What are we to make of liberals & establishment shills parading Chomsky, not for his brilliant analysis on US imperialism, the MSM, anti-capitalism, anti-authoritarianism, or anarchism, but instead for the tiniest sliver of a relatively out of context ‘Safe-state Strategy?’ 1/10
Chomsky’s comment that "failure to vote for Biden in a swing state amounts to voting for Trump." is best put within the context of a ‘Safe-state Strategy’ outlined in his own open letter (cosigned by several Left leaders): 2/10
portside.org/2020-01-24/ope…
portside.org/2020-01-24/ope…
Entirely left out of this opportunistic charade is Chomsky’s assessment that Republicans & Democrats are basically “two factions” of “one party,” - the corporate party - that “are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies” 3/10
Chomsky is right when he says the Republican Party is the “most dangerous organization in human history”
But completely left out is that he has also written extensively about how Corporate Dems, not too far off, enable & provide cover for much of Republican’s worst policies 4/10
But completely left out is that he has also written extensively about how Corporate Dems, not too far off, enable & provide cover for much of Republican’s worst policies 4/10
But the gravest mischaracterization of Chomsky’s ‘Safe-state Strategy’ is his prolific analysis of how change *really* happens. 5/10
For example, in his aptly titled book Understanding Power, Chomsky says:
“things will happen through the electoral process only if there are popular forces in motion in society which are active enough to be threatening to power.”
*Threatening to Power* 6/10
“things will happen through the electoral process only if there are popular forces in motion in society which are active enough to be threatening to power.”
*Threatening to Power* 6/10
Furthermore, in the open letter, he argues for “urging and facilitating grass roots activism.”
Why? Because movements threatening power is how change really happens & (again from the letter) that is “somewhat more probable even with the likes of Biden in office” over Trump 7/10
Why? Because movements threatening power is how change really happens & (again from the letter) that is “somewhat more probable even with the likes of Biden in office” over Trump 7/10
Real change comes from movements. Biden is arguably one of the worst Democratic candidates with a long history of racism, sexism & he has been a corporate tool his entire career. We should be honest about who he is & what he represents. 8/10
But within the context of Chomsky’s Understanding of Power, movements are more likely to *force* change with Biden, then a fascist like Trump. 9/10
If we took a historically contextualized understanding of movements, power & social change, we should be building upon Sanders’ campaign *outside of electoral politics* in a way that is "threatening to power".
See this on a possible path forward: 10/10
See this on a possible path forward: 10/10
