It is interesting that Chomsky views the ultimate aspirations of classical liberalism as being manifested in libertarian socialist ideas. However, it seems to me that there is far more conflict between classical liberalism and any form of socialism than he acknowledges in this booklet.

Mr. Chomsky also appears to have a rather strange perspective on labor. He seems to believe that industrial labor still exists in this country. While I agree that democratizing the economic realm is a crucial part of constructing a world without coercion, I wonder if workers councils and federations truly make sense in a modern context. What production still remains in the US? Most of the commotion in the American labor movement is emanating from service workers unions such as SEIU and Unite Here.

I understand that this was produced in 1999, but I am left pondering what about the ecological crisis? Do we really want to develop a democratic industrial society when we are aware that industrial society is what is harming the planet? A democratically-controlled factory farm still exploits animals and pollutes. A Marx-style alteration in the ownership of the means of production does not address the fact that our economic system is based on the false presumption that the Earth has unlimited resources.

There is an interesting discussion of Classical Liberalism and Libertarian Socialism. It delves into the various aspects and ideas within these two ideological frameworks. I found the second half, which focuses on State Socialism and State Capitalism, to be less compelling. However, it still contains some valid points.

Classical Liberalism emphasizes individual freedom, limited government, and free markets. It argues that individuals should have the maximum amount of liberty to pursue their own interests and goals. Libertarian Socialism, on the other hand, combines the idea of individual freedom with a more equal distribution of resources and the means of production.

The discussion of State Socialism and State Capitalism in the second half may not have been as engaging, but it does raise important questions about the role of the state in the economy and society. State Socialism advocates for a large and powerful state that controls the means of production and redistributes wealth. State Capitalism, on the other hand, allows for a significant role of the state in the economy while still maintaining a degree of private ownership.

Overall, this discussion provides a valuable exploration of different ideological perspectives and their implications for society. It encourages us to think critically about the role of government, the importance of individual freedom, and the pursuit of a more just and equitable society.

A great deal of thought has been put into a little book like this. It's not just a simple compilation of words and ideas. The author has spent countless hours carefully considering every aspect, from the choice of topics to the arrangement of the content. Each page has been crafted with precision and care, aiming to provide the readers with a valuable and engaging experience.

This little book may seem unassuming at first glance, but beneath its modest exterior lies a wealth of knowledge and inspiration. It has the power to touch hearts, open minds, and spark new ideas. Whether you're looking for a moment of relaxation or a source of motivation, this book has something to offer.

So, the next time you pick up a little book like this, remember the thought and effort that went into creating it. Take the time to savor each word, and let the ideas within it resonate with you. You might be surprised at how much a little book can mean.

In 1970, Chomsky delivered a lecture in New York, which encapsulated his fundamental political philosophy. This pamphlet is that very lecture and serves as a basic manifesto for libertarian socialism (or anarcho-socialism, if one prefers that term).

His analysis of imperial capitalism not only withstands the test of time but is also highly applicable to the current bout of destructive mania, such as the ridiculous economic war on Russia, just as it was relevant to the zenith of American capitalism during the First Cold War. We are now firmly in the grip of the Second Cold War.

It could be argued, borrowing Marx's words, that the First Cold War was a tragedy, while the Second Cold War appears to be heading towards farce as the West begins to cut its own throat by triggering an inflationary spiral and possible stagnation merely to hold on to a distant province. However, that is the situation we find ourselves in.

While Chomsky's analysis of a broken system that persists despite its self-destructive behaviors is persuasive (he is equally critical of Sovietism and its post-Soviet Russian nationalist offshoot), his proposed solution is less convincing.

Authoritarian and managerial late liberal capitalism, along with its own bastard offspring, stakeholder capitalism, may be morally, culturally, and increasingly administratively and organizationally bankrupt. However, libertarian socialism is more of a moral ideal than a practical course of action.

It is not inconsistent to accept the analysis without accepting the solution. Perhaps there is no solution. We must face the fact that this is the nature of our species - individual aspirations trapped within processes and a system that none of us can control, not even the beneficiaries.

Ultimately, we are left with a pessimistically conservative assessment of our species, a cold and rational observation that we are incapable of re-organizing ourselves without creating more problems than we solve. The human world is far too complex for even the most intelligent thinkers to manage effectively.

