Chomsky on Anarchism.pdf - Zine Library
Chomsky on Anarchism.pdf - Zine Library
Chomsky on Anarchism.pdf - Zine Library
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
OBJECTIVITY AND LIBERAL SCHOLARSHIP<br />
32<br />
coed by insurgency. The justificati<strong>on</strong>, were the questi<strong>on</strong> raised, is inherent in<br />
the assumpti<strong>on</strong> that we live "in a world in which loss of nati<strong>on</strong>al independence<br />
is often syn<strong>on</strong>ymous with communist c<strong>on</strong>trol, and communism is implicidy<br />
c<strong>on</strong>sidered to be irreversible." Thus, by Orwellian logic, we are actually<br />
defending nati<strong>on</strong>al independence when we intervene with military fo rce to<br />
proteC[ a ruling elite from internal insurgency.35<br />
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of scholarly work such as this is the way<br />
in which behavioral-science rhetoric is llsed to lend a vague aura of respectability.<br />
One might c<strong>on</strong>struct some such chain of associati<strong>on</strong>s as this. Science, as<br />
every<strong>on</strong>e knows, is resp<strong>on</strong>sible, moderate, unsentimental, and otherwise good.<br />
Behavioral science tells us that we can be c<strong>on</strong>cerned <strong>on</strong>ly with behavior and<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trol of behavior. Therefore we should be c<strong>on</strong>cerned <strong>on</strong>ly with behavior and<br />
c<strong>on</strong>trol ofbehavior;36 and it is resp<strong>on</strong>sible, moderate, unsentimental, and otherwise<br />
good to comrol behavior by appropriately applied reward and punishment.<br />
C<strong>on</strong>cern fo r loyalties and attitudes is emoti<strong>on</strong>al and unscientific. As<br />
rati<strong>on</strong>al men, believers in the scientific ethic, we should be c<strong>on</strong>cerned with<br />
manipulating behavior in a desirable directi<strong>on</strong>, and not be deluded by mystical<br />
noti<strong>on</strong>s of freedom, individual needs, or popular will.<br />
Let me make it clear that I am not criticizing the behavioral sciences<br />
because they lend themselves to such perversi<strong>on</strong>. On other grounds, the<br />
"behavioral persuasi<strong>on</strong>" seems (0 me co lack merit; it seriously mistakes the<br />
method of science and imposes pointless methodological strictures <strong>on</strong> the<br />
study of man and society, bur this is another matter entirely. It is, however, fair<br />
to inquire to what extent the popularity of this approach is based <strong>on</strong> its<br />
dem<strong>on</strong>strated achievements, and to what extem its appeal is based <strong>on</strong> the ease<br />
with which it can be refashi<strong>on</strong>ed as a new coercive ideology with a faintly scientific<br />
t<strong>on</strong>e. (In passing, I think it is worth menti<strong>on</strong> that the same questi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
can be raised outside of politics, specifically, in c<strong>on</strong>necti<strong>on</strong> with educati<strong>on</strong> and<br />
therapy.)<br />
The assumpti<strong>on</strong> that the col<strong>on</strong>ial power is benevolent and has the interests<br />
of the natives at heart is as old as imperialism itself. Thus the liberal Herman<br />
Merivale, lecturing at Oxford in 1840, lauded the "British policy of col<strong>on</strong>ial<br />
enlightenment" which "stands in c<strong>on</strong>trast to that of our ancestors," who cared<br />
little "about the internal government of their col<strong>on</strong>ies, and kept them in subjecti<strong>on</strong><br />
in order to derive certain supposed commercial advantages from them,"<br />
whereas we "give them commercial advantages, and tax ourselves for their benefit,<br />
in order to give them an interest in remaining under our supremacy, that<br />
we may have the pleasure of governing them."3? And our own John Hay in<br />
1898 outlined "a partnership in beneficence" which would bring freedom and<br />
civilizati<strong>on</strong> to Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines, just as the Pax Britannica<br />
had brought these benefits to India, Egypt, and South Africa.38 But although<br />
the benevolence of imperialism is a familiar refrain, the idea that the issue of<br />
benevolence is irrelevant, an improper, sentimental c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong>, is some-