Ramanan — Noam Chomsky On Neoliberalism: It’s Market For You But State Power For Me The Case For Concerted Action

"It’s Market For You But State Power For Me" is correct  as a one line distinction between  contemporary neoliberalism and classical "free market" liberalism aka laissez-faire.

Neoliberalism is a political theory holding that 1) economic liberalism trumps political and social liberalism where they intersect and 2) government influence is impossible to eliminate from markets and so it should be used to support capital formation over labor and land, that is, over workers and the environment. 

Neoliberalism is a form of corporate statism based on conflating politics with economics. It is opposed by classical liberals, social democrats and democratic socialists, especially since it tends toward fascism as the conflation of corporate and state power.

The Case for Concerted Action
Noam Chomsky On Neoliberalism: It’s Market For You But State Power For Me
V. Ramanan

Noam Chomsky in Conversation with Amy Goodman on Climate Change, Nukes, Syria, WikiLeaks & More

In this Democracy Now! special, we spend the hour with the world-renowned linguist and political dissident Noam Chomsky. In a public conversation we had in April, we talked about climate change, nuclear weapons, North Korea, Iran, the war in Syria and the Trump administration’s threat to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and his new book, "Requiem for the American Dream: The 10 Principles of Concentration of Wealth & Power."

Democracy Now!
Noam Chomsky in Conversation with Amy Goodman on Climate Change, Nukes, Syria, WikiLeaks & More

Amy Goodman interviews Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

ht V. Ramanan at The Case for Concerted Action

Noam Chomsky on the Long History of US Meddling in Foreign Elections — C.J. Polychroniou interviews Noam Chomsky

Let me count the ways.

Truthout
Noam Chomsky on the Long History of US Meddling in Foreign Elections
C.J. Polychroniou interviews Noam Chomsky

Ramanan — Noam Chomsky On Free Trade Agreements

Chomsky and Assange school economists on "free trade."

The Case for Concerted Action

Noam Chomsky On Free Trade Agreements

V. Ramanan

Alexandra Rosenmann — Noam Chomsky Unravels the Political Mechanics Behind His Gradual Expulsion From Mainstream Media

Shut out.

AlterNet
Noam Chomsky Unravels the Political Mechanics Behind His Gradual Expulsion From Mainstream Media
Alexandra Rosenmann, AlterNet

Alexandra Rosenmannt — Noam Chomsky Reveals The Hypocrisies of Capitalism in the Financial Capital of the World

Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis at the NY Public Library.

AlterNet
Noam Chomsky Reveals The Hypocrisies of Capitalism in the Financial Capital of the World Alexandra Rosenmannt

Voters hit hardest by free-trade economics are rebelling against the status quo. We can use that energy to build a powerful, grassroots movement for democracy.

With More Americans Going Far Left (And Right), an Anti-Corporate Agenda Takes Shape
David Korten / Yes! Magazine

Alexandra Rosenmann — Chomsky: The Majority of Today's Elected Democrats Are Moderate Republicans

Thanks to Third Way New Democrats and Bill Clinton's triangulation on the advice of Dick Morris. The result was the strangulation of the "old" Democratic legacy of FDR.

AlterNet

Chomsky: The Majority of Today's Elected Democrats Are Moderate Republicans
Alexandra Rosenmann, AlterNet

Yanis Varoufakis — In conversation with Noam Chomsky, at the New York Public Library

Yanis Varoufakis
In conversation with Noam Chomsky, at the New York Public Library

Robin Scher — Chomsky Interview: ‘The U.S. Is One of the Most Fundamentalist Countries in the World’

“Today’s Democrats, Clinton-style Democrats, are pretty much what used to be called moderate Republicans. And the Republicans just went way off the spectrum. They are so dedicated to service to wealth and the corporate sector that they simply cannot get votes on their own programs.”

Alternet
Chomsky Interview: ‘The U.S. Is One of the Most Fundamentalist Countries in the World’
Robin Scher, AlterNet

Electing the President of An Empire — Abby Martin interviews Noam Chomsky

NC: About 70% of the public, the lowest 70% on the income scale, are pretty much disenfranchised. Their attitudes have no detectable influence on the policies of their own representatives. As you move up the scale you get a bit more influence. When you get to the top, policy is made.

