Not that dickhead!!!?????? Edit to add: I'll be more specific. What he understands about economics could be written on the back of a postage stamp, if only I could find one. As I don't have access to a postage stamp at the moment, it doesn't matter what Chomsky said. To quote him as an example though from another source: Source: https://www.alternet.org/2013/05/noam-chomsky-kind-anarchism-i-believe-and-whats-wrong-libertarians/ No, Smith didn't argue that. Chomsky has a penchant for bending the facts to suit his argument. Typical socialist.
I was thinking about this very topic today. In history, when wealth disparity becomes too great, the good ideas within socialism are buried by anger, hatred and fear. Then the "Bolsheviks" rouse the mobs and the revolution happens. Then 100 million bodies later the wicked parts of socialism are lost in history and capitalism triumphs again, and wealth disparity arises..... etc. The only way is a middle way, guided by uncorrupted democracy which supports all in the pursuit of life and liberty. Some parts will appear as socialism to the simple minds on the right, some parts as cruel and inhumane by the simple minds on the left. Chomsky is right about greed. btw This thought process was started by a BBC radio report direct from Belsen. Greed and the horrors it brings. Richard Dimbleby at youtube address VP9BLKZENbc for anyone interested.
He quoted that "70% of the population has no way of influencing policy" He lost me there, What's happened is most of the population don't have the time, energy or testicular Fortitude to stand up and fight for what they want. Take a look at gay marriage for example, were looking a a minority group that changed the law in that example. If we had the balls to stand in the streets and protest, we'd gain momentum. Take a look at what's hapening in Hong Kong with the anti extradition bill, they've gained ground and are pushing further now. Westerners are looking gutless now compared to those Hong Kong people. We've been turned into a bunch of brainwashed, self regulating snowflakes.
You can’t change human nature. You can only limit the unsavoury aspects of our nature by limiting the unsavoury aspects of political power. Edit to add: and there are no good ideas in socialism because socialist theory is based upon a number of fallacies.
That's the binary approach I'm talking about. If you dismiss it totally, where do the socialists go if not to direct action? Left and Right are equally flawed.
The concern for worker’s conditions, political equality and the disenfranchisement of the populace that drove the early socialist theorist’s work was evident already in the earlier writings of the philosophers during the Age of Reason which led to the Classical Liberal period. The intentions of the socialist theorists may well have been sound, but it was their solutions that were flawed because of a failure to grasp economic truths eg labour theory, the profit incentive, trade etc . Combined with a disregard for the function of capital and the role capitalists play in enhancing wealth and liberty. Socialists should go to the free-market and Classical Liberalism as a start. They should also reject any redistribution if wealth that the State imposes as it’s immoral.
These three charges are that capitalism is inhuman, unjust and wasteful. https://erasethestate.com/2019/08/29/why-marxs-three-main-critiques-of-capitalism-are-wrong/
Richard Dimbleby at youtube address VP9BLKZENbc i looked but nothing - do you have a proper Youtube link?