What do you think?
Rate this book
On Anarchism
On Anarchism is an essential introduction to the Noam Chomsky's political theory.
On Anarchism sheds a much needed light on the foundations of Chomsky's thought, specifically his constant questioning of the legitimacy of entrenched power. The book gathers his essays and interviews to provide a short, accessible introduction to his distinctively optimistic brand of anarchism. Refuting the notion of anarchism as a fixed idea, and disputing the traditional fault lines between anarchism and socialism, this is a book sure to challenge, provoke and inspire. Profoundly relevant to our times, it is a touchstone for political activists and anyone interested in deepening their understanding of anarchism, or of Chomsky's thought.
'Arguably the most important intellectual alive' New York Times
Noam Chomsky is the author of numerous bestselling and influential political books, including Hegemony or Survival, Failed States, Interventions, What We Say Goes, Hopes and Prospects, Gaza in Crisis, Making the Future and Occupy.
Nathan Schneider is the author of Thank You, Anarchy: Notes from the Occupy Apocalypse and God in Proof: The Story of a Search from the Ancients to the Internet.
On Anarchism sheds a much needed light on the foundations of Chomsky's thought, specifically his constant questioning of the legitimacy of entrenched power. The book gathers his essays and interviews to provide a short, accessible introduction to his distinctively optimistic brand of anarchism. Refuting the notion of anarchism as a fixed idea, and disputing the traditional fault lines between anarchism and socialism, this is a book sure to challenge, provoke and inspire. Profoundly relevant to our times, it is a touchstone for political activists and anyone interested in deepening their understanding of anarchism, or of Chomsky's thought.
'Arguably the most important intellectual alive' New York Times
Noam Chomsky is the author of numerous bestselling and influential political books, including Hegemony or Survival, Failed States, Interventions, What We Say Goes, Hopes and Prospects, Gaza in Crisis, Making the Future and Occupy.
Nathan Schneider is the author of Thank You, Anarchy: Notes from the Occupy Apocalypse and God in Proof: The Story of a Search from the Ancients to the Internet.
192 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2005
About the author
Noam Chomsky
844 books15.7k followersAvram Noam Chomsky is an American linguist, philosopher, political activist, author, and lecturer. He is an Institute Professor and professor emeritus of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Chomsky is credited with the creation of the theory of generative grammar, considered to be one of the most significant contributions to the field of linguistics made in the 20th century. He also helped spark the cognitive revolution in psychology through his review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior, in which he challenged the behaviorist approach to the study of behavior and language dominant in the 1950s. His naturalistic approach to the study of language has affected the philosophy of language and mind. He is also credited with the establishment of the Chomsky hierarchy, a classification of formal languages in terms of their generative power. Beginning with his critique of the Vietnam War in the 1960s, Chomsky has become more widely known for his media criticism and political activism, and for his criticism of the foreign policy of the United States and other governments.
According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar during the 1980–1992 time period, and was the eighth-most cited scholar in any time period.
Chomsky is credited with the creation of the theory of generative grammar, considered to be one of the most significant contributions to the field of linguistics made in the 20th century. He also helped spark the cognitive revolution in psychology through his review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior, in which he challenged the behaviorist approach to the study of behavior and language dominant in the 1950s. His naturalistic approach to the study of language has affected the philosophy of language and mind. He is also credited with the establishment of the Chomsky hierarchy, a classification of formal languages in terms of their generative power. Beginning with his critique of the Vietnam War in the 1960s, Chomsky has become more widely known for his media criticism and political activism, and for his criticism of the foreign policy of the United States and other governments.
According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar during the 1980–1992 time period, and was the eighth-most cited scholar in any time period.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 420 reviews
August 1, 2020
There Is No Benign Power
If you think anarchism means approval of chaos, think again. Anarchism is merely the rejection of the idea that there is an entirely legitimate source for power (Greek = without origin). Whether ascribed ultimately to having its source in God, the gods, The People or genetic legacy, power will always and everywhere be abused by those who wield it. Therefore anarchism's central principle is that power must be continuously questioned and challenged to prove that it is not acting in its own interests.
Noam Chomsky has spent his life getting under the skin of powerful people - academics, politicians, corporate executives, civil servants, in short, The Establishment. Many don't like him as a consequence and do their best to make him out to be yesterday's news.
But Chomsky's profound message is more important today than ever: Never, never trust power, regardless of who holds it or of the political or economic system in which it is exercised; always call it to account by whatever means is available.
On Anarchism is a sort of thoughtful handbook to help you on your way.
If you think anarchism means approval of chaos, think again. Anarchism is merely the rejection of the idea that there is an entirely legitimate source for power (Greek = without origin). Whether ascribed ultimately to having its source in God, the gods, The People or genetic legacy, power will always and everywhere be abused by those who wield it. Therefore anarchism's central principle is that power must be continuously questioned and challenged to prove that it is not acting in its own interests.
Noam Chomsky has spent his life getting under the skin of powerful people - academics, politicians, corporate executives, civil servants, in short, The Establishment. Many don't like him as a consequence and do their best to make him out to be yesterday's news.
But Chomsky's profound message is more important today than ever: Never, never trust power, regardless of who holds it or of the political or economic system in which it is exercised; always call it to account by whatever means is available.
On Anarchism is a sort of thoughtful handbook to help you on your way.
February 22, 2021
Ξεκαθαρίζει πολλά πράγματα μέσα από συνεντεύξεις του. Σίγουρα ο αναρχισμός δεν είναι κάτι συγκεκριμένο. Γενικά πολύ ενδιαφέρον
January 19, 2014
In a lot of ways, this book feels like a remix. Virtually all of the material is either from ~1970 or ~2002. But the commentaries appear next to each other in a timeless, unending stream of anarchist thought and analysis. I like this aspect a lot actually, I think it shows both certainty on Chomsky's part and thoughtfulness on the side of the editors (and probably Chomsky himself) in terms of selecting the material.
