Bush v. Bush-lite Chomsky's Lesser-Evilism

[messiah]

Bush v. Bush-lite
Chomsky's Lesser-Evilism
By PHIL GASPER

An article in Saturday's Guardian reports that left-wing icon Noam Chomsky has given his "reluctant endorsement to the Democratic party's presidential contender, John Kerry". Chomsky's support for Kerry is far from enthusiastic. He describes the choice between Bush and Kerry as one "between two factions of the business party" and Kerry as "Bush-lite", only a "fraction" better than his Republican opponent. But Chomsky argues that the current administration is exceptionally "cruel and savage" and "deeply committed to dismantling the achievements of popular struggle through the past century no matter what the cost to the general population." He concludes that "despite the limited differences both domestically and internationally, there are differences. In a system of immense power, small differences can translate into large outcomes."

Chomsky's acceptance of the "anybody but Bush" position is sure to be influential, but on this occasion the arguments he offers represent wishful thinking rather than the clear-headed political analysis for which he is famous. There is no question that the Bush administration's policies are "cruel and savage", but John Kerry (along with the majority of Democrats in the Senate) supported most of them, including the war on Afghanistan, the Patriot Act, the war on Iraq, and the "No Child Left Behind" education act. As Marjorie Williams pointed out in the Washington Post recently, "Kerry voted for so many of Bush's major initiatives that in order to disown them now he can only argue that they were wrongly or dishonestly 'implemented.' This amounts to a confession that his opponent made a chump of him for the past three years. In fact, one might argue that Kerry is a poster boy for all the ways in which congressional Democrats have allowed themselves to be rolled by the Bush administration."
More:
http://www.counterpunch.org/gasper03202004.html

[Bill Wade]

1. Once again, Chomsky is right on.

"despite the limited differences both domestically and internationally, there are differences. In a system of immense power, small differences can translate into large outcomes."

This quote is key.

[PurityOfEssence]

3. The guy's a Professor at MIT, lest we forget

He's no dummy...

[kodi]

2. if bush made a chump of kerry it's because kerry dealt in good faith

until now (and perhaps for nixon) a president's word is expected to be considered his word of honor.

baying hound hindsight from those not even involved in the process of government is pretty goofy. but that is what one has come to expect from counterpunch's gaggle of perfectionist journalists.

so we are treated with the meme from the punchless wonders of counterpunch that acting in good faith in the process of government is morally wrong. with the logical consequence of the author's insight is that one should fuck someone else before it is done to you.

[Old and In the Way]

4. You absolutely nailed it Kodi.

What Bush has done is destroy the trust of the Excutive/Legislative relationship. Bush used this resolution as a wedge just before the mid-terms. And he basically lied about the causus belli.

Should future Presidents bring a war resolution to Congress based on a real and compelling evidence....what will the reaction in Congress be? Will they remember the political douiblecrossing of Bush's Iraq folly?

I think we are missing the real damage that this administration has wrought on this country because the motives were to further their personal political/economic agenda, not the interests of this country.

[enki23]

5. if kerry dealt with the bush admin 'in good faith'

after the first few months of the administration, he was a chump.

of course, we all know he wasn't actually doing that. he wasn't 'dealing in good faith,' he was preparing to run for president.

[messiah]

6. bumper

[RichM]

7. It's interesting that the posted article attacks Chomsky from the LEFT!

The author, Phil Gasper, is arguing that Chomsky has weighted too heavily the modest differences between Kerry & Bush. Naturally, on DU, people will be more pleased with Chomsky's position - at least this time.

Usually on DU, Chomsky is attacked from the right. So there is something amusing about the potential here for Democratic posters to start lining up on Chomsky's side, for a change!

[corporatewhore]

9. well lotta radical and anarchist friends say chomsky is losing his mojo

and becoming more statist, socialist and/or liberal reformist.they have been saying this for awhile and when they heard about this they said "see i was right!" and so on..

[mzmolly]

12. Perhaps he's simply gaining the wisdom of his years...

;)

[THUNDER HANDS]

8. Chomsky's a tool

I'm tired of this Bush-lite crap. Kerry is Bush lite the same way I'm Brad Pitt - lite.

[blondeatlast]

10. Yeah, that pic just doesn't show any resemblance...

I've had it with the holier-than-thou progressives on this board.

Tehre are no rules about slogging fuckwit Chomsky!

[nomaco-10]

14. If anybody would have told me....

one year ago that I'd be logging onto to this site and reading a post that called Chomsky a "slogging fuckwit" I'd of told them they were crazy. But, then again I've seen many a good dem candidate, a former vice-president and a standup progressive govenor, just to name a few completely savaged here. What a difference a year makes. sigh....

[Mairead]

16. I wonder how long it will be til Skinner et al. change the name to

'Republican Underground'. I can count without taking off my shoes the people whom RFK, LBJ, and Nixon would have recognised as Democrats. And isn't THAT a turn-up for the books!

[paulk]

11. The important part is in the last paragraph -

"If we choose Kerry over Bush, we make it more difficult to do the only thing that ever makes a difference for our side--building real activism on the ground."


In other words, Mr. Phil Gasper wants GW Bush to win this coming election, the idea being that Bush will fuck up so badly the "people" will rise up in anger and throw the corporatists out, Republican and Democrat alike, no doubt installing a Socialist like Mr. Gasper to set things right.

I suppose in the rarefied air at Notre Dame de Namur University, where Mr. Gasper teaches philosophy, this sort of ivory tower thinking makes sense.

Those of us living in the real world, however, don't have the luxury
of such pontificating. We're too busy wondering where our next mortgage or rent payment is going to come from.

Perhaps from the lofty heights Mr Gasper inhabits the difference between Democrats and Republicans seems mighty small - but from down here on the ground, that difference is as large as the difference between having your head in the clouds and your head up your ass.

[mzmolly]

13. Exactly right!

:toast:

[messiah]

15. Yup anybody that moves to right and keeps

moving towards the goal of world domination by forced rape is a warrior of zen!:yourock:.