Noam Chomsky, a professor of political criticism and analysis of American foreign policy, in his book "Failed States", Chomsky continues to talk about hegemony or the presence, the power of the American imperial, in spreading peace and democracy in a crazy way. I have put it forward here about the United States in general. And in some chapters, he talks about the criteria of "failed states". Chomsky defines failed states as those who cannot or do not want to protect their citizens from violence and consider themselves above the law. This is an important book to understand that "if you understand" that America will not spread democracy in your country, will not protect you, and will not care about human rights. Hell is America.

The book is a starting point for thinking about some inspiring and shocking ideas.

It makes us reflect on the true nature of American foreign policy and its impact on the world. Chomsky's analysis challenges the commonly held beliefs and exposes the hypocrisy and double standards of the United States. His work is a wake-up call for those who are concerned about the future of our planet and the well-being of its people. We need to question the actions and motives of powerful nations and strive for a more just and peaceful world.

I have been in numerous dreadful locations. However, never have I witnessed such intense fear as that in the eyes of those striving to survive in Haiti's indescribable slums during the Clinton-backed terror. Nor have I seen such profound misery as among the poor peasants in southern Colombia, who have been driven from their devastated lands by US chemical warfare - fumigation. And there are many more similar situations around the world.

Even after violence accomplishes its objectives and subsides, it leaves behind a residual culture of terror, as the surviving Salvadorean Jesuits noted. Nevertheless, somehow, communities manage to endure and survive.

Gaining an understanding of human affairs is no simple feat. In certain aspects, this task is more challenging than in the natural sciences. While Mother Nature doesn't present the answers easily, at least she doesn't deliberately create barriers to understanding. In human affairs, such barriers are the norm. It is essential to tear down the structures of deception constructed by doctrinal systems that employ a variety of devices that arise quite naturally from the ways in which power is concentrated.

Noam Chomsky's words offer profound insights into these complex issues.

There’s a line in Victor Serge’s Memoirs of a Revolutionary that always comes back to me whenever I find myself trapped in a conversation with a political nutbar. Serge, writing about some Soviet apparatchik he’d clashed with, said, “I followed his argument with the blank uneasiness which one might feel in the presence of a logical lunatic.”

Noam Chomsky fills me with a similar blank uneasiness. Now, let’s be clear: the man is no lunatic. He’s a gifted scientist and, in some ways, an admirable citizen. But his worldview is so simplistic and so rigidly consistent that, paradoxically, it becomes insane due to its very excess of logic.

At some point in the last decade, Chomsky seems to have ossified into the Jimmy Buffet of the far left: a productive yet predictable figure, still drawing in the crowds without ever bothering to change his set list. The overwhelming array of facts and figures, the quotes from obscure journals and technical literature, the scathing denunciations of American perfidy – this is Chomsky’s never-ending Margaritaville. But as Buffet knows, sameness can be soothing and, more importantly, it sells.

Before I try to explain why Chomsky is such a dangerous simpleton (from an ideological perspective), let me admit that I didn’t dislike Failed States as much as I expected. No matter what your political orientation is, if you don’t learn something from Chomsky, you’re just not paying attention. Published in the middle of the Bush II years, Failed States is a depressing catalogue of cabalistic plots, legal end-runs, and foreign-policy debacles. Even with all my defenses up, this book nearly sent me into an atavistic fit of anti-American paranoia (which, as a Canadian, I’m genetically predisposed to anyway).

Luckily for my sluggish liberal conscience, though, I see no reason to take Chomsky seriously. The guy is just massively dishonest – not on the factual level (where he’s merely sneaky) but on the rhetorical level. Take the premise of Failed States. Chomsky’s mendacious little conceit here is that the United States exhibits many of the characteristics of a failed state. That’s right: America is the new Somalia. I doubt even Chomsky believes this nonsense, but he presents it with a straight face (as he does everything else; humor is not his strong point, unless you enjoy crude sarcasm). He comes up with his own blatantly self-serving definition of a failed state but somehow overlooks the most salient feature: namely, a failed state is one that has simply ceased to function. His diagnosis is just an infantile bit of magical thinking: it’s a failed state because I say it is.