At the end of the day, one has to ask: Who's the audience? At $16 for 140 neatly curated Chomsky pages... I doubt anarcho-curious people are choking down that price for such little content. So presumably it's jokers like me, who already know they'll like what's inside? At which point, I have to feel I'm being taken for a ride. A Chomsky Greatest Hits.
If you've read any other Chomsky, you can skip this. If you want to start reading Chomsky, there are better entry points.
At the end of the day, one has to ask: Who's the audience? At $16 for 140 neatly curated Chomsky pages... I doubt anarcho-curious people are choking down that price for such little content. So presumably it's jokers like me, who already know they'll like what's inside? At which point, I have to feel I'm being taken for a ride. A Chomsky Greatest Hits.
If you've read any other Chomsky, you can skip this. If you want to start reading Chomsky, there are better entry points.
February 14, 2015
Not a book, but a rather disjointed collection of essays and other pieces. I agree with all of Chomsky's ideas, but it was very dry to read. I didn't like how this was put together at all.
June 28, 2024
”The basic principle that I would like to see communicated to people is the idea that every form of authority and domination and hierarchy, every authoritarian structure has to prove that it’s justified. It has no prior justification. The burden of proof for any exercise of authority is always on the person exercising it, invariably. And when you look, most of the time, these authority structures have no justification.”
On Anarchism is a collection of Chomsky’s writings and interviews on the subject. Its excellent introduction by Nathan Schneider sets the stage. Schneider speaks of the “anarcho-curious” young, and of “anarchist amnesia.” He states that:
”Anarchy is the political blank slate of the 21st century.”
By which he means that a generation disillusioned with the the present Oligarchy, but also with the tired alternatives of state socialism or capitalist liberalism are drawn to anarchy as an open ended alternative. But “anarchist amnesia,” purposely cultivated by by the state and its institutions, threatens to kill off this revived interest in its infancy. Writing about the young anarchist in the Occupy movement, Schneider says:
”They were astonished by the systematic violence used to eliminate the Occupy encampments because they hadn’t heard about how the Spanish anarchists and the Paris Commune were crushed with military force as well. Amnesia constrains ambition and inoculates against patience.”
As previously stated, this book is a collection of Chomsky’s previously published writings/interviews on anarchy. Both Notes on Anarchism, and Excerpts from Understanding Power address common concepts and questions about anarchism. Part II of Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship is a brief history of the popular Anarchist revolution in Spain; how not only the Fascists, but also the Soviets and the Western powers all worked to destroy it, and how later historians misrepresent it in histories of The Spanish Civil War. (This section is long, dense and dry, unlike the earlier chapters.) In Interview with Harry Kreisler, from Political Awakenings, the question/answer format brings out more interesting material, as well as revisiting some themes from earlier chapters. Finally, in Language and Freedom, Chomsky riffs on ideas of Rousseau.
On Anarchism is an uneven collection. The introduction and the first two chapters, as well as Chomsky’s interview are excellent as an introduction to Anarchism for people unfamiliar with, but interested in it. The chapters on the revolution in Spain and on Rousseau’s thoughts, on the other hand, are far more dense, and geared toward those already familiar with anarchist theory.
Woman: ”There’s a separate meaning of the word anarchy different from the one you often talk about, namely chaos.”
Chomsky: ”Yeah, it’s a bum rap, basically. It’s like referring to Soviet style bureaucracy as socialism, or any other term of discourse that’s been given a second meaning for the purpose of ideological warfare. I mean, chaos is a meaning of the word, but it’s not a meaning that has any relevance to social thought. Anarchy as a social philosophy has never meant chaos. In fact, anarchists have typically believed in a highly organized society, just one that’s organized democratically from below.”
On Anarchism is a collection of Chomsky’s writings and interviews on the subject. Its excellent introduction by Nathan Schneider sets the stage. Schneider speaks of the “anarcho-curious” young, and of “anarchist amnesia.” He states that:
”Anarchy is the political blank slate of the 21st century.”
By which he means that a generation disillusioned with the the present Oligarchy, but also with the tired alternatives of state socialism or capitalist liberalism are drawn to anarchy as an open ended alternative. But “anarchist amnesia,” purposely cultivated by by the state and its institutions, threatens to kill off this revived interest in its infancy. Writing about the young anarchist in the Occupy movement, Schneider says:
”They were astonished by the systematic violence used to eliminate the Occupy encampments because they hadn’t heard about how the Spanish anarchists and the Paris Commune were crushed with military force as well. Amnesia constrains ambition and inoculates against patience.”
As previously stated, this book is a collection of Chomsky’s previously published writings/interviews on anarchy. Both Notes on Anarchism, and Excerpts from Understanding Power address common concepts and questions about anarchism. Part II of Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship is a brief history of the popular Anarchist revolution in Spain; how not only the Fascists, but also the Soviets and the Western powers all worked to destroy it, and how later historians misrepresent it in histories of The Spanish Civil War. (This section is long, dense and dry, unlike the earlier chapters.) In Interview with Harry Kreisler, from Political Awakenings, the question/answer format brings out more interesting material, as well as revisiting some themes from earlier chapters. Finally, in Language and Freedom, Chomsky riffs on ideas of Rousseau.
On Anarchism is an uneven collection. The introduction and the first two chapters, as well as Chomsky’s interview are excellent as an introduction to Anarchism for people unfamiliar with, but interested in it. The chapters on the revolution in Spain and on Rousseau’s thoughts, on the other hand, are far more dense, and geared toward those already familiar with anarchist theory.