Now the top can mean a fraction of 1%, so it’s kind of a plutocracy with democratic forms. And the elections, I mean by now it’s almost become a joke but it’s always been true that campaign financing plays a very substantial role in not only who’s elected but what the policies are. That goes back 100 years. Great campaign manager 100 years ago, Mark Hanna, was asked once: “What are the important things that you have to have to run a campaign. He said: “There are three things. First one’s money. The second one is money. And I forget what the third one is.”

Aside — Abby Martin is looking to be her generation's Amy Goodman. Her recent interview of Larry Wilkerson was excellent, and this interview with Chomsky continues in that vein. Interesting to see Larry Wilkerson, a self-identified Republican, although now a disaffected one, agreeing with arch-leftist Noam Chomsky. I hope Abby will interview Mike Lofgren, too.

AlterNet
Noam Chomsky: Electing the President of An Empire
Abby Martin

No Brains In Washington — Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts was the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan Administration and one of the developers of supply side economics. He was also associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. When he starts agreeing with Noam Chomsky and Michael Hudson about "neoliberal economics" being the problem, you know that something is up. This is not supposed to happen in a normal world.

No Brains In Washington — Paul Craig Roberts

Noam Chomsky — Creating the Horror Chambers

Dan Falcone: I wanted to stay on the topic of education and ask you about language, terminology, and definitions in the social sciences. So for example, I’ve noticed in my curriculum that there’s a tendency to have terms with a real definition and then a code definition. Terms like foreign aid, independence movements, partition, and democracy. 

Two terms that I know are of particular interest to you are anarchism and libertarianism. Could you discuss the varying definitions of those two terms, anarchism and libertarianism? Maybe the American definition versus the European, and why that’s important for education to sort out?

Noam Chomsky: There’s hardly a term in social science, political discourse, academic professions, and the scholarly professions where there’s anything remotely like clear definitions. If you want a clear definition, you have to go to mathematics or parts of physics.

Definitions are basically parts of theoretical structures. A definition doesn’t mean anything unless it’s embedded in some theory of some explanatory scope. And in these areas, there really are no such theories. So the terms are in fact used very loosely. They have a strong ideological component.

Take, say, democracy. The United States, I’m sure in your school, they teach as the world’s leading democracy. It’s also a country in which about 70 percent of the population, the lower 70 percent on the income scale, are completely disenfranchised.

Their opinions have no detectable influence on the decisions of their own representatives. Which is a good reason to believe, a large reason, why a huge number of people don’t bother voting. They know that it’s a waste of time. So is that a democracy? No, not really.

And you could say the same about almost any other term. Sometimes it’s almost laughable. So for example, in 1947, the US government changed the name of the War Department. They changed it to the Defense Department — any person with a brain functioning knew that we’re not going to be involved in defense anymore. We’re going to be involved in aggression. They didn’t have to read Orwell to know that. And in fact, religiously, every time you read about the war budget, it’s called the defense budget. And defense now means war, very much as in Orwell. And pretty much across the board.…

Jacobin
Creating the Horror Chambers
Dan Falcone interviews Noam Chomsky

Mark Evans — Rethinking False Consciousness

Question: If capitalist economics is based on class exploitation and oppression, then why hasn’t the working class organized itself into a liberating revolutionary movement?

Answer: False consciousness!

The notion of false consciousness has been developed out of Marxist theory. The basic idea can be broken down into the following components. First, the dominant ideas in society are those of the ruling class or classes. Second, the interests of the dominant class or classes are not the same as those of the subordinate class or classes. Third, under such circumstances, the subordinate class(es) tend to adopt the interests of the dominant class and in-so-doing unknowingly takes on an ideological position that does not promote their interests.

Perhaps the most obvious and extreme example of false consciousness, to play-out in the real world, would be that of war. Here the use of nationalism, for example, as a means of getting the people of one country to fight against the people of another country, is employed by elites. Put simply, this results in working class people killing each other to protect and promote the existing power and privilege of the capitalist class.

Understanding that we can be socialized into adopting an ideological position that is detrimental to our own interests is an important step towards the development of revolutionary consciousness. The facilitation of such development also represents perhaps the greatest challenge to revolutionaries. Unfortunately however, the ways in which Marxists have tried to address false consciousness have led to a number of very problematic and undesirable outcomes. Here I would like to highlight two specific, and perhaps related, examples of this problem and present possible alternative solutions...

Interesting Marxian analysis that takes issue with Marxism.
    
teleSur
Rethinking False Consciousness
Mark Evans

Ellen Brown — The Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Death of the Republic

Ellen is a lawyer. She spells out the implications of what we know about the trade agreements that are being fast-tracked without public debate.

