Re: Re: Chomsky in the news

[Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ali's question is fascinating.  When the country gets too corrupt and too
chaotic, that is inconvenient.  When the country gets too democratic, that
too is dangerous.

Maybe we could construct a mirror of Robert  Barro's estimation of the
appropriate level of democracy.

On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 08:53:54AM -0800, ALI KADRI wrote:
> I have asked once on the list about the role of
> imperialism in social development in the third world.
> so here i ask again:
> put bluntly does the us benefit more from a third
> world country with a socially regressive agenda or
> from one with a socially progressive agenda?
>
> depending on where you stand on this question then it
> is possible to say that US kills people, schools,
> hospitals, etc because it is better for its interests
> or not, no!
> --- jdevine@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > from Microsoft's SLATE on-line newsmagazine:
> >
> > Chomsky Speak
> >
> > By Inigo Thomas
> >
> > Posted Tuesday, November 27, 2001, at 3:25 PM PT
> >
> > In Pakistan to promote the view that the United
> > States sponsors terrorism, Professor Noam Chomsky
> > told an audience of 1,500 people that the 1998
> > bombing of a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory
> > (wrongly believed by the CIA to be an al-Qaida
> > chemical weapons plant) may have resulted in the
> > deaths of several thousand people. (Other reports
> > say that one or maybe two people died at the factory
> > after it was hit by U.S. cruise missiles.) This
> > instance of U.S. terrorism, Chomsky says, is an
> > indication of what will happen in Afghanistan.
> > "Coalition forces [meaning American and British
> > forces together with their proxy, the Northern
> > Alliance] are making plans to further destroy the
> > hunger-stricken country. The consequences of their
> > crimes will never be known and they are quite
> > confident about that. And that is the enormous
> > outcome of the crime of the powerful ?"
> >
> > Chomsky is famous for his analysis of U.S.
> > government actions and the language used by
> > officials to blind the citizenry from the truth, yet
> > in this speech the MIT professor comes close to
> > adopting the language of distortion he abhors.
> > Chomsky implies that the Afghan famine is a result
> > of U.S. and British military action, although an
> > Afghan farmer might say that a lack of rain in
> > recent years as well as the Taliban regime were more
> > directly responsible for the dearth. Moroever, and
> > contrary to what Chomsky says, the United States and
> > its allies are not planning to "further destroy"
> > Afghanistan, although they do hope to destroy the
> > Taliban, whose willful destruction of their own
> > country has created a humanitarian calamity.
> > Finally, what truth is there in Chomsky's remark
> > that the "consequences of their crimes will never be
> > known and they are quite confident about that"? The
> > implication is that the Americans and the British
> > are getting away with murder in Afghanistan, but if
> > th!
> > e consequences of previous American actions have
> > been revealed, and Chomsky offers some examples in
> > the very same speech, why is he so sure that the
> > consequences of these so-called "crimes" will remain
> > a mystery? What's so special about Afghanistan? Of
> > course, you could also be led to believe that no
> > "crimes" have taken place in Afghanistan, in which
> > case there will be different consequences.
> >
> > ----
> > comments?
> > Jim Devine
> >
> > _________________________________________________
> > The simple way to read all your emails at ThatWeb
> > http://www.thatweb.com
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx