Noam Chomsky - Sovereignty

[@Nahedomaymen]

The international human rights law also has a significant impact on state sovereignty because it challenges the moral authority of the state. Those in power will fear losing their interests. Noam chomsky always call for justice. He is voice of right. If you get your rights you live in peace and justice.

[@Sepantamino]

I agree that we have to compromise to be part of a collective decision making but at the same time we should be conscious and knowledgeable of what we have compromised for the sake of the collaboration.

[@Libertarianmobius1]

Absolutely wrong. The "collective good" excuse is abused and manipulated by highly intellectual individuals proposing for increasing state power. The common individual is put in a very precarious position because of the menace that affects his interests through govermental power.

[@Sepantamino]

Collective decision making is sometimes necessary to prevent uncontrollable disorder that may accelerate the hostility and destruction embedded in the nature of human society.

[@Libertarianmobius1]

@@Sepantamino Collective decision is mostly influence by politcal forces fighting to spread their influences. Individuals in a community with share interests can arbitrarily find solutions for complex problems. It will be done in more efficient and productive manner. The knowledge acquired of how to deal with human relationships, allocating scarce resources and decisive decision making is priceless. If you leave it to bureaucrats or a foreign governmental force to do all the work, whats the incentive for locals to try otherwise?

[@staatsfeindlich9939]

@@Libertarianmobius1 "Right wing Libertarians are deeply authoritarians. They're calling for subordination to private tyrannies, the worst kind of tyrannies." -- Noam Chomsky

[@CoolBreezeAnthony]

Getting the message across.

[@Unseenessential]

Luv u from Pakistan

[@maxwaller2055]

informative - 07:31 am hours Pacific Standard Time on Friday, 29 March 2019

[@aaliadoesanarchy6277]

Could you guys share your thoughts on my progressive content? I'm really curious for thoughts.

[@alrhayul5536]

Focus less on reactionary videos and more on substantive topics/issues. I've yet to see anyone dedicated to environmental issues or political history. Things people think they 'know' about.

[@munstrumridcully]

My advice would be to try not to fall into the trap of only talking about bad things the _other_ side does. Prof. Chomsky pointed out once that the way we can tell if a news media is sincere in illustrating human rights violations is if they condemn the bad actio s of their own nation first and foremost(like taking care of your own house first). He sites the Soviet rags of the 70s and 80s writing all about US aggression but was silent on soviet atrocities. So I would just say be careful not to ignore faults on your own "side". I see it all the time here on KZbin; conservative channels seem to only call out liberal excess and dishonesty while completely ignore the Liar In Cheif in the Oval Office. Same goesfor progressive channels, who seem to only focus on conservative shenanigans.

[@aaliadoesanarchy6277]

@@munstrumridcully I dont do these things. Did you actually see my content?

[@aaliadoesanarchy6277]

@@alrhayul5536 my videos are very substantive but it seems as though you saw the titles and already came to an conclusion.

[@munstrumridcully]

@@aaliadoesanarchy6277 I wasnt accusing you, it was just advice to avoid that trap as I've noticing that a lot lately. Sorry if i came off as accusatory. Yes, i saw a few, one on ben Shapiro and onr on Trump Russia connection being dead. Again, i wasnt accusing just offering advice because of a trend ive noticed on KZbin in general when it comes to politics.

[@youtubehatesfreespeech2555]

But the scale of the family and the world are drastically different! You can't simply assume it's the same mechanism! It's called the Dunbar number which states any social group bigger than 150 needs a certain form of artificial institution in order to sustain it because the group starts to disintegrate! It's an innate limitation of our species! You can't treat the world as your family! Naturally your concern and emotional investment regarding strangers diminishes significantly as the group grows!

[@Gigika313]

Bernie 2020.

[@lewiscullen8236]

Timely with the Brexit fiasco

[@TimMer1981]

Maybe you should check out this Chomsky video, which is a perfect explanation of why the Brexit itself isn't the fiasco, it's the politicians who ignored the democratic vote and fucked up the process on purpose: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bKrYlpygbc-ib7M

[@johnnonamegibbon3580]

It's why I don't think it's _necessarily_ oxymoronic to be a Chomskyan Anarchist and a Nationalist. To Chomsky Anarchism isn't literal, it's about choosing you oppression. Well, I choose to be in a nation of my co ethnics. It strips me of some rights, but I choose it.

[@nohbuddy1]

What? He plainly says anarchy is a rejection of all unjustified authority. Yes being a "nationalist" and an anarchist is oxymoronic since nationalist needs to rely on arbitrary state/nation boundaries

[@johnnonamegibbon3580]

​@@nohbuddy1 Nope. He also says that what makes them just or unjust is if people choose to live in such a thing. As everything we agree to constricts our freedom. He isn't literal with his views on anarchism, it's one of the most misunderstood things about him. It's why he calls himself a "Fellow traveler" and not a literal anarchist. Personally, I don't think a world like that can even exist. As many differences get in the way. It goes against human nature and economics. It's more pragmatic not to do this. So I choose to live in a nation. You can live in Brasil type "nations" if you like. With no real rule of anything if you like. It's your choice.

[@nohbuddy1]

@@johnnonamegibbon3580 Where are you getting this nonsense from? kzbin.info/www/bejne/ip7QimqAn5iLsM0 Human nature isn't to form a nation-state

[@blackflagsnroses6013]

John NoNameGibbon that is a load of crap honestly. Nations or the State aren’t justified. Because I was born a Hispanic doesn’t mean I have to follow the language, the culture, the cuisine etc... Chomsky is a Libertarian Socialist, there is no advocation of Nation-States. You can’t be an Anarchist and for Statism period. Anarchism is dismantling of coercive and hierarchical structures and social relations. Now there is a fringe group of Nationalist Anarchists who mix left libertarianism with right wing social ideology. That if a Nation (people) want to be exclusive to a certain ethnicity, or race, then they should be free to have Anarchist Stateless communities of their own. There is a debate to have whether this is passable or rejected for being opposed to left wing social ideology that is traditionally Anarchist. The solidarity of workers and people across demographic lines for free societies. Chomsky isn’t a Nationalist Anarchist, he’s a clear LibSoc. Saying you can be a National-Statist and be an Anarchist is as false as saying you can be Anarchist and Capitalist because people might choose to be a Capitalist society. Assuredly they wouldn’t if a classless and Socialist (worker’s ownership) society were capable and present. And Capitalism is a hierarchical system that is completely devoid of Anarchist political philosophy.