Chomsky on Anarchism.pdf - Zine Library

ANARCHISM, INTEllECTUALS FIND THE STRTE
the local community. The equipment and buildings would be state-owned
and the salaries would also come from the state, but workers and the community
would determine policy, work, organization, and so on. In this case,
you are extending democracy. ..
I understand, you don't have £0 go on.
214
And at the same time weakening the state ...
No, it's not weakening the state, it's strengthening the state because norice
what you pm in there-the salaries will be paid by the state. The ownership
will be by the state; that's strengthening the state sector. I'm very much in favor
of that. I think there should be worker self-management, but I think that the
fu nding should be socialized. For example, if you had added one thing to this,
namely (hat (he funding should come from the communities, (hat would have
been a major gift to rich people They'd love that. What they want is to eliminate
{he role of what {here is of the tax system-it's not much, bur rhere's
something which places at least some burden on them to support welfare systems.
They'd love to see that removed. So if you go as far as self-management,
terrific, I think it's a great idea and that's not at all inconsistent with what I
said. So, tor example, consistent with what I said bdore are moves to have self ..
management in factories, worker self-management in factories. It's the same
thing. That's still making sure that, under present circumstances, it's nor the
poor people who pay for it, rhat the costs are socialized. That means strengthening
rhe state against private powers. So these are all perfectly consistent, it's
not a third option; it's part of the second oprion I was describing. In fact, wirhin
the public arena that is preserved in parliamentary democracy that allows
some role for the state, there's all kinds of opportunities for struggle. For example,
the crucial ones, of which rhis is a small part, are eliminating management
and ownership in the entire private system. That's within the system. That
could actually be theoretically done by parliamentary means. Ir hasn't been
done bur at least the mechanisms are there. Anyway, one should always pursue
the mechanisms to the limits. The reason why transnational corporations are
so interested in the liberals is that, from their point of view, it is precisely liberals
that minimize the state. And minimizing rhe state means strengthening
the private sectors. It narrows the domain within which public influence can
be expressed. That's not an anarchist goal. I mean people may be seduced by
the words "minimize the state" and sort of trapped in them, bur think what it
means. lr's minimizing the state and increasing an even worse power. That's nor
an anarchist goal.
Are you stressing this because many anarchists in the United States mistake
the libertarian party for a party that deftnels anarchist ideals or something
close to anarchism. Is that the reason why. .. ?