But Chomsky was always a Jeffersonian at heart, a believer in the "Old Republic" restorationist utopia, from whence emanates the rhetoric of "moral outrage" at her violation. But the Old Republic will never be restored to a pristine state it hever possessed to begin with.
=====
This is incorrect.
There are too many references to reasonably list, but even a leisurely review of one of Chomsky's books from the 1990s, "Year 501: The Conquest Continues", provides a reader with abundant evidence Chomsky's view of US history is rather far from the misty-eyed nostalgia for the 'Old Republic' you might find in the works of Buchanan or, higher up the style scale, Vidal.
...
Brad continues...
Of course there is a difference, but the question is, a difference for whom?
===
A difference to the victims of US aggression. Chomsky has made this point so many times it's disappointing it must be made again.
The Democrats, if history provides any guide, will practice a less wildly aggressive version of imperialism. This means less lives lost and somewhat less destruction overall. Not a solution by any means but important to the people who face the bombers and, domestically, the detainees and potential detainees who languish in prison or cower in fear of prison.
Not a minor matter.
DRM