It was no accident that the Soviet Revolution had to resort to terror and bureaucracy to survive and then build an economic base at the expense of a generation. It had enemies, but it also attracted sociopaths, time-servers, and the naive like moths to a flame.

The essence of our condition is that we are not and can never be in control of our situation because we are part of the perpetual struggle of millions, even billions on a global scale, of mutually unknowable minds acting and reacting to the actions of others. There will always be disruption.

This leads to systems that move as uncontrollable processes within pre-set structures, lurching into collapse and chaos or into tyranny, brutality, and sclerosis, while most of us simply struggle to survive. The winners are few, the losers many, and most are just survivors.

Strategically, if one is serious about creating something of the Left in the world, Lenin probably got it as right as anyone ever will, and we know how that turned out. Today, what we have instead is a sort of pseudo-Leftism, largely rhetorical, that changes little except 'culture'.

Probably the only way forward is to recognize that the structures of order cannot be suddenly transformed into something new very quickly because they exist for a reason. There is likely no alternative but the slow process of persuasion to allow Leftists to gain control of the state.

But which Leftists? I don't mind Chomsky having a try - he is a good person - but when I look at the naive idealists, urban intellectuals, and excitable activists who pass for the Left, I would be reluctant to have them in charge of anything more complex than latrine duties.

The real problems lie elsewhere - not in the people who are justifiably nervous of intellectuals and idealists, but in the anti-democratic structures of the vehicles necessary to control the state (political parties) and in the lack of any truly libertarian socialist political parties.

Beyond that, we have the inability of intellectuals and activists to abandon their narcissistic attempts to manipulate populations into right thought, right speech, and right behavior and understand the real desires and needs of the voters (a gap that populists are now filling).

My own pessimism is not driven by some arrogant and negative view of the'masses' (quite the opposite, they are the driving force of action) or a belief in the power of the system (after all, our leaders have proven to be consistently inept), but in the utter stupidity of contemporary Leftists.

Anyway, regardless of all this, the pamphlet is worth reading. It comes from a highly intelligent and decent human being who sees the world as it truly is, even if he struggles to come up with a solution that could even come close to changing it.

Short and to the point. That's a virtue for a book.

This book offers a concise yet comprehensive exploration of various ideological origins and positions. It delves into the realms of classical liberalism, libertarian socialism, state socialism, and state capitalist Weltanschauungs.

Classical liberalism emphasizes individual freedoms and limited government interference. Libertarian socialism, on the other hand, combines the pursuit of individual liberty with a socialist vision of economic equality. State socialism advocates for a more centralized and planned economy under the control of the state. State capitalism, meanwhile, involves a significant role for the state in the economy, often with a focus on promoting national interests.

By presenting these different perspectives, the book provides readers with a valuable opportunity to understand the diverse range of ideas and positions within the political and economic spectrum. It allows for a more informed and nuanced discussion about the role of the state, the nature of individual freedoms, and the pursuit of social and economic justice.

Overall, this book serves as a useful resource for anyone interested in exploring the complex and often controversial world of political and economic ideologies.

Kоротко и плотно. К сожалению, я все еще много не понимаю в этих делах. It seems that I still have a long way to go in understanding these matters. There is so much that remains unclear to me, and it can be quite frustrating at times.

Но наверное это крайновато, надо как-то ближе к золотой середине. However, perhaps this is an extreme view. Maybe I need to find a way to get closer to the golden mean. Instead of being too extreme in my thoughts and actions, I should strive for a more balanced approach. This might help me to better understand the situation and make more informed decisions.

Overall, I realize that I have much to learn and improve upon in these areas. But I am determined to keep working hard and seeking knowledge until I can achieve a better understanding and find the right path forward.

This very short book presents a highly potent case for democracy, socialism, and classical liberal thought. These are ideals that have unfortunately often been overlooked or forgotten by Tony Blair and those of his ilk.

Within its pages, the author draws on examples from Humboldt, Kant, Mirbeau, Rousseau, and others to compellingly reinforce the argument for why socialism is indeed a beneficial thing. It also delves into how the left can realign itself and get back on the right track.

It serves as a timely reminder and a valuable source of inspiration for those who believe in the power of these ideals and are committed to seeing them thrive in the modern world.

Miliband, in particular, would do well to take note of the insights and ideas presented in this book, as they could potentially have a significant impact on the future direction of the left.

