Chomsky on Anarchism.pdf - Zine Library

CHOMSKY ON ANARCHISM
lence that John F. Kennedy could undertake before the public had been
aroused.
As elites pondered the rising threat of democracy at home in the post­
Vietnam period, they also had to deal with the spread of rot and cancers
abroad. The mechanisms of thought-control at home, and the real reasons for
subversion and state terror abroad, are brought out with great clarity in one of
the most spectacular achievements of the Reagan administration propaganda
operation-which was, incidentally, strictly illegal, as Congress irrelevantly
determined. Virtually as a reflex, the propaganda system concocted the charge
that the current enemy, in this case Nicaragua, was planning to conquer the
hemisphere. But it went on to provide actual proof: the evil Communists had
openly declared a "Revolution without Borders." This charge-which aroused
no ridicule among the disciplined educated classes-was based on a speech by
Sandinista leader Tomas Borge, in which he explained that Nicaragua cannot
"export our revolution" but can only "export our example" while "the people
themselves of these countries ... must make their revolutions"; in this sense, he
said, the Nicaraguan revolution "transcends national boundaries." The hoax
was exposed at once, even noted marginally in the press. Bur it was toO useful
to abandon, and it was eagerly accepted by Congress. the media, and political
commentators. The phrase is used as the title for a major State Department
propaganda document. and it was brilliantly exploited by Reagan's speechwriters
to stampede Congress into providing $100 million of aid to the contras in 165
response to the World Court judgment calling upon the United States to terminate
its "unlawful use of force" and illegal embargo against Nicaragua.
The crucial point is that lying behind the hoax there is a valid insight,
which explains its wide appeal among the educated classes. Early Sandinista
successes in instituting social reforms and production for domestic needs set
the alarm bells ringing in Washington and New York. These successes aroused
the same fears that agitated Metternich and the Czar, the people of best quality
since the 17th century, all those who expect to dominate by right: the rot
might spread, the virus might infect others, and the foundations of privilege
might crumble.
Despite all efforts to contain them, the rabble continue to fight for their
rights, and over time, libertarian ideals have been partially realized or have even
become common coin. Many of the outrageous ideas of the ] 7th century radical
democrats, for example, seem tame enough today, though other early
insights remain beyond our current moral and intellectual reach.
The struggle for freedom of speech is an interesting case, and a very crucial
one, since it lies at the heart of a whole array of freedoms and rights. IS The
central question is when, if ever, the state may act to interdict the content of
communications. One critical element is seditious libel, the idea that the state
can be criminally assaulted by speech, "the hallmark of closed societies
throughout the world," legal historian Harry Kalven observes. A society that