Nestor Gorojovsky wrote:
>
>I'm a socialist, a Marxist to be sure, and I know Noam Chomsky is
>not. This does not make me sneer at his ideas, nor disregard his
>"anarchist" (?) leanings.

I wonder why you say that you "know Noam Chomsky is not", as he has said:

        "The consistent anarchist, then, should be a socialist, but a
        socialist of a particular sort. He will not only oppose alienated
        and specialized labor and look forward to the appropriation of
        capital by the whole body of workers, but he will also insist that
        this appropriation be direct, not exercised by some elite force
        acting in the name of the proletariat."

        "A consistent anarchist must oppose private ownership of the
        means of production and the wage slavery which is a component
        of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must
        be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer."

<<SNIP>>
>
>Moreover, I would add that his writings on American involvement in Asia,
>Latin America, and, to be honest, the whole world outside American
>frontiers include (as a logical precondition if not explicitly, I cannot quote
>and expect not to be forced to by a "Chomskian Inquisition") the idea
>that American economy needs such forced outlets for overproduction
>within the country's boundaries.

Will this do? I'm not sure Chomsky really acknowledges the link to
overproduction in this passage though.

"Diplomacy has perceived Latin America and Africa in a similar light.
Planning documents stress that the role of Latin America is to provide
resources, markets, investment opportunities with ample repatriation of
capital, and in general, a favorable climate for business. If that can be
achieved with formal elections under conditions that safeguard business
interests, well and good; if it requires death squads "to destroy
permanently a perceived threat to the existing structure of socioeconomic
privilege by eliminating the political participation of the numerical
majority . . .," that's too bad, but preferable to the alternative of
independence; the words are those of Lars Schoultz, the leading US academic
specialist on human rights in Latin America, describing the National
Security States that had their roots in Kennedy Administration policies."
-(Chomsky, Year 501: World Orders Old and New)

Bill Bartlett
Bracknell Tas.