Deterring Democracy

by Noam Chomsky

Book Overview

"A volatile, serious contribution to the debate over American's role as the globe's sole remaining superpower." --San Francisco Chronicle

From World War II until the 1980s, the United States reigned supreme as both the economic and the military leader of the world. The major shifts in global politics that came about with the dismantling of the Eastern bloc have left the United States unchallenged as the preeminent military...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0374523495
• ISBN13: 9780374523497
• Release Date: April 1992
• Publisher: Farrar, Strauss & Giroux-3pl
• Length: 424 Pages
• Weight: 1.43 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.2" x 6.0" x 8.9"

Customer Reviews

A relentless analysis of America's imperial project.

All Chomsky's political books have one aim: To show to the world, and to American's in particular, that America's foreign policy is imperial in design. This book is his best. Chapter by chapter he shows how the Cold War was essentially the creation of the USA to cloak its own global ambitions: - to become the first truly world power. He shows how "communist" revolutions were usually nationalist in flavour, including Cuba and Vietnam; how America wants unlimited access to cheap primary markets in the Third World; how America's victims are usually left-leaning politicians, civil-right activists, trade unionists, and peasants, -in other words, people who might harm US investments; and how America prefers democracy - except where democracy may threaten American business interest. When American business interests are threatened by democracy, socialists are pushed out of office and replaced with right-of-centre coalitions, coupled with CIA covert operations to undermine popular organisations such as trade unions.Noam Chomsky says this: "Democratic forms can be tolerated, even admired, if only for propaganda purposes. But this stance can be adopted only when the distribution of effective power ensures that meaningful participation of the 'popular classes' has been barred. When they organise and threaten the control of the political system by the business-land-owning elite and the military, strong measures must by taken, with tactical variations depending on the ranking of the target population on the scale of importance. At the lowest level, in the Third World, virtually no holds are barred."This book is uncompromising and Chomsky is relentless in his argument and presentation of facts. Once you get to the end, you will be find it difficult to refute what Chomsky says. If you have never questioned America's foreign policy before-then you are in for a radical shake-up of the intellect. For those of us who care about the world, believe in the self-determination of nations, and want to cut through the pious cant of governments, this is the place to start.

One of Chomsky's best

Like a lot of people, I came across this particular work of Chomsky's before any of the rest, perhaps because it was the first in a long time that was brought out by a major publishing corporation (Vintage UK, a division of Random House) and not by a smaller, more radical press. (Sobering to remember that his first major political work, "American Power and the New Mandarins", was published in the UK by Penguin.) It changed the way I think about the world.It's significant that critics of Chomsky's political writings have very little means at their disposal with which to criticise him. They can claim that he quoted one source out of context (even if this were true - one source out of the hundreds cited in the whole book? Chomsky didn't make up NSC 68, it's in the archives for anyone to read...); they can claim that he's a bolshevik who should go back to Russia (in spite of his lifelong denunciations of the Soviet regime, and his deep-rooted mistrust of state power in general - in fact, Chomsky has often said that the reason he hasn't denounced the crimes of the Soviet regime more often is because he didn't need to, practically everybody else did); they can claim that he denied the Khmer Rouge atrocities (he never has, in fact he has compared it in scale to the activities of Indonesia in East Timor - however, plenty of people have pretended that he's denied KR atrocities, especially in the French press - see his "Language and Politics" for the details) or that he's a Holocaust denier (which he isn't; he defended the right of a Holocaust denier to free speech, while publicly disassociating himself from the man's opinions, on the grounds that if you don't give your enemies the right to free speech then "free speech" is meaningless). The fact is, most people who have a problem with Chomsky base their criticisms on what other critics of him have said, and never bother to actually read his work.This is a pity, as Chomsky is not so much a theorist of politics as a sort of higher journalist. His method is to present us with facts - documents, statements, commentary - and invite us to draw conclusions based upon them. He is far from being a "conspiracy theorist"; he shows us that there is no conspiracy, that it's going on right under our noses, in the pages of our newspapers, on our TV news bulletins, albeit tarted up and edited to seem like it's something else. So that the invasions of Panama and Grenada are, in some way, of a higher moral order than the invasion of Kuwait - the first are "defending the national interest", the second is "violating the rights of a sovereign country". The actions were much the same in terms of human consequences, i.e. invading a country and killing civilians, but our justifications (when we bother to provide any) are assumed, without explanation, to be impeccable, whereas our enemies' actions must ipso facto be the work of Satan. The recent events in New York and Washington are tragic and appalling. No less tragic

