Society with abundance of basic needs , zenith of machines, technology , full of leisure time , without any burden of coercive work is ideal society , which would definitely come into existence.....
The biggest problem is the separation within our class system. If we automate labor then the problems of class will decay. And our new revolution will shine
"remove corrosive institutions", and goes on talking about the state. We need "freer, more democratic structures". Agreed. (And... "Educate yourself and others", "take action", "dedicate yourself". What else can one say, when saying they don't specifically know how an ideal society works?)
@@MrTweedyDocumentaries its "coercive institutions" not "corrosive institutions" and you clearly have no idea what the term means or even what youre talking about
The reason why it’s impossible it’s because the words “ideal” and “perfect” are both subjective, we all have different views of what is ideal or perfect so one persons ideal society could be where everyone works for him and everyone worships him and all the girls want to be with him etc etc but that is another mans hell. One persons ideal society is a completely conservative society whereas that is a gay atheists hellhole. I don’t know if what I’m saying makes sense but You get the picture.
"It reminds me of the routine in which Dave Chappelle talks about first learning of the stereotype about blacks and fried chicken. "All these years, I thought I liked chicken because it was delicious," Chappelle says. "Turns out I am genetically predisposed to liking chicken. I got no say in the matter." Well, I felt the same way when I finished "Supermob": I thought Sidney Korshak became a powerful figure because he was crooked and ambitious and smart. Turns out he was just Jewish." Rich Cohen
I was with him until he started to talk about interfering with peoples famlies, then I realized that the only way that can be done is by using ill defined power to punish those who disagree with his definition of good, that is tyrannical.
I think you may have misunderstood. he's talking about taking the principle of questioning unjustified authority into the institution of the family. that means taking it into our own families, not anyone else's
That's right. When your rights bump up against mine, we work it out amicably by using sane rules agreed to and controlled by a majority of the citizens. If 99 people in a community agree to set the Main Street speed limit to 30mph and 1 guy thinks it should be 40mph, the majority carries, unless they all agree on 35mph as a compromise. With lots of facts and information, consensus is usually reachable; the final differences and sticking points are negligible in most cases, and you just work things out as best you can. But everybody gets to drive down Main Street at a fair, safe speed. And, most importantly, some dictator doesn't get to decide for a community. No rights are absolute. Nothing's perfect. Democracy is a reflection of that.
chomsky is such a know-it-all historian the creative part of himself (which he says a decent society would try maximize the possibilities of) has completely shriveled up and died. chomsky can not see beyond the tip of his own nose
Great humility is one of the greatest parts of this man's genius.
Simple yet amazing.
Society with abundance of basic needs , zenith of machines, technology , full of leisure time , without any burden of coercive work is ideal society , which would definitely come into existence.....
Boys. I'm gonna crack it
The biggest problem is the separation within our class system. If we automate labor then the problems of class will decay. And our new revolution will shine
As long as social inequality is criminalized humanity will never have a Healthy society. No matter how you wanna look at it.
"remove corrosive institutions", and goes on talking about the state. We need "freer, more democratic structures". Agreed.
(And... "Educate yourself and others", "take action", "dedicate yourself". What else can one say, when saying they don't specifically know how an ideal society works?)
" "Educate yourself and others", "take action", "dedicate yourself".". As far as I'm concerned that is the biggest way to improve society.
Like destroying the corrosive insttution of the family, 1:27 I have the feeling that a great many Chomsky fans have shitty families.
@@MrTweedyDocumentaries its "coercive institutions" not "corrosive institutions" and you clearly have no idea what the term means or even what youre talking about
The reason why it’s impossible it’s because the words “ideal” and “perfect” are both subjective, we all have different views of what is ideal or perfect so one persons ideal society could be where everyone works for him and everyone worships him and all the girls want to be with him etc etc but that is another mans hell. One persons ideal society is a completely conservative society whereas that is a gay atheists hellhole. I don’t know if what I’m saying makes sense but You get the picture.
He's an anarchist, so he doesn't want other people's ideas of "Ideal" and "perfect" imposed on other people.
"It reminds me of the routine in which Dave Chappelle talks about first learning of the stereotype about blacks and fried chicken. "All these years, I thought I liked chicken because it was delicious," Chappelle says. "Turns out I am genetically predisposed to liking chicken. I got no say in the matter." Well, I felt the same way when I finished "Supermob": I thought Sidney Korshak became a powerful figure because he was crooked and ambitious and smart. Turns out he was just Jewish."
Rich Cohen
mdphybes 😂😂well said
I was with him until he started to talk about interfering with peoples famlies, then I realized that the only way that can be done is by using ill defined power to punish those who disagree with his definition of good, that is tyrannical.
I think you may have misunderstood. he's talking about taking the principle of questioning unjustified authority into the institution of the family. that means taking it into our own families, not anyone else's
the question is
who decides the definition and the details of the so called IDEAL ?
If you get rid of authority, people decide for themselves what their IDEAL is.
Everybody, together.
@@jonm7888 if you get rid of authority the strongest will kill you in the next alley
@@2Majesties in real life there is always someone who disagrees
That's right. When your rights bump up against mine, we work it out amicably by using sane rules agreed to and controlled by a majority of the citizens. If 99 people in a community agree to set the Main Street speed limit to 30mph and 1 guy thinks it should be 40mph, the majority carries, unless they all agree on 35mph as a compromise. With lots of facts and information, consensus is usually reachable; the final differences and sticking points are negligible in most cases, and you just work things out as best you can. But everybody gets to drive down Main Street at a fair, safe speed. And, most importantly, some dictator doesn't get to decide for a community.
No rights are absolute. Nothing's perfect. Democracy is a reflection of that.
🇺🇸 BERNIE 2020 🇺🇸
chomsky is such a know-it-all historian the creative part of himself (which he says a decent society would try maximize the possibilities of) has completely shriveled up and died. chomsky can not see beyond the tip of his own nose
Anti-racism anti-sexism is anti-human.