But that’s nothing compared to a more glaring piece of chicanery. Like any good lefty, Chomsky is dismissive of the Bush administration’s claim that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling WMDs. Fair enough. The absence of WMDs is a truism by now. But then, in an astonishing admission, Chomsky tells us that “this is not quite accurate. There were stores of equipment for developing WMDs in Iraq after the invasion: those produced in the 1980s, thanks to aid provided by the United States and Britain, among others.”

Wait a minute. Are you saying Colin Powell was right all along? Is that what you’re saying, Noam? Was that cheesy PowerPoint presentation at the UN legitimate, then? Well, yes, he sort of is saying that, but as usual he has a forensic rabbit up his sleeve. It turns out that Iraq’s WMD facilities were systematically looted following the invasion:

Most of the looting was from production sites for solid- and liquid-propellant missiles, where about 85% of the equipment had been removed, along with biotoxins and other materials usable for chemical and biological weapons, and high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear and chemical weapons and missiles. A Jordanian journalist was informed by officials in charge of the Jordanian-Iraqi border after US and UK forces took over that radioactive materials were detected in one of every eight trucks crossing into Jordan, destination unknown.

Nice work, Noam! What a scoop! Biotoxins, chemical weapons, nuclear missiles! Truckloads of radioactive material! Call Rumsfeld. Tell him all is forgiven. He can have his old office back, as soon as Gates clears his stuff out.

Okay, my irony is getting almost as heavy as Chomsky’s. But you saw what he did there, right? First he tells us there were no WMDs. Then, without pausing to notice the contradiction, he informs us that the whole place was teeming with the things. But conveniently for his argument, the US is still guilty, since they provided the weapons, or the “aid” to buy them, back in the 80s – and doubly guilty because they failed to secure all this military surplus after the invasion.

So, as always with Chomsky, the US can’t win for losing. You have to ask yourself: does he even care what the truth is? Does it matter to him whether or not Hussein possessed WMDs? Or that nuclear-grade materials might have fallen into the hands of some really nasty characters? No. He couldn’t care less. He’s just blindly grasping at the nearest polemical blunt instrument: a crowbar here, a two-by-four there – anything will do, as long as he can use it to bludgeon the imperialists and their lackeys in the media.

The sad thing is that a lot of people – people who no doubt pride themselves on their critical-thinking skills – take this guy very seriously indeed. Strangely, it never occurs to them to apply the same skepticism to his work that they would to the equally dubious pronouncements of Rush Limbaugh or whoever. Read him, by all means; learn from him. But for God’s sake, be sure to check under the hood, kick the tires, and give the old CD changer a spin. Even the smartest and most intellectually honest pundits are bound to be wrong around 70% of the time. Chomsky is plenty smart but, as far as I can see, intellectual honesty is not among his virtues.

Propaganda is to democracy

what violence is to autocracy.

Failed States commences with an extraordinary appeal issued to the people of the world by Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein in July, 1955. They assert that the choice confronting the world is “stark and dreadful and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war”.

Chomsky contends that not only has the world not renounced war, but the world's hegemonic power, under a doctrine of “anticipatory self-defence” with unstated bounds, accords itself the right to wage war at will. He delineates the characteristics of a “Failed State” as the inability to protect its citizens from violence, the tendency to regard itself as beyond the reach of domestic or international law, and suffering from a serious “democratic deficit”. Subsequently, he proceeds to prove that the United States of America embodies many of these characteristics and, consequently, is one of the gravest threats to the survival of the human race. The evidence he presents is impeccable, and his assertion is proven beyond reasonable doubt.

For a novice like me, who has hitherto believed what is published in newspapers and magazines, this is both eye-opening and almost难以置信. I have always regarded the USA as an ideal country, one that endeavors to promote democratic values worldwide. However, after perusing this book, I have been compelled to reanalyse the situation and alter my perspective.

