxism (http://www.marxist.com/Theory/chomsky_part1.htm)

[PRC-UTE]

As we shall see later, we find this dictatorial apparatus replicated in the FAI’s leadership of the Spanish anarchist movement. We also find that the most famous anarchist movements were named after one man, in the Ukraine the ‘Mahknovites’, in Spain the ‘friends of Durruti’ – hardly the indication of a “non-hierarchical movement” with no leaders, which in real life never exists.

There's a difference between an inspiring militant who sets a positive example to follow and a leader who you obey.


“Bakunin is known to the world as one of the founders of anarchism. It is less often remembered that he was the first originator of the conception of a select and closely organised revolutionary party, bound together not only by common ideals, but by the tie of implicit obedience to an absolute revolutionary dictator.” (Carr Bakunin, p. 455, my emphasis) It should be noted that it is precisely for the concept of the “vanguard party” that Leninism is condemned by the anarchists!

Anarchist forms of organising remained very backward for a time, largely because of the repression they faced. It was a response (that we now know to be incorrect) created by material conditions, not ideology. This author is making the same mistake he accuses Chomsky of making.


It is our contention that most if not all, anarchist “non-hierarchical and anti authoritarian movements,” were in fact highly authoritarian, hierarchical secret conspiracies.

Has this person spent any time with anarcho-syndicalists? <_<

If this author listed specific anarchist organisations that were clique-ish or extremely informal, this could be the case like behind the scenes. Most anarchists aren&#39;t that way in my experience.

I agree Chomsky often substitutes caricatures for political critiques but it strikes me that this writer is doing the same.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Heiko Khoo+--> (Heiko Khoo)As we shall see later, we find this dictatorial apparatus replicated in the FAI’s leadership of the Spanish anarchist movement. We also find that the most famous anarchist movements were named after one man, in the Ukraine the ‘Mahknovites’, in Spain the ‘friends of Durruti’ - hardly the indication of a "non-hierarchical movement" with no leaders, which in real life never exists.[/b]

Trotskyist trash&#33;

By contemporary accounts, Makhno was enormously popular among his followers...generally the case with peasant revolutionary leaders.

But more importantly, Makhno was one of the founders of what eventually became known as "platformist anarchists"...who have experienced a "re-birth" in our own time and who in no way possess or advocate a "dictatorial apparatus".

Durruti became something of a "Che-like icon" for young Spanish revolutionaries after he was killed in the early fighting, and the "Friends of Durruti" were named so to honor his revolutionary integrity. They were the most intransigent libertarian anarcho-communists in the Spanish Republic...and never "dictated" anything to anybody.

Finally, notice the sneaky verbal conflation: "a non-hierarchical movement with no leaders, which in real life never exists."

It is not "leaders" per se that anti-authoritarians object to; it is "leaders" with the institutionalized power of command that will never be acceptable.

Students for a Democratic Society was a non-hierarchical movement with no leaders and existed from 1962-69...and we managed to do a few things. So much for the historical accuracy of Heiko&#39;s assertion that such movements "never exist in real life".


Engels
I should very much like to know whether the good Bakunin would entrust his portly frame to a railway carriage... -- emphasis added.

Bakunin was fat?

Privately known, perhaps, as "comrade lardass"? :lol:

Next to the embarrassing Dialectics of Nature, Engels never looks more absurd than when he attempts to polemicize against the anarchists of his era.

Not because there were not sound criticisms to be made (and Engels does make a few), but because he so anxious to discredit them that he loses all sense of proportion and attributes to them absurdities that they did not, in fact, advocate.

He even drags in Bakunin&#39;s girth as an "argument"...as if Engels and Marx were "cut" in their revolutionary rectitude.

If you look at photos from the second half of the 19th century, it quickly becomes obvious that most people were either "fat" or "emaciated". In those days, you ate as much as you could when you could...because you never knew when there&#39;d be nothing to eat at all.

Why a modern Trotskyist should find this kind of slur appealing is obscure...perhaps, like Engels himself, he is not overly fastidious in his choice of "arguments".

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Redstar, tell me stories from the sixties . . .

(I&#39;m actually not kidding.)

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Virgin Molotov [email protected] 20 2004, 12:34 AM
Redstar, tell me stories from the sixties . . .

(I&#39;m actually not kidding.)
Students for a Democratic Society vs. Leninism (http://redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1083585987&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

. . . and the article was relevant in the context of the thread. *polite applause*.

Really fascinating. I&#39;ll comment properly later once I&#39;ve finished this damn philosophy paper.