In a message dated 3/26/99 7:36:55 PM, you wrote:

>I believe that they should have given Chomsky more attention in the magazine.
>Would you not agree though that to refer to his politics as left-wing is
>erroneous. It's this kind of labeling that gives people the wrong idea about
>his writings in the political field. I don't personally believe his politics
>can really be applied to the political spectrum.

Chomsky wrote the intro to a book on anarcho-syndicalism published sometime
ago. He defines himself, not as an anarchist theorist, but a "fellow
traveler." I guess he likes syndicalist anarchism or he wouldn't have bothered
writing an intro to one of the best books on its history and theory. That
would make him  leftist in my book, though what the heck that means to the
average reader of Time Magazine....

As for the "political spectrum," Chomsky has consistently been for the
broadening of the spectrum of political discourse, particularly in the US, but
elsewhere as well. He is critical of the narrowness of what ideas get debated
in the mass media. He has even defended the right, not the ideas, of some
pretty gross "right-wingers" to express their ideas.

Chomsky grew up in New York City hanging out on Broadway and 72nd street, and
talking with the leftists who used to gather at the news stand that is still
there though the leftists are know longer milling about and debating each
other there.
That's where he got his "political" education. If it seems odd to "define" him
as a leftist maybe that's because he isn't boneheaded, as many leftists seem
to be.

john korber