Tweet Noam Chomsky Quotes
Showing posts tagged capitalism.

Noam Chomsky Quotes

Ask me anything   Submit   Noam Chomsky Books   Twitter    

Quotes by Noam Chomsky - unofficial (managed by his fans)

    "Neo-Liberalism" Is neither "New" nor "Liberal"

    — 6 months ago with 34 notes
    #chomsky  #chomskyvideo  #neoliberalism  #capitalism  #economics  #corporations 
    "I don’t understand how people can talk about “free trade” with a straight face. Apart from the transparent violations of free trade built into the World Trade Organization rules-monopolistic pricing guarantees that go far beyond anything in economic history, for example-what does it mean for political entities that rely crucially on the dynamic state sector for economic development (like the US) to enter into “free trade agreements”?"
    Noam Chomsky


    — 7 months ago with 37 notes
    #capitalism  #usa  #free trade  #free market  #chomsky quotes  #noam chomsky  #chomsky 
    "The IMF, which is sort of an off-shoot of the US Treasury Department, has had a shattering effect in Latin America. Its programs have been followed more rigorously in Latin America than any other part of the world outside of Sub-Saharan Africa, and they’ve been a disaster. So take say Bolivia. They’ve been following IMF policies for 25 years, and at the end per-capita income is lower than it was in the beginning. Argentina was the poster-child of the IMF. It was marvelous, it was doing all the things right, they were urging everyone else to follow the same policies, same for the World Bank and the US Treasury Department. Well what happened is it led to a total economic catastrophe."
    Noam Chomsky


    — 7 months ago with 53 notes
    #chomsky  #noam chomsky  #imf  #IMF  #USA  #capitalism  #greed 
    "There are major institutions that are specifically dedicated to undermining authentic democracy. One of them is called the public relations industry. A huge industry, it was in fact developed on the principle that it’s necessary to regiment the minds of men, much as an army regiments its soldiers - I was actually quoting from one of its leading figures before."
    Noam Chomsky


    — 7 months ago with 38 notes
    #noam+chomsky  #marketing  #propaganda  #public relations  #chomsky  #democracy  #freedom  #capitalism 
    "As a broader question, however, why do we have copyright laws? Is that the moral way or even the economically efficient way to support the creative arts? I don’t think so; there are better ways. For example, it should be, in a free democratic society, a sort of responsibility arrived at by democratic decision to maintain adequate support for creative arts as we do for science. If that were done, the artists wouldn’t need copyrights to survive. That’s economically more efficient, I believe, and morally more justified."
    Noam Chomsky


    — 7 months ago with 89 notes
    #noam+chomsky  #chomsky  #piracy  #copyright  #capitalism  #science 
    "You can’t control people by force anymore, but you can get them to focus on nothing but maxing out five credit cards, okay you got them under control. They don’t talk to anybody. They have no ideas. They don’t think you can do anything."
    Noam Chomsky 


    — 7 months ago with 87 notes
    #noam+chomsky  #chomsky  #capitalism  #freedom  #liberty 

    "Too big to fail" - government insurance policy 

    — 8 months ago with 8 notes
    #capitalism  #corporate profits  #chomsky  #noam chomsky 
    "Corporatization can have considerable influence in other ways. Corporate managers have a duty. They have to focus on profit making and seeking to convert as much of life as possible into commodities. It’s not because they’re bad people; it’s their task. Under Anglo-American law, it’s their legal obligation as well. There’s a lot to say about this topic, but one element of it concerns the universities and much else. One particular consequence is the focus on what’s called efficiency. It’s an interesting concept. It’s not strictly an economic concept. It has crucial ideological dimensions. If a business reduces personnel, it might become more efficient by standard measures with lower costs. Typically, that shifts the burden to the public, a very familiar phenomenon we see all the time. Costs to the public are not counted, and they’re colossal. That’s a choice that’s not based on economic theory. That’s based on an ideological decision, which applies directly to the “business models,” as they’re called, of the universities. Increasing class-size or employing cheap temporary labor, say graduate students instead of full-time faculty, may look good on a university budget, but there are significant costs. They’re transferred and not measured. They’re transferred to students and to the society generally as the quality of education, the quality of instruction is lowered."
    Noam Chomsky (via sombrefan)
    — 8 months ago with 92 notes
    #corporate  #corporations  #ethics  #capitalism  #noam chomsky  #chomsky 
    "Returning to the “victory of democracy” under US guidance, neither Lakoff nor Carothers asks how Washington maintained the traditional power structure of highly undemocratic societies. Their topic is not the terrorist wars that left tens of thousands of tortured and mutilated corpses, millions of refugees, and devastation perhaps beyond recovery- in large measure wars against the Church, which became an enemy when it adopted “the preferential option for the poor,” trying to help suffering people to attain some measure of justice and democratic rights. It is more than symbolic that the terrible decade of the 1980s opened with the murder of an archbishop who had become “a voice for the voiceless,” and closed with the assassination of six leading Jesuit intellectuals who had chosen the same path, in each case by terrorist forces armed and trained by the victors of the “crusade for democracy.” One should take careful note that the leading Central American dissident intellectuals were double assassinated: both murdered and silenced. Their words, indeed their very existence, are scarcely known in the United States, unlike dissidents in enemy states, who are greatly honored and admired."
    Noam Chomsky, Profit over People (via gemutlich-geigenspieler)

