Tuesday, March 30, 2010

RE: Chomsky in the light of French Anarchism.

            Billy Blogblather (see his comments below) introduces some interesting considerations.  He writes, "No one has authority over anyone but that one agrees by the will of another or of some groups."  I'm not absolutely sure what that means, but it sounds like the individual is free to abrogate the social contract he has with his nation if he disagrees with it.   Billy says that he has no intention of abrogating his, but that may be a personal decision.  His "principle" if he has created one, seems to leave that open to the individual.  Correct me Billy, if I'm wrong.
            Without studying the matter exhaustively, what I have studied suggests that every nation has done something that some citizens object to.  According to the Billy Blogblather principle (assuming I understand it).  Those citizens, much as the French citizens who resorted to Anarchy, have the right to abrogate their social contract and take some sort of action against their nation.  The French Anarchists of the 1890s liked to throw bombs at their leaders.  Noam Chomsky likes to go about the world giving speeches.
            Interestingly, Chomsky, and Billy, aren't concerned about America changing its ways and doing better in the future.  They both hold America to account for past sins.  Most Protestants believe there is no unforgiveable sin, but that isn't the case with Chomsky and Blogblather.  They reserve the right to severe their social contract (should they choose to, which they don't) based upon past sins -- sins America no longer commits.  Of course there are new sins they object to, but are they not being inconsistent by bring up past sins?  Every nation has bushel baskets full of those.  We who admire Liberal Democracy admire its ability to correct its mistakes.  Look, we used to believe in Slavery, but we don't any more.  Shouldn't we get some credit for abrogating slavery?  Not by a long shot, say Chomsky and Blogblather.  Don't forget Wounded Knee either.  So what would it take, Chomsky Blogblather, for you to become reconciled to Liberal Democracy such that you quit bringing up those past sins.
            As to acquiring a "compassionate moral code," we are quite a bit more compassionate than we used to be.  Also, for example, what is "compassionate" by one person's standards may be "criminal coddling" by another's.  We get to vote on all those matters and if our representatives represent us and the Supreme Court doesn't overrule us, our opinions become law.  Surely you aren't saying that if we get out voted, our social contract with our nation is null and void.


Billy Blogblather has left a new comment on your post "Chomsky in the light of French Anarchism":

And #2 daughter was right. No one has authority over anyone but that one agrees to abide by the will of another or of some group. And that agreement can be rescinded at any time. Most of us no longer believe in the divine right of kings or any other ruler -- even of God many would say. This seems to me to be the bedrock value of liberal democracy. I can yell "fire" in a crowded theater, I can blow up buildings because I'm angry, I (as a nation) can invade countries because I desperately need their resources. I can make $300 million dollars a year while millions go under nourished. It's liberal democracy. I wouldn't have anything else. Except liberal democracy with a compassionate moral code. I think this is all that Noam Chomsky ever argued. The military evil we unleashed in Latin America and Vietnam, the economic evil we unleashed in the US through slavery and Jim Crow, these are but the most egregious offense against our credo of equality, justice and (the French, god love 'em) fraternity. For the sake of money this nation has committed many crimes. We've not starved millions as Stalin did in the Ukraine, nor as Mao executed after the Revolution or during the Cultural Revolution, we have no Babi Yar to account for -- well, there's Wounded Knee and The Trail of Tears and many other massacres, but they were just Indians and that was long ago. Bunches of blacks got hanged, but that's all history now. Over all, we're quite a Christian nation. Love your neighbor and all that. Chomsky bickers. He seems to think that we have had other motives in mind besides Justice, Equality, (and yes, the French again) Fraternity. All Chomsky is asking is that we stop being idiots at look at what's going on. But when you're comfortable, why should you do that?

No comments: