Free Market Fantasies by Noam Chomsky 5/5

vktrsx Says:

Jan 6, 2009 - His point at 8:48 is crucial: To speak of "corporate greed" is to miss the point of corporations, which is to navigate markets to their own advantage. Greed is the entire point!

vktrsx Says:

Jan 6, 2009 - The term "corporate greed" implies that some are not, which is absurd!

DennisDuine Says:

May 22, 2009 - tautology

lapwiz Says:

Jun 6, 2009 - That is incorrect. Trade unionists often regard anarcho-syndicalism as a direct menace, sometimes viewing the Anarchist objections to authoritarian leadership and to the closed shop as equivalent with Conservative attacks on free trade unionism. Yet at the same time Conservatives view anarcho-syndicalism as "trade unionism gone mad." from Anarchism: Arguments for and Against, AK Press, 1996: Edinburgh, pgs. 79 - 83.

lapwiz Says:

Jun 6, 2009 - TRADE UNIONISM tends to become a division of the working class separating employed from unemployed/unwaged, and creating job categories to which one is very often bound for life. It is sometimes, in the English system certainly, impossible to get a job unless you have a union card and impossible to get a union card unless you have a job.

lapwiz Says:

Jun 6, 2009 - ANARCHO-SYNDICALISM is based on the unity of all the workers in the region, grouping all employed, unemployed or self-employed in the local workers' centre, and providing entry regardless of 'category.'

lapwiz Says:

Jun 6, 2009 - TRADE UNIONISM in many countries looks to a closed shop to defend workers' interests, which - while it means on the one hand the union can obtain limited reforms or increases for all - also means the union is dependent more on parliamentary action than industrial action. The leadership becomes all-powerful since once it exerts its right to expel a member, that person is not only out of the union, but out of a job.

lapwiz Says:

Jun 6, 2009 - ANARCHO-SYNDICALISM rejects the closed shop and relies on voluntary membership, and so avoids any leadership or bureaucracy. One or two paid officials sufice for a membership of thousands, and sometimes even that much is considered unnecessary. Fights private enterprise and State control alike. Its aim is to abolish both.

wcropp1 Says:

Jun 9, 2009 - I'm still wondering what the effects of a truly free market would be like - one in which there is no state to manipulate it and that addresses the hierarchical concerns of capitalism. Certainly a mutualist or individual anarchist market economy like the ones suggest by Proudhon and Tucker would be a major improvement compared to what we have now. However, how do they compare to more collectivist economies in practice? I suppose, in theory, a truly anarchist society would be composed of both

wcropp1 Says:

Jun 9, 2009 - types of economies. The world has had limited experience with both. Experience will have to teach us as usual. And also, I wonder how successful "true" libertarians would be in reforming the state and subjecting corporations to the same "tough love" the average worker is subjected to. Or would we be better off with a social democracy type government? Obviously social revolution would be preferable, but in a pragmatic sense, I wonder who is the lesser of the two evils in a democratic society? The

wcropp1 Says:

Jun 9, 2009 - state or the market? A democratic socialist state or private industry in a more radically free market? Democratic socialists or "real" libertarians? I guess this is why reform is so unsuccessful - none of the candidates do what they say they will.

TheHandOfGovernment Says:

Jul 1, 2009 - fuck you noam

theonlynever6 Says:

Jul 23, 2009 - Truly free markets exist in third world countries, and that's one big reason why they still are third world countires.

Pentazoid111 Says:

Jul 29, 2009 - Well , we certainly no what effects the state would have if It had complete control of a country's economy (Soviet Union, North Korea, ); Hong Kong's economy is the closest thing to a real free market on this planet, and they are not slipping into the realm of economic chaos. Thoughout the ages it has been shown that the more economically successfully economies have be capitalistic economies and the less successful countries have been countries with unfree economies.

Pentazoid111 Says:

Jul 29, 2009 - He says corporations are greedy: well so are other entities , like small businesses, the consumers who buy goods and services at these small businesses and coporations; and of course , the government is greedy for wanting more rules , scientists are greedy for wanting more knowledge; the athletic for wanting to be a more skilled athlete Businesspeople don't have a monopoly on greed ; I have people who have the power to restrict these desires and the only entity who has that power is the govt.

MrXfromPlanetX Says:

Aug 27, 2009 - The only problem is the Corporations control the government. They also manipulate the opinions of average people using the media. Check out the book Propaganda by Edward Bernays originally published in 1928: "The minority has discovered a powerful help in influencing majorities. It has been found possible so to mold the mind of the masses desired direction. In the present structure of society, this practice in inevitable." He was trying to sell people on the idea

demik027 Says:

Oct 16, 2009 - im having a hard time trying to understand your argument. it is widely know that if not all most human institutions have ingrain qualities because humans created them. it sound to me that you would preffer the lesser of two evils which in this case is human nature or motive vs mindless submission to power. a human mind shape out of this regressive thinking, by my definition is mostly shaped by the capitalist impose conditions to our environment

jakiner Says:

Oct 17, 2009 - i agree with you in a way Pentazoid111... individuals do have the power to resist greed. However, corporations don't have this power because Unions have been smashed since the 1920's.

YankeeTom63 Says:

Nov 9, 2009 - Those were dictatorships / fascist in nature. Chomsky is a Libertarian Socialist. Your use to Corporate entities owning your government and setting the agenda, Noam Chomsky wants you to have a share of ownership and government to Liston to you. That means personal Liberty from Government AND Big Business!

YankeeTom63 Says:

Nov 9, 2009 - Don't believe me? Look at governments in the Netherlands , Switzerland, Iceland, Look at worker rights in France , Germany.

bapyou Says:

Nov 20, 2009 - The thirst for knowledge and the greed for money are the same thing? You're a sick asshole.

enomarekim Says:

Feb 25, 2010 - Whoever owns the mill will eventually hire someone else to work for them. There is no way to stop this. If the workers hate not owning the factories, why don't the unions pool money and buy the factories? Then the workers could vote for who runs the companies. Or does the government protects the company owners. Either way, this will become irrelevant when robots replace all manual labor.

lordblazer Says:

Mar 1, 2010 - lol HK isn't slipping because it has a strong tradition as being an international HUB. MAny expats live in that city and many people of different nationalities live there.. Of course one thing you have to know is there is still some form of regulation done in the HK or else the whole thing does truly fall apart. Also the HK has quite a few social problems that are welll hidden even when they were under British rule as a colony until 1997.

chuckiepoo222 Says:

Jun 1, 2010 - i play wif my dick

BobSlydell100 Says:

Aug 27, 2010 - Just listened to the whole thing. He could not be more right.