The Web of Debt Blog
The Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Death of the Republic
Ellen Brown

See also:

Truthdig
Noam Chomsky: Every Word in the Phrase ‘Free Trade Agreement’ Is False

Opponents need to attack TPP and TIPP based on national sovereignty. Any diminution of national sovereignty would create a flurry of outrage on the right and the GOP would be forced to back off with their base in an uproar.

Ron Paul says Free Trade Agreements erode National sovereignty, destroy jobs, and only serves the special interests. So-called "Free Trade" is Government-managed trade. 

When Noam Chomsky and Ron Paul agree, you can be sure that something is up.

Patrick L. Smith — Our dangerous new McCarthyism: Russia, Noam Chomsky and what the media’s not telling you about the new Cold War

Perverse, diabolical obsession: Policy cliques in D.C. have no intention of desisting in this war until they win it

Salon
Our dangerous new McCarthyism: Russia, Noam Chomsky and what the media’s not telling you about the new Cold War

Patrick L. Smith

Sarah Gray — Noam Chomsky on Russia

Noam Chomsky appeared this week on Russian network RT, in a nearly half-hour-long interview about U.S. foreign policy. He discussed everything from NATO, sanctions against Russia, the fight against ISIS and the worst-case scenario for declining U.S. and Russian relations.

Summary with link to video and transcript.

Salon
Noam Chomsky on Russia: “The worst-case scenario, of course, would be a nuclear war”

Sarah Gray

Travis Gettys — Noam Chomsky: U.S. used to have people killed for practicing what Pope Francis preaches (via Raw Story )

Noam Chomsky: U.S. used to have people killed for practicing what Pope Francis preaches (via Raw Story )

The United States waged a decades-long war against Catholics who practiced the teachings that got Pope Francis named as Time magazine’s person of the year, said political philosopher Noam Chomsky. He said that the 1962 Vatican II conference had restored…

---

Chomsky: Business Elites Are Waging a Brutal Class War in America

The business classes are constantly fighting a bitter class war to improve their power and diminish opposition.

AlterNet
Chomsky: Business Elites Are Waging a Brutal Class War in America
Noam Chomsky
Excerpt from the just released 2nd edition of Noam Chomsky’s OCCUPY: Class War, Rebellion and Solidarity, edited by Greg Ruggiero and published by Zuccotti Park Press. Chris Steele interviews Chomsky.

Noam Chomsky — The State Fears Its Own People

Chomsky on terror, Snowden, and why "security" is usually an excuse for government repression.

AlterNet
Noam Chomsky: The State Fears Its Own People
Noam Chomsky

Interesting summary of Lenin's "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism" (1916):

This thesis posited that the merging of banks and industrial cartels gave rise to finance capital—the basis of imperialism, the zenith of capitalism. To wit, in pursuing greater profits than the home market can offer, business exports capital, which, in turn, leads to the division of the world, among international, monopolist firms, and to European states colonising large parts of the world, in support of their businesses. Imperialism, thus, is an advanced stage of capitalism based upon the establishment of monopolies, and upon the exportation of capital (rather than goods), managed with a global financial system, of which colonialism is one feature.

Hmmm.

BTW, Lenin's later justification of the necessity for a national security state in Russia is pretty similar to the rationale we are hearing now from recent administrations and leaders of both parties.

Noam Chomsky — How Do We Defend Ourselves from the Corporate and Imperial Forces That Threaten Our Existence?

We need a worldwide struggle to preserve the global commons....

The blurring of borders and these challenges to the legitimacy of states bring to the fore serious questions about who owns the Earth. Who owns the global atmosphere being polluted by the heat-trapping gases that have just passed an especially perilous threshold, as we learned in May? Or to adopt the phrase used by indigenous people throughout much of the world, Who will defend the Earth? Who will uphold the rights of nature? Who will adopt the role of steward of the commons, our collective possession? That the Earth now desperately needs defense from impending environmental catastrophe is surely obvious to any rational and literate person. The different reactions to the crisis are a most remarkable feature of current history. At the forefront of the defense of nature are those often called “primitive”: members of indigenous and tribal groups, like the First Nations in Canada or the Aborigines in Australia - the remnants of peoples who have survived the imperial onslaught. At the forefront of the assault on nature are those who call themselves the most advanced and civilized: the richest and most powerful nations. 

AlterNet
Chomsky: How Do We Defend Ourselves from the Corporate and Imperial Forces That Threaten Our Existence?