Woman: ”There’s a separate meaning of the word anarchy different from the one you often talk about, namely chaos.”
Chomsky: ”Yeah, it’s a bum rap, basically. It’s like referring to Soviet style bureaucracy as socialism, or any other term of discourse that’s been given a second meaning for the purpose of ideological warfare. I mean, chaos is a meaning of the word, but it’s not a meaning that has any relevance to social thought. Anarchy as a social philosophy has never meant chaos. In fact, anarchists have typically believed in a highly organized society, just one that’s organized democratically from below.”
October 14, 2016
A very good book on anarchism. Noam Chomsky achieved his goal, as he always does. I think that Chomsky finds politics harder to explain than linguistics, which seems strange but is completely reasonable. Some predictions derived from his theory of natural languages can be experimentally tested. By the opposite, nothing derived from specific points of view on politics or history can be empirically tested. Hence, any statement about anarchism is just an opinion. In my opinion as common reader, Chomsky has successfully restricted the meaning of anarchism in this book. That is, anarchism shall be seen as an active apology of freedom. A direct corollary might be the opposition to any form of oppression. However, I think that such view is an intuition, not the consequence of reasoned evaluations of theories and flat facts. It remains quite clear that anarchism is not an apology of violence or chaos. Anarchy is rather a reduction of violence and a very organized model of society. This book includes essays and interviews translated into Spanish. The edition by Malpaso is a beautiful hardcover that includes an e-book. A very enjoyable reading.
April 20, 2020
This is not an 'original' work but instead a small collection of various essays and interviews from Chomsky's career that I think intend to provide just a basic overview of Anarchism and Chomsky's thought. Approached from this perspective, this is a great read. The interviews were very digestible and contained good questions that probed Chomsky's early life, inspirations, and posed challenges to him that he responded well to. Chomsky writes at length in one section about scholarship and bias in regards to historical work on the Spanish civil war and the Anarchist movement there, though it does tend to drag and go on a bit too long.
The section I found most interesting was the last, entitled 'Language and Freedom.' Of course it's interesting to hear about where the two areas cross over, but to me what I found most enlightening and educating about this book and chapter was how Chomsky integrates thought from some of the most important Enlightenment thinkers. When you look at what Rousseau and Kant wrote it is quite obvious that the modern 'Anarchist' movement is merely picking up where they left off. I do not claim to be an expert on the subject, but it seems to me that the two aforementioned philosophers were almost certainly massive influences on the early anarchist movement. Rousseau in particular developed much of the intellectual groundwork on which later anarchist thinkers could build and begin to offer critiques of authority and structures of power. A good introduction to Chomsky's work, but if the chapter on the Spanish civil war starts to bore you, you can pretty safely just move on to the next chapter.
The section I found most interesting was the last, entitled 'Language and Freedom.' Of course it's interesting to hear about where the two areas cross over, but to me what I found most enlightening and educating about this book and chapter was how Chomsky integrates thought from some of the most important Enlightenment thinkers. When you look at what Rousseau and Kant wrote it is quite obvious that the modern 'Anarchist' movement is merely picking up where they left off. I do not claim to be an expert on the subject, but it seems to me that the two aforementioned philosophers were almost certainly massive influences on the early anarchist movement. Rousseau in particular developed much of the intellectual groundwork on which later anarchist thinkers could build and begin to offer critiques of authority and structures of power. A good introduction to Chomsky's work, but if the chapter on the Spanish civil war starts to bore you, you can pretty safely just move on to the next chapter.
February 27, 2022
It is important to note that this book is a compilation of a series of interviews and essays by Noam on Anarchism. To those who have been following Noam's work, it may seem what's new in this since most of Noam's thoughts on Anarchy as a political philosophy date back to the 1970s and they haven't exactly changed.
Yet, this makes a great short read as it clarifies Noam's position on whether the goals of Anarchism stand opposed to the goals of democratic socialism or welfare state, which too, Noam has been vocal about since the last decade. In the light of recent developments where the legitimacy of the welfare state has come into question, Noam explains how his notion of Anarchy has the same goal as a welfare state: ensuring that every child has a right to eat and every person a right to healthcare.
Yet, this makes a great short read as it clarifies Noam's position on whether the goals of Anarchism stand opposed to the goals of democratic socialism or welfare state, which too, Noam has been vocal about since the last decade. In the light of recent developments where the legitimacy of the welfare state has come into question, Noam explains how his notion of Anarchy has the same goal as a welfare state: ensuring that every child has a right to eat and every person a right to healthcare.
October 2, 2018
Anarchy - a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems.
Synonyms: lawlessness, an absence of government, nihilism, mobocracy, revolution, insurrection, riot, rebellion, mutiny, disorder, disorganization, misrule, chaos, tumult, turmoil, mayhem, pandemonium.
This is what the internet interprets the notion of Anarchism when I trying to grasp the exact terminology of Anarchism. It seems the modern people perception about Anarchism is somehow misleading and distorted due to the massive political propaganda or what's in the book put it this way:
Chomsky refers to right-wing libertarianism as "an aberration" nearly unique to this country, a theory of "a world built on hatred" that would self-destruct in three seconds."Yet the vitality of this once- or twice-removed cousin of anarchism becomes evident with every election cycle when libertarian candidate Ron Paul squeezes his way into the Republican debates thanks to his impressively youthful "army" fighting for this "rEVOLution". This is anarchism with corporate funding and misplaced nostalgia, its solidarity cleaved off by the willful protagonists in Ayn Rand's novels.
In this book, Noam Chomsky, an anarcho-syndicalist or a libertarian-socialist offers a vital overview of the meanings of anarchism in a whole new perspective and the foundations of his thought and political view. He tries to refute the notion of anarchism as a fixed idea and disputing the traditional fault lines between anarchism and socialism. I will only excerpt a few writing of Noam Chomsky about the notion of anarchism at here to better express my understanding of Anarchism without conflicting myself with the tendencies to encompass all of the political ideology and general theory.
