If they hear that then they must not know that Chomsky has spent his life arguing against central planning and "technocracy." He's literally an anarchist. [1]
From the summary of: "Internationalism or Extinction", his new book.
>The introduction and accompanying interviews place these dual threats in a framework of unprecedented corporate global power which has overtaken nation states’ ability to control the future and preserve the planet. Chomsky argues for the urgency of international climate and arms agreements, showing how global popular movements are mobilizing to force governments to meet this unprecedented challenge to civilization’s survival.
He's an anarchist who doesn't regard himself as an "anarchist thinker". He's against central planning, but laments the state's failing ability to "control the future and preserve the planet". He argues for supranational governance to protect civilization.
The proposed solutions seem at odds with the assertion that he is against central planning. I'm not sure if it is fair to define him as an ideologue within narrow political terms. Perhaps it is a case of pragmatism overtaking ideals?
>"CHOMSKY: Let me just say I don’t really regard myself as an anarchist thinker."
https://books.google.com/books/about/Internationalism_Or_Ext...
From the summary of: "Internationalism or Extinction", his new book.
>The introduction and accompanying interviews place these dual threats in a framework of unprecedented corporate global power which has overtaken nation states’ ability to control the future and preserve the planet. Chomsky argues for the urgency of international climate and arms agreements, showing how global popular movements are mobilizing to force governments to meet this unprecedented challenge to civilization’s survival.
He's an anarchist who doesn't regard himself as an "anarchist thinker". He's against central planning, but laments the state's failing ability to "control the future and preserve the planet". He argues for supranational governance to protect civilization.
The proposed solutions seem at odds with the assertion that he is against central planning. I'm not sure if it is fair to define him as an ideologue within narrow political terms. Perhaps it is a case of pragmatism overtaking ideals?