    (Source: dilettante-perpetuel)

    — 8 months ago with 12 notes
    #capitalism  #wars  #Profit over People 
    "The belief in markets is a religious belief. Rationally, we know of all kinds of fundamental, what are called, “inefficiencies” in markets. But the belief that they can solve everything and that everything can have a value determined by the market, I think you can regard that as a religious belief. The other day I happened to be reading a careful, interesting account of the state of British higher education. The government is a kind of market-oriented government and they came out with an official paper, a “White Paper” saying that it is not the responsibility of the state to support any institution that can’t survive in the market. So, if Oxford is teaching philosophy, the arts, Greek history, medieval history, and so on, and they can’t sell it on the market, why should they be supported? Because life consists only of what you can sell in the market and get back, nothing else. That is a real pathology."
    Noam Chomsky


    — 9 months ago with 127 notes
    #noam+chomsky  #capitalism  #freedom  #religion  #history  #anarchism 

    “It’s designed to carry forward the neoliberal project to maximize profit and domination, and to set the working people in the world in competition with one another so as to lower wages to increase insecurity.

    “It’s called free trade, but that’s just a joke,” Chomsky said. “These are extreme, highly protectionist measures designed to undermine freedom of trade. In fact, much of what’s leaked about the TPP indicates that it’s not about trade at all, it’s about investor rights.”

    Noam Chomsky, in an interview with the Huffington Post on the latest WikiLeaks releases on the TPP,  revealing what really the partnership really is.  (via assangistan)

    (Source: The Huffington Post, via assangistan)

    — 9 months ago with 78 notes
    #usa  #capitalism  #greed  #noam chomsky  #chomsky 
    "…that’s the way that capitalism works. The nature of the system is that it’s supposed to be driven by greed; no one’s supposed to be concerned for anybody else, nobody’s supposed to worry about the common good - those are not things that are supposed to motivate you, that’s the principle of the system. The theory is that private vices lead to public benefits - that’s what they teach you in economics departments. It’s all total bullshit, of course, but that’s what they teach you. And as long as the system works that way, yeah, it’s going to self destruct."
    Understanding Power - Noam Chomsky
    — 11 months ago with 283 notes
    #noam chomsky  #chomsky  #capitalism  #power  #Understanding Power  #economics  #crisis  #democracy 
    The principle is that the powerful and the privileged have to be able to do what they want

    In general the principle of the World Trade Organization, the primary principle, and related treaties, is that sovereignty and democratic rights have to be subordinated to the rights of investors. In practice that means the rights of the huge immortal persons, the private tyrannies to which people must be subordinated. These are among the issues that led to the remarkable events in Seattle. But in some ways, a lot of ways, the conflict between popular sovereignty and private power was illuminated more sharply a couple of months after Seattle, in Montreal, where an ambiguous settlement was reached on the so-called “biosafety protocol.” There the issue was very clearly drawn. Quoting the New York Times, a compromise was reached “after intense negotiations that often pitted the United States against almost everyone else” over what’s called “the precautionary principle.” What’s that? Well the chief negotiator for the European Union described it this way: “Countries must be able to have the freedom, the sovereign right, to take precautionary measures with regard” to genetically altered seed, microbes, animals, crops that they fear might be harmful. The United States, however, insisted on World Trade Organization rules. Those rules are that an import can be banned only on the basis of scientific evidence.

    Notice what’s at stake here. The question that’s at stake is whether people have the right to refuse to be experimental subjects. So, to personalize it, suppose the biology department at the university were to walk in and tell you, “You folks have to be experimental subjects in an experiment we’re carrying out, where we’re going to stick electrodes in your brain and see what happens. You can refuse, but only if you provide scientific evidence that it’s going to harm you.” Usually you can’t provide scientific evidence. The question is, do you have a right to refuse? Under World Trade Organization rules, you don’t. You have to be experimental subjects. It’s a form of what Edward Herman has called “producer sovereignty.” The producer reigns; consumers have to somehow defend themselves. That works domestically, too, as he pointed out. It’s not the responsibility, say, of chemical and pesticide industries to prove that what they’re putting into the environment is safe. It’s the responsibility of the public to prove scientifically that it’s unsafe, and they have to do this through underfunded public agencies that are susceptible to industry influence through lobbying and other pressures.

    That was the issue at Montreal, and a kind of ambiguous settlement was reached. Notice, to be clear, there was no issue of principle. You can see that by just looking at the lineup. The United States was on one side, and it was joined, in fact, by some other countries with a stake in biotechnology and high-tech agro-export, and on the other side was everybody else-those who didn’t expect to profit by the experiment. That was the lineup, and that tells you exactly how much principle was involved. For similar reasons, the European Union favors high tariffs on agricultural products, just as the United States did 40 years ago, but no longer-and not because the principles have changed; just because power has changed.

    There is an overriding principle. The principle is that the powerful and the privileged have to be able to do what they want (of course, pleading high motives).  


    — 1 year ago with 49 notes
    #noam chomsky  #wto  #capitalism  #usa  #trade  #gmo  #experiments  #environment