Eric Beck wrote:
>
>
> Older, I'd say: It's a purely Leninoid lens Chomsky views the world
> through. Even if Lenin was right in his time,
"Lenin" (or rather Hilferding) was probably wrong for his time to. Being wrong is not unusual for anyone. He was trying under somewhat desperate circumstances to ge some grip on the causes that led the working classes of Europe to blindly march to slaughter on the orders of thei their bourgeois rulers -- and more importantly, why their _own_ leaders, the Social-Democratic parties, approved that slaugher. His theory of "super profits" and a "bribed" aristocracy of labor answered (probably wrongly) those questions. I note that every so often many posters on this list go int a frenzy about the stupid Americans who follow Bush et al. I don't claim to have ane xplanation, but I think the explanation of stupidity is almsot always wrong.
But I do not see what any of this has to do with Chomsky, and the many highly influenctial personages in the U.*S. elite who advance the geopolitical (not the profit) motive to explain 50 years of u.s. efforts to establish a military presence in the Middle EAst.
Carol