The classical liberal ideals, he argues, were wrecked on the realities of capitalist economic forms. Anarchism is necessarily anti-capitalist in that it "opposes the exploitation of man by man." But anarchism also opposes "the dominion of man over man." It insists that "socialism will be free or it will not be at all. In its recognition of this lies the genuine and profound justification for the existence of anarchism." From this point of view, anarchism may be regarded as the libertarian wing of socialism.
----------------
WOMAN: "Professor Chomsky, on a slightly different topic, there's a separate meaning of the word "anarchy" different from the one you often talk about-namely, "chaos."
NOAM CHOMSKY: Yeah, it's a bum crap, basically – it's like referring to Soviet-style bureaucracy as "socialism," or any other term of discourse that's been given a second meaning for the purpose of ideology warfare. I mean, "chaos" is a meaning of the word, but it's not meaning that has any relevance to social thought. Anarchy as a social philosophy has never meant "chaos"–in fact, anarchists have typically believed in a highly organized society, just one that's organized democratically from below.
----------------
MAN: What's the difference between "libertarian" and "anarchist," exactly?
NOAM CHOMSKY: There's no difference, really. I think they're the same thing. But you see, libertarian has a special meaning in the United States. The US is off the spectrum of the main tradition in this respect: what's called "libertarianism" here is unbridled capitalism. Now, that's always been opposed in the European libertarian tradition, where every anarchist has been a socialist–because the point is, if you have unbridled capitalism, you have all kinds of authority: you have extreme authority.
----------------
QUESTION: These experiences we've described, you were saying they led you into linguistics, but also led you into your view of politics and of the world. You're a libertarian anarchist, and when one hears that, because of the way issues are framed in this country (U.S.A), there are many misperceptions. Help us understand what that means.
NOAM CHOMSKY: The US is sort of out of the world on this topic. Here, the term "libertarian" means the opposite of what it always meant in history. Libertarian throughout modern European history meant socialist anarchist. It meant the anti-state element of the Workers' Movement and the Socialist Movement. Here it means ultra–conversative, Ayn Rand or Cato Institute or something like that.
In Europe, it meant, and always meant to me, an antistate branch of socialism, which meant to me, an antistate branch of socialism, which meant highly organized society, nothing to do with chaos, but based on democracy all the way through. That means democratic control of communities, of workplaces, of federal structures, built on systems of voluntary association, spreading internationally. That's traditional anarchism.
This book comes in handy for me as an introduction to Noam Chomsky's political view and a touchstone for political dissident like me who likes to question the authority. It's essential for everyone who is curious about Chomsky's thought and wanna explore more on the aspect of the historical development of socialism thoughts and anarchism. I personally found it intriguing by reading the chapter of "Language and Freedom" that broaden my perspective on the philosophical human nature existence.
June 26, 2020
Um bom início para uma longa caminhada.
May 15, 2022
l’últim capítol es fa suuper llarg però crec q tothom l’hauria de llegir. 3.5
April 8, 2024
I have to come back to this one after I learn more about the Spanish Revolution, because I couldn’t really grasp Chomsky’s thoughts on that without the historical background. So for now 3 stars- but it’s good.
July 22, 2016
Chomsky writes for people who are already steeped in his kind of rhetoric. He refers constantly to other historians and philosophers, with lengthy quotes and expositions. He speaks in broad generalities, that sound nice in principle, but I have no way of gauging whether anything he says has any practical relevance once once the messiness of reality grabs hold. After reading this book, I have no real fucking clue exactly what anarchism is or isn't except that it might be libertarian socialism, but not the American brand of libertarian, obviously, you dolt. Fucking hell, what a slog, and such a small portion.
Update:
After attending the book club meeting about this book, I now have a better perspective, and a bit more understanding of what Chomsky was on about. The key is when Chomsky defines anarchism as the position that any claim in which one entity places itself in authority above an individual (or other entity) must be justified. Any exercise of power that deprives someone of autonomy is assumed by default to be illegitimate, and the burden of proof is on the claimant of the power. Importantly this applies not just to government (as American libertarians would claim) but also to business, specifically for business owners or presidents, etc. when exercising control over workers. It is possible that I'm an anarchist. I must think on this. I've upped the rating to 3 stars, but it does not get higher because Chomsky is still a terrible bore when it comes to history, and the largest chapter was a tedious slog.
Update:
After attending the book club meeting about this book, I now have a better perspective, and a bit more understanding of what Chomsky was on about. The key is when Chomsky defines anarchism as the position that any claim in which one entity places itself in authority above an individual (or other entity) must be justified. Any exercise of power that deprives someone of autonomy is assumed by default to be illegitimate, and the burden of proof is on the claimant of the power. Importantly this applies not just to government (as American libertarians would claim) but also to business, specifically for business owners or presidents, etc. when exercising control over workers. It is possible that I'm an anarchist. I must think on this. I've upped the rating to 3 stars, but it does not get higher because Chomsky is still a terrible bore when it comes to history, and the largest chapter was a tedious slog.
April 7, 2014
Chomsky has always been an author beyond praise. His works are as informing and surprising as they are interesting. He is one of the few intellectuals that blends information and entertainment together seamlessly, without seeming full of himself or like a comedian.
This small compilation includes an essay on modern anarchism, 2 excerpts from interviews, 2 other essays related to anarchism, and an extensive bibliography. The version I read also had a introduction by Nathan Schneider, which was insightful. While the titular essay takes the spotlight, the other areas are equally informative and entertaining, and supplement "On Anarchism" nicely. It was a nice surprise to see someone both state their beliefs and then showcase themselves defending and discussing them.
