The Pros and Cons of Chomsky
My brief response to an inquiry regarding my views on prolific author and intellectual Noam Chomsky
Noam Chomsky was one of my first introductions to leftist politics and his work definitely set me on the right path and inspired me to learn more. I watched tons of his lectures and read his collection of short books (it was a box set I discovered while working at an independent book store after high school). I remember his pamphlet on 9/11 became incredibly popular because not many media voices mentioned the relevant historical context of the U.S. arming and training the mujahideen in Afghanistan, a Salafi-jihadist organization that later formed al-Qaeda and the Taliban. My friends and I had heated discussions about this over drinks.
I watched the documentary about him (“Manufacturing Consent”) many times and read a few of his other books. My initial exposure to the Israel/Palestine issue was also shaped in part by Chomsky’s analysis. I’d say at this point the main aspects of Chomsky’s work that stick with me are his critique of U.S. foreign policy and his analysis of the way the mainstream media “manufactures consent” for war and other destructive policies. These definitely still hold up as a valuable analyses.
However, since I have refined my political views over the years, I ended up in disagreement with Chomsky on other issues. I am a Marxist-Leninist and Chomsky is an anarchist (“libertarian socialist”), and this is the root of our disagreements. For instance, I believe that the working class must seize state power to build socialism, while Chomsky opposes all states, even proletarian ones (he denies the proletarian nature of socialist countries throughout history). He uses the language and talking points of capitalist institutions to demonize the history of socialist/communist movements that have come to power. Despite the overwhelming successes of socialist countries like China, Cuba, and the USSR, Chomsky utilizes sensationalistic and debunked anti-communist rhetoric to push people away from actually existing revolutionary socialism.
Chomsky also promotes, to some degree, the notion of “lesser evilism.” For instance, he often claims it is important for Americans (even leftists) to vote for Democrats in presidential elections. As someone who espouses revolutionary Marxism, I see the two major political parties as equal parts of the “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie” in the U.S. — both institutions represent the capitalist class. This becomes more and more clear, as every election cycle the options get more and more evil. At this point, Joe Biden and Donald Trump are virtually indistinguishable in terms of draconian immigration policy, domestic austerity, pathological lying, sexual assault allegations, relentless imperialism, and legislating on behalf of large corporations and Wall Street. The policies of both the Democrats and Republicans in no way represent the needs of the poor or the working class. In short, bourgeois “democracy,” to paraphrase Lenin, is only democracy for the rich. I believe revolutionary class struggle is the only way to truly transform society for the better.
Back to Chomsky. I’d say I have a nuanced view of him, especially since his work was foundational to my journey as a leftist. I think a lot of his work remains valuable, while I also have profound disagreements with his stances on class struggle, building socialism, electoral politics, and the history of communist/socialist movements. In lieu of Chomsky’s work, the main book I usually recommend to people on leftist politics is “Blackshirts and Reds” by Michael Parenti.
Parenti is a political scientist who has advanced degrees and was a prolific author and public speaker, and therefore comparable to Chomsky. I recommend him as sort of an alternative to Chomsky because there was a lot of “unlearning” I had to do when I started becoming a Marxist regarding some of the more naive notions that are perpetuated on the Western left, including by Chomsky himself. Parenti even provides a brief critique of Chomsky in his piece “Left Anticommunism,” which further elucidates my own disagreements with this particular aspect of Chomsky’s outlook.
All that being said, I would definitely recommend Chomsky’s work overall. He is extremely knowledgeable on a vast array of topics, has written dozens of excellent books, and remains a great introduction to leftist politics in general. Just be aware of his anti-communist talking points and seek out a range of sources on the history and theory behind revolutionary politics.
Note: This was a very brief reaction, written in one sitting without doing any research. I might be interested in writing a more in-depth piece in the future.
