>I don't think Chomsky says that the Left is to blame for the tea party.
I transcribed it. What he says is:
"I wouldn't ridicule them. I wouldn't even ridicule the answers given to them." (shag:given by rightwing media)
"the Answers (of the rightwing) are not only crazy, but dangerous. So the right response is to ask *ourselves*, why are we failing to organize these people."
To the question from the interviewer, about why, if there's a common sentiment on right and left about a shared target, then why aren't they unifying?
"Because we have not succeeded in unifying people. It's our fault."
> What he says - causing consternation - is that the tea party arises from
> legitimate grievances.
horse shit. what causes me consternation is the idea that 1. no one is giving these people any answers. 2. that ideology can be simply wiped away and 3. there a
>He objects to a response to the teapartiers that is simply ridicule. The
>Limbaughs and the Palins offer plausible but false answers for real
>economic distress - "crazy, but extremely dangerous" answers. It's the job
>of the Left to counter those answers, not just dismiss them.
people ARE doing that. we have plenty of answers - including massive numbers of phamplets, articles, videos, films, etc that Chomsky has made. we have answers. what more do you and Chomsky want?
>Of course the administration and its supporters are working hard to
>convince us that all their critics are just crazy racists - an interesting
>example of Walter Benn Michaels' notion of the substitution of race for
>class. --CGE
>
>
>On 5/9/10 11:32 AM, shag carpet bomb wrote:
>>what is it with the "blame the left" crap?
>>
>>in this interview, (and in a few others), Chomsky says that the left is
>>to blame for the tea party: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWs6g3L3fkU
>>
>>and in another interview, he intimates that, if we don't get it
>>together, we can be blamed for the rise of fascism.
>>
>>WTF! how on earth do you engage in all that analysis of the media
>>ideology machine, yak away about powerful interests, etc. and then
>>actually blame the left for the Tea Party and, possibly, fascism.
>>
>>he says he "wouldn't ridicule the answers that are being given to" the
>>Tea Party by the right - Limbaugh, Palin, etc. Instead, those answers
>>are understandable and he assumes they are "sincere." (referencing
>>Limbaugh interviewing Palin back in dec 2008). "If Limbaugh says, 'what
>>do you think about this junk science elitist liberals are trying to
>>foist on us?' and if she (Palin) says, 'yeah, just look out the window,
>>you can't see any palm trees growing in Alaska.' (as refutation to the
>>junk science)
>>
>>then he says that the "answers they *are* getting are not only crazy but
>>extremely dangerous. so the *right* response is to ask *ourselves*, why
>>are we failing to organize these people."
>>
>>so, don't ridicule their ideas - except when you do(and call them crazy)?
>>
>>
>>it's as if chomsky tremendously admires the idea that you merely need
>>give really simple answers to make an impact. be more like Sarah Palin,
>>I guess, and point out the window at a "fact" - a palm tree is not
>>growing in Alaska - and, voila!, the people will get it and be moved to
>>your position.
>>
>>how do you trace the duplicity of the press - where lies and truth are
>>told on the exact same page (figuratively) speaking - revealing the
>>stronghold capitalist ideology has on people, talk about the massive
>>propaganda from the business class and then think ideology is so easilyl
>>undone. if the propaganda requires so much effort to implant and sustain
>>itself, relently shaping hearts, bodies, and minds to keep people in
>>line, adhering to that ideology, how it is that it just melts away at
>>mere exposure to the facts.
>>
>>Later, the interviewer asks him why, if there are shared ideas about the
>>bank bailouts, etc on the left and right, why can't unify them since
>>we're going after the same targets. Chomsky's answer: "because we have
>>not succeeded in unifying them. it's our fault."
>>
>>this is really strange. it's as if all you have to do is yak it up with
>>people, talk away about the facts and the way it is, and --voila! -- the
>>left/right will be unified against the common enemy of capitalism.
>>
>>and where does he get the idea that the left hasn't been giving people
>>answers for a damn long time, in all kinds of venues, in all kinds of
>>ways, through all kinds of media, in easy-to-understand phamplets (like
>>his!), in activist organizations, in their participation in various
>>groups (like antiwar, feminist etc. - that's where i first encountered
>>marxist analysis -- though no one told me they were marxist or
>>identified what they were saying as a marxist-inspired idea.)
>>
>>feh!
>>
>>how do you write about this huge propaganda machine and then turn around
>>and pretend that getting a hearing in the face of the machine is pretty
>>difficult. but it isn't the fault of a capitalist system that rejects
>>and viciously puts down those ideas, it is, rather, the fault of
>>leftists for not making their views sufficiently clear.
>>
>>yeah yeah i know. but chomsky's your hero. whatever.
>>
>>
>>--
>>http://cleandraws.com
>>Wear Clean Draws
>>('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
>>
>>___________________________________
>>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>--
>http://cleandraws.com
>Wear Clean Draws
>('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)