Brilliant and thought provoking analysis

I picked up this book because I was quite ashamed at the American political scene at home and quite mystified with its actions abroad. I was angry that our government and the business community seemed to be drifting farther and farther from popular control, and how politicians were condescending, insincere, and corrupt. I wondered if America really was the savior of the world I had been taught to believe it to be, or whether it was all a hoax. I remembered from my childhood how the toughest guys always bullied the weaker individuals, and I was extremely skeptical that the United States could have such power and always use it benevolently. The book proved to be an incredible read, right from the first page. Chomsky did not begin with the assumption that America has acted benevolently in the past, or that it ever meant to. Instead, he started with the facts, and constructed them into a global picture that should irk anybody with a conscience. The US IS a thug and a murderer, an untrustworthy goon, as far as international affairs are concerned. Even now, George W. Bush, the Republican candidate for the presidency, says he will "cancel," or VIOLATE, the treaty the United States signed with Russia that forbids both countries from building missile defense systems. Anybody concerned with the truth would do well to read this book.

Well written and well documented (from the mainstream media)

Unlike the reviewer Mr. Gartman, I do not see Chomsky's ideas as poorly researched or un-deductive. Quite the opposite: most of his sources come directly from the mainstream media in the US and are quite illuminating to US foreign policy. Chomsky is also one of the more empirical thinkers I've read before, which also means one must think a lot about his ideas before accepting or rejecting them. His assertions are based upon a very wide world view, one that cannot be easily condensed into a simply International Politics book. Like Mr. Gartman, I would interject that the US does not act to limit the freedoms of the people in other countries out of malice, but out of it's own concern and interest. This is, Mr. Gartman, what Chomsky is arguing. I do disagree with you as to the extent that elites play in the execution of US concern and interest, however. It is plain to see in the fact that, although the US is a democracy (although not in law-- we are technically a republic), that democracy only extends insofar as everyone has a meaningful way of affecting policy and interacting in that democracy. We all know how much say we have in our democracy: we get to vote once a year, and for Presidential elections, once every four years. The rest of the time it is up to certain interests to affect those policy makers to have their will done. That is not democracy. That is what Chomsky argues.Like another reader, I think the history _can_ speak for itself: the US has acted like a belligerent thug in the past, regardless of what reason and for who's interests, and in a humanistic world view, that is wrong. Most people, if made known of that truth, would also condemn US belligerence. Others, such as Mr. Gartman, may choose to re-write that history or deny it.

Utterly Astonishing

If there was one book that changed my perspective on the world, this is it. For years, I believed the US was a well-intentioned but negligent country on the world scene, but far superior to the Soviet Union. Chomsky meticulously dismantled that traditional liberal myth, and many others, by comparing them to the demonstrated behavior of the US. Why, for instance, was it acceptable for the United States to invade Panama on the flimsiest of pretexts in 1990, but barbaric for Iraq to do the same to Kuwait? Chomsky rigorously leads the reader through a multitude of analyses, until, towards the end of the book, the terrible conclusion of what kind of country the United States really is finally comes into full view. However, this book is not an easy read. Readers will have to deal not only with the rude shock of some of their most cherished national myths tumbling down before their very eyes, but also with Chomsky's writing, which tends to be a grammatical nightmare. Despite that, I consider this book a must-read to grasp how our society truly works.