I really struggled with this one. However, at least I managed to get through most of it! I have to admit that I skipped one chapter, which was "Supporting evidence -- the Middle East".

It was a bit easier to understand compared to the previous Chomsky book I attempted to read, which was "Hegemony or Survival".

I'm still trying to figure out if one has to be a history or political science major to truly understand Chomsky. Or is it just me?

In any case, the major themes were clearly defined throughout the book, and it really made me think a lot about how I view US foreign and domestic policy.

The first half of the book argues that US state power has continuously increased the threat of international terrorism and violence, including the possibility of nuclear war, all in the pursuit of its own self-interests and in blatant disregard of international law.

He details, for example, how the US has essentially destroyed Iraq and its people over decades of interference. First, it supported Saddam Hussein, and then when he became "independent", it turned him into an evil despot. It imposed devastating sanctions that decimated the population, invaded the country against the will of the international community in 2003, and there was corruption and greed involved in the "rebuilding" of the country.

He reports how the "fight for freedom and democracy" are buzzwords that the US often uses to label almost everything it does in foreign policy, even when the individual actions have the exact opposite effect. But as long as American strategic, economic, and political goals are achieved, who cares!?

"Democracy is a good thing IF AND ONLY IF it is consistent with strategic and economic interests." (Thomas Carothers)

Regarding domestic policy, he describes how "democracy" is a farce in the US, long hijacked by multinational corporate interests in close collaboration with the political establishment. He explains how major media organizations are just mouthpieces for the establishment, ignoring the aspirations of the US population. For example, polls show that Americans demand a decrease in the defense budget and increases in healthcare coverage, education, and social services, but this data is never publicized.

The one overwhelming feeling I had when I finished this was that Donald Trump is just continuing a very long tradition of the values inherent in US policy since 1945. He's just blatantly honest and in-your-face about it.

Noam Chomsky makes a powerful statement about why the United States, which proclaims itself as a symbol of democracy in the world, fails to adhere to its own self-proclaimed ideals. In fact, rather than safeguarding freedom and security, the United States is more preoccupied with securing its own economic and geopolitical interests.

As the world's most powerful state, the USA asserts its right to have influence and a say in its actions, even when they conflict with international agreements like the Geneva Convention. For example, the USA ignores the Convention's definition of torture in Guantanamo Bay. It follows its own rules when punishing enemies, as seen during the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Contrary to its self-proclaimed desire to spread democracy, the real motives behind American actions are often its economic interests and the will to block the democratic intentions of countries like Syria and Palestine. The invasion of Iraq, which was supposed to establish democracy, actually worsened the living conditions of Iraqis.

All in all, the author criticizes the United States and its policies, but in my view, some important things are left out. While the invasion of Iraq may have been based on false pretenses and the US may not have had a legal basis to invade Afghanistan, we must remember that these actions were taken after 9/11, when the US was attacked by Osama Bin Laden. Additionally, while it can be argued that North Korea's nuclear program is driven by the US's aggressive intentions, it is important to note that some rogue nations may develop nuclear programs regardless of external factors. It is easy to complain about the US's policies in dealing with these nations, but from a realpolitik perspective, sometimes these actions are necessary, not out of a moral obligation, but because the US is the only country capable of doing so.

Reading this book has arguably been the most eye-opening experience. It truly surprised me, or rather, shocked me to discover the lies that are masterfully and continuously sold to us by even highly-regarded media platforms. Take the NYT and the FT for example. Sometimes, they knowingly conform to the tacit Western views of what their nations or leaders stand for. However, they conveniently leave out the many ground realities of international issues. This book is a must-read for anyone who wants to consider our world with an alternative lens. It forces you, at the cost of almost everything one has learned since childhood about world affairs, to become wary of the inspiring written and spoken word of leaders who claim to be at the service of democracy. It makes you question the information you have been fed and encourages you to look beyond the surface. By doing so, you can gain a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the world we live in.