Noam Chomsky's anarchist future is not 7 billion people in a mosh pit; it is a world of greater understanding and self-reliance. He doesn't shy away form socialist overtones and Marxist ideologies; instead, he embraces and tweaks them so that they would work in the real world. It defies the stereotype and questions the norm.
This small compilation includes an essay on modern anarchism, 2 excerpts from interviews, 2 other essays related to anarchism, and an extensive bibliography. The version I read also had a introduction by Nathan Schneider, which was insightful. While the titular essay takes the spotlight, the other areas are equally informative and entertaining, and supplement "On Anarchism" nicely. It was a nice surprise to see someone both state their beliefs and then showcase themselves defending and discussing them.
Noam Chomsky's anarchist future is not 7 billion people in a mosh pit; it is a world of greater understanding and self-reliance. He doesn't shy away form socialist overtones and Marxist ideologies; instead, he embraces and tweaks them so that they would work in the real world. It defies the stereotype and questions the norm.
October 30, 2021
Puc recordar perfectament aquell dia d'escola ja fa molts anys en que ens van parlar per primera vegada de l'anarquisme, i com jo vaig pensar "i qui pot no voler això?". Com més anys passen més creus me'n faig, i més m'esgarrifa veure el món tan horrible en tants aspectes que tenim.
Per això és interessant llegir a algú com Chomsky, tot un optimista pel que fa a canviar l'ordre social, i que en aquest llibre ens sembra moltes llavors de pensament i acció. Interesantíssim el capítol sobre la Guerra Civil Espanyola, que indefectiblement em porta a treure de la pila Homenatge a Catalunya, i a veure una vegada més com es manipula el discurs de la Història.
Per això és interessant llegir a algú com Chomsky, tot un optimista pel que fa a canviar l'ordre social, i que en aquest llibre ens sembra moltes llavors de pensament i acció. Interesantíssim el capítol sobre la Guerra Civil Espanyola, que indefectiblement em porta a treure de la pila Homenatge a Catalunya, i a veure una vegada més com es manipula el discurs de la Història.
Read
November 3, 2020It is difficult to rate a book on a political ideology or philosophy, because one's own personal beliefs influence it. But this book was exactly what I was looking for: some understanding of anarchism, to go deeper than the surface where the common prejudices that anarchism is chaos lies.
It is a very informative book that includes interviews which makes it even more interesting.
I will definitely read more of Chomsky's work in the future.
It is a very informative book that includes interviews which makes it even more interesting.
I will definitely read more of Chomsky's work in the future.
February 25, 2022
Hard going at times, but some fascinating insights
Shelved as 'abandoned'
June 21, 2022I have not finished this book but I am finished with this book.
How is it that such a short book can be such a slog, I give up. It is mostly about the Spanish Civil War (which is relevant at least) but I feel like if you don't already have some vague background knowledge this is NOT a good way to learn about it. It is also not really a good way to learn about anarchism. I do not know who this book is for at all.
How is it that such a short book can be such a slog, I give up. It is mostly about the Spanish Civil War (which is relevant at least) but I feel like if you don't already have some vague background knowledge this is NOT a good way to learn about it. It is also not really a good way to learn about anarchism. I do not know who this book is for at all.
August 6, 2022
4+
Ενδιαφέρον και διαφωτιστικό βιβλίο για τον αναρχισμό και για τη δημοκρατία κατά μία έννοια.
Θεωρώ πώς διαβάζοντας το έμαθα και κάτι.Ο Chomsky δεν με απογοήτευσε και αυτή τη φορά.
Ενδιαφέρον και διαφωτιστικό βιβλίο για τον αναρχισμό και για τη δημοκρατία κατά μία έννοια.
Θεωρώ πώς διαβάζοντας το έμαθα και κάτι.Ο Chomsky δεν με απογοήτευσε και αυτή τη φορά.
July 3, 2024
Cheers Noam guess I’m into anarchism now
February 4, 2022
So how best to introduce this book...
This is not really a book.
The introduction by Nathan Schneider is a demistifier a general greeting of do not be afraid gentle traveler, we will not ask you to go raid the local police office. It is also not badly written and carries an interesting idea.
The first chapter of the book, Notes on Anarchism, is quite interesting. Here enters Chomsky to explain what Anarchism is to him. He places his anarchism as a sibling if not a twin to libertarianism, he distinguishes it from socialism, or state socialism rather. He introduces the thoughts of several thinkers, socialists and not, on the matter at hand. He does answer a lot of what anarchism is to him here and he replies to some of the most common objections as well.
The second chapter is excerpts from some sort of interview or lecture, in it Chomsky replies to some comments and questions relating to the subject matter.
The third chapter seems to be an article in reply to an account of the civil war in Spain with which Chomsky disagrees. Arguably relevant because of the anarchist element in the said war.
The fourth chapter is an interview with Chomsky about some of his ideas and experiences.
The fifth chapter is an essay on freedom and language.
For all intents and purposes, this is a bad book. And I am saying that based on the standards of this very book, based on the objectives I imagine it sets for itself. This book taught me little about anarchism, would teach little to people who know nothing about anarchism, and does little to counter the opponents of anarchism. In short, this is not a serious book "on Anarchism". I would argue that it should be named "some thoughts relating to Anarchism" or something of the sort.
However, I do not say I principally disagree with Chomsky on his ideas regarding Anarchism.
To Chomsky, anarchism is mostly the questioning of illegitimate authority. It is not chaos, and it is not the senseless abolition of the state. To him it is in a sense being a true classical liberal or a libertarian socialist. He opposes capitalism and wage slavery but also any authoritarian version of the state. His aim is maximum individual liberty. He is in that sense as much an opponent of Marxist-Leninists as he is an opponent of neoliberals.