Chomsky is truly amazing, as he has always been. In this short and easy-to-read book, he covers a wide range of political movements and titles.

He also provides his insights into where he believes the government is headed in the future.

This book is a great choice for anyone who is interested in politics and desires an accessible read by a genius of political thought.

Chomsky's ideas and analysis are presented in a clear and engaging manner, making it suitable for both beginners and those with a more in-depth knowledge of the subject.

Whether you are looking to gain a better understanding of current political issues or simply want to explore the mind of one of the most influential political thinkers of our time, this book is well worth reading.

So, if you have an interest in politics and are seeking an easy yet informative read, look no further than this book by Chomsky.

This guy is truly a GENIUS!

His work provides a great summary of political positions, encompassing both theory and flaws, as well as potential. It is an extremely comprehensive and insightful analysis that offers a deep understanding of the complex world of politics.

I find myself constantly drawn back to this piece, having read it about 3 times already. Each time, I discover new details and perspectives that further enhance my knowledge and appreciation of the subject matter. The clarity and coherence with which the author presents the information make it accessible to a wide range of readers, regardless of their prior knowledge of politics.

This is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the intricacies of political positions and the potential for change and progress. I highly recommend it to all.

I presented this to my far more devout Marxist friend, and she pointed out all the problems she had with his portrayal of "left Marxism", its resemblances to anarchism (and their purported tactical differences), and the (argued) similarities of the aforementioned with classical liberalism. I disputed some points, but ultimately, it was a futile effort.

I'm certain she was correct, yet I don't really care. For me, this is a condensation of Chomsky's political thought; what he endeavors to convey in most of his lectures, with an emphasis on his approach to political theory. And, for me, this体现了 Chomsky 的才华: as a figure who engages people (including me) in left-wing politics, anarchism, and the like. I understand that Chomsky has his own perspectives on politics and theory, just like everyone else. The minute details, regarding which he may be right or wrong, are for me to uncover.

"Government in the Future" - This is a starting point, not an end goal. It is an inspiring speech (or text, however you prefer to consume it). I consider it valuable to the extent that those who read it become more involved in the left-wing politics that Chomsky is advocating. From that point on, whether you agree with its adherence to each respective left-wing doctrine is not the issue that I (personally) am concerned with; as long as you begin to observe and recognize the transgressions of capitalism, the state, and the US, which Chomsky has dedicated his entire political career to pointing out to the people - mostly Americans, as they are his countrymen, although his influence extends far beyond America - for whom these transgressions are difficult to perceive.

In conclusion, I'm not asserting that a large number of people have read (or heard) this specific text and have been inspired by it - surely many have. I'm using this as a symbol to make the simple point that Chomsky's political efforts, which might be somewhat haphazard in their communication of the specific political theory (or they might not be - all can be debated), are extremely successful in getting people who are less interested in (left-wing) politics to understand that they have (or should have) a greater stake in the political world.

However, I don't want to rate this because this review was inadequate in addressing the text itself.

Anarchism is a political philosophy that challenges the traditional power structures and advocates for a society without a centralized authority. It offers a unique perspective on the discontents of American imperialism.

The book provides a short but solid introduction to these ideas. One particularly illuminating portion is the discussion on the profitability of war that capitalism relies so much on. War has long been a means for capitalist economies to expand and accumulate wealth.

This not only has significant implications for the lives of people around the world but also for the future of our planet. By understanding the relationship between capitalism, war, and imperialism, we can begin to envision alternative ways of organizing society that are more just and sustainable.

Anarchism offers one such alternative, suggesting that a society based on voluntary cooperation and mutual aid can be more effective in meeting the needs of its members than a hierarchical and authoritarian one.

Overall, this introduction to anarchism and the discontents of American imperialism is a thought-provoking read that challenges us to think critically about the world we live in and the choices we make.

I have a deep affection for the way Chomsky composes his works.

Every now and then, he ingeniously introduces the concept that he is about to expound upon.

Subsequently, he provides us with a wealth of more detailed information regarding that concept.

This unique approach makes his works not only highly understandable but also extremely engaging.

It is truly remarkable how he can present complex ideas in such a lucid and accessible manner.

The book I have read is truly great, filled with profound insights, precisely as I had anticipated.

Chomsky's writing style and the depth of his ideas never fail to impress me, and I look forward to exploring more of his works in the future.