I picked up this book primarily because it has been a highly influential one, and that is indeed the sole reason I managed to finish it.

It is not completely lacking in information. In fact, it does have its merit in at least opening the eyes of those who have never seriously considered whether the US is truly as great as it proclaims. However, it should be read with a great deal of skepticism.

Chomsky seems to be attempting to make us believe his viewpoints. He provides facts to support his opinions rather than presenting facts for the readers to form their own conclusions. The numerous partial sentences quoted, the selectively chosen statistics, and the frequency with which he tells us the "obvious" conclusion should raise doubts in the minds of any discerning reader.

Essentially, it earns 2 out of 5 stars because it is not entirely useless. However, I had higher expectations. I do not feel that I can blindly "take his word" for anything he has stated in this book. If it inspires people to explore the issues raised in this book and seek out reliable information on their own, that would be excellent. But I prefer books that actually provide me with the information rather than those that simply tell me how "obvious" it is that the US does not want Venezuela to have democracy.

All of Chomsky's works are truly worth reading. His ideas and theories have had a profound impact on various fields, including linguistics, philosophy, and politics. Chomsky's writing is not only intellectually stimulating but also accessible to a wide range of readers. He presents complex concepts in a clear and engaging manner, making it possible for those without a background in the relevant fields to understand and appreciate his work.

Whether you are interested in the nature of language, the structure of society, or the role of the individual in a democratic system, Chomsky has something to offer. His books and articles are filled with incisive analysis, thought-provoking arguments, and a passion for social justice. Reading Chomsky can开阔 your视野, challenge your assumptions, and inspire you to think more deeply about the world around you.

In conclusion, if you are looking for a writer who can expand your intellectual horizons and make you think differently, then Chomsky is definitely worth reading. His work is a testament to the power of ideas and the importance of critical thinking in our modern world.

Noam, you are such an important person to me.

They could try all they want, but they could never make me hate you.

Our connection is too deep and meaningful.

Your presence in my life has brought so much joy and support.

Even if others try to come between us, I will always stand by your side.

You are like a shining star that can never be dimmed.

Our friendship or relationship means the world to me, and I will do everything in my power to protect it.

No matter what challenges or obstacles we face, I know we can overcome them together.

So, Noam, always remember that you have my unwavering love and loyalty.

They may say or do things to try to break us apart, but they will never succeed.

Because our bond is stronger than anything they could ever imagine.

Noam Chomsky, who is reviled by the red-neck right, is indeed a breath of fresh air in the political debate.

To be honest, however, he is hardly fresh, as he has been around for a long time. His research is methodical, and he presents such a cohesive and logical argument that only the most narrow-minded and rabid patriots could fail to be swayed by his views.

He does what a true "Patriot" should do, which is to examine the practices of those in power rather than blindly following and accepting without question. He points out the discrepancies between what the political leaders in the USA are saying and what they are actually doing. He shows, with one example after another, the devastation that successive US administrations have caused to other countries.

It is plain to see that he believes the USA has been hijacked, not by foreign terrorists, but by successive governments. If you don't mind looking at the dirty political laundry of previous USA governments, then read him.

His work provides a valuable perspective on the inner workings of the US political system and its impact on the world. It challenges us to think critically about our own government and its actions, and to question the status quo.

Chomsky's ideas may be controversial, but they are also thought-provoking and essential for a healthy democracy.

While Chomsky's book "Hegemony or Survival" presented a fact-filled and academic perspective on US foreign policy, "Failed States" takes those facts and elevates them to an entirely new level with the author's sharp wit and sarcasm. This book is a must-read for every American. Seriously. We have far too frequently used our power to strong-arm and force the countries of the world to conform to our capitalistic demands. There will inevitably be consequences for such actions. US foreign policy at its current levels is extremely concerning and unsustainable. Moreover, we have made enemies all over the world, which will surely prove to be a disadvantage for all of us in the near future. As you read this book, the word "hypocrisy" will become deeply ingrained in your mind.