His view opens itself up to various objections which he doesn't even acknowledge. To add to that, the objections he does acknowledge he mostly replies to half-heartedly with a wave of hand. I would say that this is what I found most disappointing in this book, but then again, this is not really a book in that sense. This is not a serious book about anarchism with strong anarchist arguments. In a sense this is a form of "pop politics" book with which people can entertain themselves about anarchism or an entry point to delve deeper, but no more.
I exaggerate somewhat, but this was a disappointing read, better replaced by a YouTube video.
Funnily enough, my favorite chapters of the book are the one about the Spanish Civil War, an event of which I know little and have always wanted to read on, and the chapter on language and freedom which was cohesive enlightening and entertaining to the end.
This is not really a book.
The introduction by Nathan Schneider is a demistifier a general greeting of do not be afraid gentle traveler, we will not ask you to go raid the local police office. It is also not badly written and carries an interesting idea.
The first chapter of the book, Notes on Anarchism, is quite interesting. Here enters Chomsky to explain what Anarchism is to him. He places his anarchism as a sibling if not a twin to libertarianism, he distinguishes it from socialism, or state socialism rather. He introduces the thoughts of several thinkers, socialists and not, on the matter at hand. He does answer a lot of what anarchism is to him here and he replies to some of the most common objections as well.
The second chapter is excerpts from some sort of interview or lecture, in it Chomsky replies to some comments and questions relating to the subject matter.
The third chapter seems to be an article in reply to an account of the civil war in Spain with which Chomsky disagrees. Arguably relevant because of the anarchist element in the said war.
The fourth chapter is an interview with Chomsky about some of his ideas and experiences.
The fifth chapter is an essay on freedom and language.
For all intents and purposes, this is a bad book. And I am saying that based on the standards of this very book, based on the objectives I imagine it sets for itself. This book taught me little about anarchism, would teach little to people who know nothing about anarchism, and does little to counter the opponents of anarchism. In short, this is not a serious book "on Anarchism". I would argue that it should be named "some thoughts relating to Anarchism" or something of the sort.
However, I do not say I principally disagree with Chomsky on his ideas regarding Anarchism.
To Chomsky, anarchism is mostly the questioning of illegitimate authority. It is not chaos, and it is not the senseless abolition of the state. To him it is in a sense being a true classical liberal or a libertarian socialist. He opposes capitalism and wage slavery but also any authoritarian version of the state. His aim is maximum individual liberty. He is in that sense as much an opponent of Marxist-Leninists as he is an opponent of neoliberals.
His view opens itself up to various objections which he doesn't even acknowledge. To add to that, the objections he does acknowledge he mostly replies to half-heartedly with a wave of hand. I would say that this is what I found most disappointing in this book, but then again, this is not really a book in that sense. This is not a serious book about anarchism with strong anarchist arguments. In a sense this is a form of "pop politics" book with which people can entertain themselves about anarchism or an entry point to delve deeper, but no more.
I exaggerate somewhat, but this was a disappointing read, better replaced by a YouTube video.
Funnily enough, my favorite chapters of the book are the one about the Spanish Civil War, an event of which I know little and have always wanted to read on, and the chapter on language and freedom which was cohesive enlightening and entertaining to the end.
February 9, 2017
'On Anarchism' is a compilation of some very powerful and thought-provoking ideas. Some borrowed and credited to thinkers of yore like Rousseau, while others those of Chomsky himself.
In 'Notes on Anarchism', he spells out the fundamentals of anarchist philosophy, and while doing so, dissects both the Capitalist as well as the Soviet-style Socialist economies which turn out to be equally dangerous to the society.
'Excerpts from Understanding Power' is a study in human behavior and gives very strong evidence of the pressures to conform to the norm, and the subtle ways in which dissident opinions are silences in the mainstream media.
'Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship', the longest chapter in the book, is probably the most engrossing one as well. It talks about the Spanish Civil War, pitting two starkly different accounts of the same events - the mainstream liberal one of Gabriel Jackson tainted with a kind of elitism against those of Orwell and Borkenau who experienced the upheaval first-hand. The gaps in the information relayed to the later generations is immense, to the point of facts being distorted and the popular leaders of the masses (who were fighting a twin battle against the Communist-dominated Republican Government and Franco's rebels) being antagonized. It is a retelling of a major historical event that was brutally crushed because it posed a very real threat to all known structures of power and hierarchy. The account is at once historical, economical, and political study of human society and it offers some damning glimpses of things we are capable of doing to save the old world order.
The last chapter 'Language and Freedom' is where Chomsky steps into familiar ground of linguistics, and offers another insight into human behavior in terms of what freedom means in the context of the industrial and developing world, and goes back to classic liberal ideas like those of Rousseau to understand and explain the consequences of "predatory capitalism".
If ever there was a book to serve as a stepping stone, then this is it. Not only does it give you a taste of Chomsky's ideas, but also to his style which is as elegant as it is ruthlessly comprehensive. Call me biased, which I am anyway in Chomsky's favor, but this book certainly made me admire him more.
In 'Notes on Anarchism', he spells out the fundamentals of anarchist philosophy, and while doing so, dissects both the Capitalist as well as the Soviet-style Socialist economies which turn out to be equally dangerous to the society.
'Excerpts from Understanding Power' is a study in human behavior and gives very strong evidence of the pressures to conform to the norm, and the subtle ways in which dissident opinions are silences in the mainstream media.
'Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship', the longest chapter in the book, is probably the most engrossing one as well. It talks about the Spanish Civil War, pitting two starkly different accounts of the same events - the mainstream liberal one of Gabriel Jackson tainted with a kind of elitism against those of Orwell and Borkenau who experienced the upheaval first-hand. The gaps in the information relayed to the later generations is immense, to the point of facts being distorted and the popular leaders of the masses (who were fighting a twin battle against the Communist-dominated Republican Government and Franco's rebels) being antagonized. It is a retelling of a major historical event that was brutally crushed because it posed a very real threat to all known structures of power and hierarchy. The account is at once historical, economical, and political study of human society and it offers some damning glimpses of things we are capable of doing to save the old world order.
The last chapter 'Language and Freedom' is where Chomsky steps into familiar ground of linguistics, and offers another insight into human behavior in terms of what freedom means in the context of the industrial and developing world, and goes back to classic liberal ideas like those of Rousseau to understand and explain the consequences of "predatory capitalism".
If ever there was a book to serve as a stepping stone, then this is it. Not only does it give you a taste of Chomsky's ideas, but also to his style which is as elegant as it is ruthlessly comprehensive. Call me biased, which I am anyway in Chomsky's favor, but this book certainly made me admire him more.
October 20, 2015
'The two- speculation and action- must progress, as best they can, looking forward to the day when theoretical inquiry will provide a firm guide to the unending, often grim, but never hopeless struggle for freedom and social justice.'
This book was challenging in parts, particularly where I was not familiar with the terminology such as the classical (now warped) notion of libertarianism, and in regards to the historical events of the Spanish Civil War.
Nevertheless, this book was so eloquent, so deeply intelligent, infused with humility and a honourable regard for fairness, that it was entirely worth the read- and indeed, I find myself feeling quite uplifted and enhanced by it. I particularly appreciate the importance he places on the popularization of movements. This is a brief summation of my sentiments throughout. I feel hope, inspiration and motivation towards playing my part in the human struggle for freedom. One which, Chomsky never fails to assert, can only be completed in communion with our fellow human beings.
This book was challenging in parts, particularly where I was not familiar with the terminology such as the classical (now warped) notion of libertarianism, and in regards to the historical events of the Spanish Civil War.
Nevertheless, this book was so eloquent, so deeply intelligent, infused with humility and a honourable regard for fairness, that it was entirely worth the read- and indeed, I find myself feeling quite uplifted and enhanced by it. I particularly appreciate the importance he places on the popularization of movements. This is a brief summation of my sentiments throughout. I feel hope, inspiration and motivation towards playing my part in the human struggle for freedom. One which, Chomsky never fails to assert, can only be completed in communion with our fellow human beings.
March 25, 2021
Nathan Schniders introduction immediately made me rethink wroking examples of mutual aid and Chomsky's section on ‘defending the welfare state’ made a particular impression on me in regards to abolishing state powers very far in the future in order to keep from seceding the power we do have, in a very flawed system, to corporations. One of his early points about collective amnesia of the anarchist legacy may be something I needed to take in more deeply as I found the chapter about the Spanish anarchist tradition didn’t quite stick in my mind; but I hope I can learn more about it and other anarchist movements through other forms of media, in addition to maxist-leninest socialist state structures. The book was easy to read and understand (although I made need to brush up on my philosophy and read the last chapter again).
June 3, 2020
Mi pedazo favorito: "Anarquismo y libertarianismo".
February 16, 2021
A goldmine of extremely well articulated ideas that is mostly way too dry to read.
February 25, 2023
In this collection of articles, interviews and essays, one can find an accessible introduction to Anarchism, both as an intellectual and social phenomenon, as a practical attempt to organize societies without undemocratic hierarchies.
In int we read that Anarchism is the radical doubt of and critique to power, domination, oppression and every social hierarchy that puts some people below others.
As long as such hierarchies can't justify themselves in terms of necessity and justice, they ought to be dismantled, and thus place power and ownership over what people produce back into their own hands. The alternatives are wage-slavery and the subjugation to domination where one is not free to define one's own labour and social organization.
The most practical chapter in the book shows how this worked for a while in Catatonia, showing how people there owned their own means of production, and the results of their productions.
Unfortunately Anarchism has come to stand for chaos, and egotistical resistance to any form of hierarchy (such as entrepreneurs that are only after their self-interest), whereas actually Anarchism stands for the highly social idea that people should democratically organize themselves, in such way that everyone has ownership over their own lives.
In the words of Choamsky himself: "anarchism is a type of 'voluntary socialism' and is synonymous with 'libertarian socialism'. This is not found in capitalist societies where labour is subjected to coercion and is not allowed to own the means of production nor have any effective control of productive activity."
In an age where there is so much wealth that we could be more free with fairer distribution, the message of Choamsky seems to me relevant for this day.
In int we read that Anarchism is the radical doubt of and critique to power, domination, oppression and every social hierarchy that puts some people below others.
As long as such hierarchies can't justify themselves in terms of necessity and justice, they ought to be dismantled, and thus place power and ownership over what people produce back into their own hands. The alternatives are wage-slavery and the subjugation to domination where one is not free to define one's own labour and social organization.
The most practical chapter in the book shows how this worked for a while in Catatonia, showing how people there owned their own means of production, and the results of their productions.
Unfortunately Anarchism has come to stand for chaos, and egotistical resistance to any form of hierarchy (such as entrepreneurs that are only after their self-interest), whereas actually Anarchism stands for the highly social idea that people should democratically organize themselves, in such way that everyone has ownership over their own lives.
In the words of Choamsky himself: "anarchism is a type of 'voluntary socialism' and is synonymous with 'libertarian socialism'. This is not found in capitalist societies where labour is subjected to coercion and is not allowed to own the means of production nor have any effective control of productive activity."
In an age where there is so much wealth that we could be more free with fairer distribution, the message of Choamsky seems to me relevant for this day.
