Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

Chomsky Takes on the World (Bank)

search

w1ld
Picture of w1ld
My Blog
My Profile
My Audience
My Sources
Send Me a Message

sponsored links

w1ld's topics
Movies
Music
Business
  Industries
   Tech Industry
   Telecom Industry
  Management
  Markets & Investing
Games
Health and Wellness
  Fitness
Miscellaneous
  Humor
Current Events
Recreation
  Cars and Trucks
Local Information
  United States
   Tennessee
    Nashville
Science
Society
  Economics
  Politics and Law
Sports
  Golf
Technology
  Computers

support us

Get MemeStreams Stuff!


 
Chomsky Takes on the World (Bank)
Topic: Politics and Law 8:19 pm EDT, May 22, 2007

It is Chomsky on current topics, but an interesting read none the less.

----------

Noam Chomsky is a noted linguist, author, and foreign policy expert. On April 26, Michael Shank interviewed him about the conflict between Congress and the U.S. president over Iraq and Syria, the scandal enveloping World Bank head Paul Wolfowitz, and the nature of foreign debt.

Michael Shank: Given that the U.S. Congress is no longer calling for binding timelines for troop withdrawal, how is this indicative of a broader struggle between the executive and legislative branches?

Noam Chomsky: There are a number of issues. One is the unitary executive conception. The Republican Party happens to be right now in the hands of a very extreme fringe. That goes from the legal system and the Federalist Society to the executive and so on. What they basically want, to put it simply, is a kind of an elective dictatorship. The chief executive should have total control over the executive branch. And the executive branch should dominate the other branches. That’s an effective mode of authoritarian control, natural for those whose dislike of democracy goes beyond the norm.

There’s a real fascist streak there, definitely. And Congress, to some extent, is trying to recreate more of a balance between the executive and legislative branch. So that’s part of the struggle. Part of it is just that neither party is willing to face the consequences of a withdrawal from Iraq. It’s not a trivial matter. First of all, there’s almost no public discussion of the issues involved in the war. Why did we invade? Why don’t we want to get out?

Chomsky Takes on the World (Bank)



 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics
RSS2.0