Chomsky Gives Me The Red Pill

There are good reasons to resent the US and its policies, and nearly every nation in the world can cite some grievance against the state or the corporations it serves. Chomsky's persuasive thesis is that the US, by its own definition, meets the criteria for a failed state. It is widely acknowledged by many countries as their greatest threat to national security. It acts unilaterally, often in contempt of international consensus or law. It ignores the will of its people, safeguards the interests of corporations and the powerful, and increasingly shirks its responsibilities to the citizens who need the state most.


Chomsky also offers up dubious arithmetic when he contends that developing domestic oil supplies in the Arctic Northern Wildlife Refuge "entails even greater reliance on Middle East oil." He also tries to argue that there is no Social Security crisis because "If American society was able to take care of the boomers from ages zero to twenty, there can be no fundamental reason why...[America] cannot take care of them from ages sixty-five to ninety. At most, some technical fixes might be needed."

Speaking of Israel's relations with Palestinians, Chomsky paraphrases scholar and scientist Yeshayu Leibowitz's warning that "oppressing another people would lead to serious moral degeneration, corruption, and internal decay." The caution applies equally well to the US, with its awesome sphere of dominion, and oppression abroad and--often overlooked--domestically.
Our current government's sympathy for the US's religious fundamentalism, corporate primacy, fear-mongering, and militarism ranks behind that of only the UK and Australia, perhaps. That is a disturbing development. Canada has long had a reputation as a successful plural society, a social welfare state in the model of Western Europe, a mediator of international relations, a peacekeeper, and a tolerant, progressive society. But, as Chomsky warns in the US, reactionary statists are seeking to exploit current opportunities to enshrine policies which serve the powerful elite "so that it will be no small task to reconstruct a more humane and democratic society."
Why, oh why, did I take the Red Pill?
Comments
Admittedly, I'm unfamiliar with your blog and only stumbled upon it.
After reading your book review, however, it would seem fair to say that we have fundamentally different views of Chomsky's work. In reading his books, I might be inclined to make provocative statements, such as 'reading too much Chomsky causes brain rot'. Aside from some questionable logic, his historical accounts are tainted with serious flaws - at least as far as historical academia is concerned. The famous liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. (and former staff member of the JFK admin) warned others about "prophetic" and pseudo-historians. In fact, historian Kevin Mattson provides a similar warning regarding Howard Zinn (noting Chomsky in passing) (Democracy Journal).
There are many other small-l-liberal sources, which are much more credible.