February 22, 2022
A fantastic introduction to a philosophy that has been misrepresented all too often by those it challenges. A compilation of interviews, speeches and essays, On Anarchism features Noam Chomsky collating arguments for and dissecting the arguments against anarchism. His dry yet engaging tone is straight to the point, devoid the radical left rhetoric that often does more harm than good.
Chomsky leads us through the annals of anarchist history, from Bakunin's prediction that state socialism would lead to a totalitarian 'red bureaucracy' to the miraculous success of anarchist Catalonia, before diving into how language shapes our relationship with political systems. While this makes it an amazing introductory read, it is not revolutionary in any way - Chomsky has made his points elsewhere and shares little in the way of new perspectives. Its success is thus derived from its compilation of the most important arguments into a slim paperback that can be easily referred to.
Not only is this a must read for budding anarchists - it ought to be read by everyone. As we witness the rise of surveillance capitalism, we need to remind ourselves of the unofficial 'creed' of anarchism. That authority is not self-justifying, and that authority that cannot justify its existence ought to be dismantled.
Chomsky leads us through the annals of anarchist history, from Bakunin's prediction that state socialism would lead to a totalitarian 'red bureaucracy' to the miraculous success of anarchist Catalonia, before diving into how language shapes our relationship with political systems. While this makes it an amazing introductory read, it is not revolutionary in any way - Chomsky has made his points elsewhere and shares little in the way of new perspectives. Its success is thus derived from its compilation of the most important arguments into a slim paperback that can be easily referred to.
Not only is this a must read for budding anarchists - it ought to be read by everyone. As we witness the rise of surveillance capitalism, we need to remind ourselves of the unofficial 'creed' of anarchism. That authority is not self-justifying, and that authority that cannot justify its existence ought to be dismantled.
March 18, 2016
Nice, hard-hitting intro to the subject of Anarchism. Long story short: it's not what you think it is. One of my favorite moments in the book was his clever use of Adam Smith and Wilhelm von Humboldt. He makes a (disappointingly) brief argument for how their philosophies have been transfigured and misconstrued by modern conservatives. I also found it interesting how American Libertarianism can actually be traced back to Social Anarchism. In the light of this historical connection, a right-wing libertarian might be compelled to consider how their brand of Libertarianism has wandered so far from traditional Libertarian values.
Here's a Humboldt quote that Chomsky used that resonated with me:
"...man never regards what he possesses as so much his own, as what he does; and the labourer who tends a garden is perhaps in a truer sense its owner. than the listless voluptuary who enjoys its fruits...In view of this consideration, it seems as if all peasants and craftsmen might be elevated into artists; that is, men who love their labour for its own sake, improve it by their own plastic genius and inventive skill, and thereby cultivate their intellect, ennoble their character, and exalt and refine their pleasures. And so humanity would be ennobled by the very things which now, though beautiful in themselves, so often serve to degrade it...But, still, freedom is undoubtedly the indispensable condition, without which even the pursuits most congenial to individual human nature, can never succeed in producing such salutary influences. Whatever does no spring from a man's free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very being, but remains alien to his true nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely mechanical exactness...We may admire what he does, but we despise what he is."
Here's a Humboldt quote that Chomsky used that resonated with me:
"...man never regards what he possesses as so much his own, as what he does; and the labourer who tends a garden is perhaps in a truer sense its owner. than the listless voluptuary who enjoys its fruits...In view of this consideration, it seems as if all peasants and craftsmen might be elevated into artists; that is, men who love their labour for its own sake, improve it by their own plastic genius and inventive skill, and thereby cultivate their intellect, ennoble their character, and exalt and refine their pleasures. And so humanity would be ennobled by the very things which now, though beautiful in themselves, so often serve to degrade it...But, still, freedom is undoubtedly the indispensable condition, without which even the pursuits most congenial to individual human nature, can never succeed in producing such salutary influences. Whatever does no spring from a man's free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very being, but remains alien to his true nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely mechanical exactness...We may admire what he does, but we despise what he is."
January 7, 2022
Digging deep into anarchism. What I loved about this book is the extensive references and footnotes Chomsky gives. Gave me a lot to chew on for my further studies of anarchism and anarcho-syndicalism, such as the works of Bakunin, Rocker, Orwell etc. I'm following up this read with Orwell's classic Homage to Catalonia.
Besides the excellent essay on Anarchism, there is an extensive refutation of some of the claims made by Jackson in his award-winning work on the Spanish Civil War. Also lays bare many of the liberal biases Jackson was operating on.
After these, there was a short interview with Harry Kreisler which talked about Chomsky's early influences and how his worldview was shaped.
At the very end was an illuminating essay called Language and Freedom, in which Chomsky connected the two strands of Western Enlightenment thought on the concept of freedom (that freedom is the fundamental postulate of human existence) and the concept of language (that creative, infinitely-varied use of the language faculty distinguishes us from animals), through the works of Rousseau, Humboldt (one of Chomsky's fav thinkers), Descartes, Kant and others. A very enlightening and uplifting read indeed! Looking forward to reading more Chomsky books in the future.
Besides the excellent essay on Anarchism, there is an extensive refutation of some of the claims made by Jackson in his award-winning work on the Spanish Civil War. Also lays bare many of the liberal biases Jackson was operating on.
After these, there was a short interview with Harry Kreisler which talked about Chomsky's early influences and how his worldview was shaped.
At the very end was an illuminating essay called Language and Freedom, in which Chomsky connected the two strands of Western Enlightenment thought on the concept of freedom (that freedom is the fundamental postulate of human existence) and the concept of language (that creative, infinitely-varied use of the language faculty distinguishes us from animals), through the works of Rousseau, Humboldt (one of Chomsky's fav thinkers), Descartes, Kant and others. A very enlightening and uplifting read indeed! Looking forward to reading more Chomsky books in the future.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 420 reviews