The abuse of power and the assault on democracy

I finally finished reading Noam Chomsky’s book: The abuse of power and the assault on democracy.

I would like to quote some text from his book in my blog:

One commonly hears that carping critics complain about what is wrong, but do not present solutions. There is an accurate translation for that charge: “They present solutions, but I don’t like them.” In addition to the proposals that should be familiar about dealing with the crises that reach to the level of survival, a few simple suggestions for the United States have already been mentioned:

  • accept the jurisdiction of of the International Criminal Court and the world Court;
  • sign and carry forward the Kyoto protocols;
  • let the UN take the lead in international crises;
  • relay on diplomatic and economic measures rather than military ones in confronting terror;
  • keep to the traditional interpretation of the UN Charter;
  • give up the Security Council veto and have “a decent respect for the opinion of mankind,” as the Declaration of Independence advises, even if power centers disagree;
  • cut back sharply on military spending and sharply increase social spending.

For people who believe in democracy, these are very conservative suggestions: they appear to be the opinions of the majority of the US population, in most cases the overwhelming majority. They are radical in opposition to public policy.

6 thoughts on “The abuse of power and the assault on democracy”

  2. you might try reading Ben Stein’s book entitled “Can America Survive? The rage of the Left and what to do about it”

    you might also try reading a few of his articles such as:
    http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10160
    http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10192
    http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10092

    as far as Chomsky, I feel he lives in his own little world where no one ever really wants to hurt anyone else, where everyone just wants to get along. Sadly, the world we live in is not the world Chomsky sees. We live in the Real World, not Chomsky’s Candy Land.

    Reducing our military… what purpose does that serve? Do you know the military provides millions of jobs that wouldn’t otherwise be there? Do you not realise that a large military is a HUGE deterrent from being attacked? Large militaries aren’t only for offensive purposes, they serve more as defense.

    The UN is a joke. Without the US, they are nothing. They couldn’t get off their collective arses to do ANYTHING without the US doing it for them. History has shown this to be the case. I would LOVE to see the UN more proactive, but I doubt I ever will. The problem is most of the countries in the UN do not put their money where their mouths are, the US is one of the few that do.

    Relying on diplomatic/econimic measures to combat terror? What are you, blind? What did diplomatic measures get Clinton? Or any other Democratic leader in US history? Oh wait, terrorist attacks, funding of terrorists (North Korea by Jimmy Carter, the dupe) to make nuclear weapons and other armories? Yea, that’s right.\

    This is what I’m talking about them I say he lives in Candy Land.

  3. Hi Phillip,

    The tradition advocated in point 4 embodies the right outlined in point 5. Being an organization with a lifespan only recently celebrating its 60 year mark, I’m just not sure how much the UN’s paste performance will be representative of future results.

    Many of these reforms seem to to be largely Euro-centric. How would you feel about a populist voting system, where Chinese delegates cast 20% of the vote, India 16%, and Europe 11%?

    Sincerely,
    Rob J. Caskey

  5. You should read Ben Stein’s book entitled “Can America Survive? The rage of the Left and what to do about it”

  6. The problem is that the UN has significant problems. The main of which is that it is not a democratic institution.

    China with 1 billion people has the same weight as France with 60 million. And France with 60 million has more weight than India with 1 billion.

    Then there is also the fact that many of the people represented there are dictators. There are no standards on freedom and democracy. All power wielding bodies of the US should have strict democracy/freedom standards like the EU.

    Then, even when walk to walk slowly and talk, “bad people” (like dictators and human right violators) will not listen to you unless you carry a big stick. But carrying a big stick is not enough, they have to be convinced that you are ready to whack them with it. Otherwise, why would they care?

Comments are closed.