[Peace-discuss] Chomsky on the great danger of Trump

Sat Aug 1 20:23:51 UTC 2020

I’ll take Chomsky’s words and analysis, his warnings about threats to human existence. far more seriously then the chipping away of Nicholson and Green, who seems not to appreciate the truly dire threats brought forward by the present conjuncture. One can admit the desperate political situation in the U.S., not only, but foremost, Trump and his followers, but also of its Democratic party opposition. I think there is perversity in not recognizing what Chomsky emphasizes as current existential threats, criticizing issues important for many but not having the gravity of Chomsky’s views.

Would a Biden election be any better than what now exists? I think the answer is yes, as much as I detest Biden and company on so many “issues/details”.
All this carping sickens sickens me. Valid points struck, perhaps, but beside the point.

—mkb

On Jul 30, 2020, at 8:18 AM, David Green via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:

Yes, I think that what Jeff says is fundamentally correct.

DG

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020, 1:34 AM J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote:
> See the second and third parts of this interview (linked at end):
>
> https://www.democracynow.org/2020/7/24/noam_chomsky_on_trump_s_troop

I'm afraid I don't agree with Chomsky in much of this interview because large
portions of it came off to me as leaving out significant context and participating in
Trump Derangement Syndrome. Yes, Trump is awful, but the Democrats offer nobody
better because they're okay with Trump and Biden is merely a useful neolib/neocon
insurance policy. Chomsky was said to have shown "massive differences" between Trump
and Biden but as far as policy goes the two major corporate parties (and Trump &
Biden in particular) share so much in common that it seems unrepresentative to get
into what separates them as though there's enough to make a big deal out of that.
When I take into consideration what is likely to be on most Americans minds during a
depression and a pandemic with an upcoming election ahead, I can't concur with so
much of what Chomsky or DN's Nermeen Shaikh got into here.

Domestically, neither supports a UBI, jobs program, or Medicare for All (in fact, as
Jimmy Dore pointed out in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv21BLO-JwI and as I've
written to peace-discuss previously, it wouldn't be hard for Trump to shame the
Democrats by even offering to pass Medicare for All into law knowing the Democrats
will never bring such a bill to the House floor for a vote. Pelosi will see to
that.). Medicare for All alone is an election winner and is massively important to
Americans now. Medicare for All will only become more important as the coming weeks
pass: evictions, more people losing their jobs, and the loss of whatever healthcare
was tied to that job. Medicare for All didn't show up as a talking point in any of
the three parts of this Chomsky interview linked from
https://www.democracynow.org/2020/7/24/noam_chomsky_on_trump_s_troop and that's
probably because there's nothing a Democratic Party supporter could say about
Medicare for All that would make the Democrats look good. I dare say that Medicare
for All for Americans is more important than traveling to Europe (a topic Chomsky
does reference).

The interview spends a fair bit of time on speculation around imposing martial law
and canceling the elections (perhaps so they don't have to talk about far more
pressing issues where no speculation is necessary like the lack of Medicare for All,
lack of a national jobs program, and no UBI and that this tells us the Democrats are
fine with Trump). It's worth noting that in 2016 the largest bloc of registered
voters did not vote for president. So if 2020 repeats what happened in 2016 the
largest bloc of registered voters might not miss a chance to participate in a
presidential election they would have skipped due to loathing the two most prominent
candidates and their horrid policy choices.

We also get a bit of psychoanalysis -- the kind of talk we'd rightly reject coming
from anyone else (and it's not clear why we should hold Chomsky to different
standards) -- Chomsky said Trump is "desperate", "psychotic. He is in extreme danger
of losing his position in the White House", and "psychologically incapable of
losing". But there's no acknowledgement that establishment pollsters got the 2016
election wrong (and there's no price to pay for being so wrong). Hillary Clinton lost
her 2nd attempt at becoming US President to a TV game show host who had no electoral
history. To shift the blame she backed a now 4-year-long baseless conspiracy theory
(which DN is apparently happy to echo) blaming Russia for her loss known colloquially
as Russiagate. But somehow Trump's speculated "[refusal] to commit to accepting the
outcome of the 2020 election" is supposed to be troubling. Would that refusal come
with sanctions against Russia like Russiagate has? Sanctions hurt and kill the poor.
One would think those sanctions and the harms they cause would merit mention.

I'm suspicious that the main reason DN wants to interview Chomsky on this topic now
is because Chomsky is saying things that are compatible with DN's neoliberalist Trump
Derangement Syndrome. Around election time Chomsky seems to favor the Democrats
(witness this interview and the letter Chomsky signed on to not too long ago which
reached a conclusion much like 'any Blue will do').

In another part of the same overall interview --
https://www.democracynow.org/2020/7/24/man_woman_camera_person_tv_noam -- which DN
titled "Noam Chomsky Responds to Trump Bragging He Aced a Dementia Test" -- nobody
brought up Biden's readily-apparent mental problems (which the establishment media
try to paper over by calling them "gaffes"). And his team knows it; Obama "bluntly
counseled Mr. Biden to keep his speeches brief, interviews crisp and slash the length
of his tweets" so as to not give Biden more opportunity to showcase his obvious
mental inadequacy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmoln-XK3Gw). Recently a Biden
staffer cut off Biden's interview with docile media outlet before Biden could go
off-script too much further (https://youtube.com/watch?v=SaX1i4EeQRI).

So I fail to see how Trump is dangerous enough to merit the single-minded mentions he
gets in that DN interview; it would be far more useful to the audience to point out
that Trump is all too typical a US President which means he's merely the latest
leader of a line of rapacious oligarchs (quoting Dylan Ratigan). We got Trump because
of what the Obama/Biden administration did. The country rejected Mrs. Clinton in part
because of what we'd already seen her do as a Senator (which includes voting for
authorizing invading Iraq alongside Sen. Biden who would later go on to brag that
he'd make the same vote again, then when realizing that line is reading the room
wholly wrongly, lie about the reason for his authorization vote).

The Democrats currently give Trump what he asks for while calling Trump a traitor to
the US. The Democrats & Republicans work together against our needs. The Democrats
are not an opposition party. It's shameful to point out only one part of the trouble
we're in with the Democrats and Republicans without the context that the other major
corporate party agrees on all the major issues of the day.

Joe Biden promised his wealthy campaign investors that "Nothing will fundamentally
change". In that same speech he waxed fondly about "memories of working alongside
segregationist senators, and telling wealthy donors they have nothing to fear from
his presidency" according to establishment media outlet Vox, which continued:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/19/18690910/biden-fundraiser-controversy-segregationists-donors
> [Biden] didn’t want to “demonize” the wealthy and added that, though “income
> inequality” is a problem that must be addressed, under his presidency, “no one’s
> standard of living will change, nothing will fundamentally change.” He went on: “I
> need you very badly. I hope if I win this nomination, I won’t let you down.”
Biden should be taken at his word. That's a bad promise for anyone trying to pitch
the idea that Trump is "desperate" and "psychotic" in an effort to only talk about a
part of the story (particularly problematic in the context of a presidential election).
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20200801/3350e2a6/attachment-0001.htm>