Videos


Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitalism



check it out

Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 186,323
Added: 6 years
Runtime: 5:21
Comments: 7838

Tags for this video:  



Find more videos in the: "News"
Uploaded by: mr1001nights
See more videos uploaded by mr1001nights


Related Videos:

Chomsky explains Cold War in 5 min
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 145744
From a 1985 Discussion
Chomsky explains anarchism (1 of 5)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 85183
1976 interview with Peter Jay. 2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnBnloqzGkE
4 Great Thinkers refute "anarcho"-capitalism
Rating Rating Rating RatingRating
Views: 7626
In less than a minute....
Chomsky criticizes postmodern feminism & marxism
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 166069
As pseudo-scientific elitist constructs
Chomsky: We Shouldn't Ridicule Tea Party Protesters
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 91391
Instead, those on the Left are to blame for letting right-wing ideologues organize and manipulate them. Noam Chomsky interviewed 2 Dec 2009 by...
Noam Chomsky on "The Federal Reserve" (2013)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 48814
Chomsky on Socialism
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 303500
Noam Chomsky responds to a caller's request for his thoughts on socialism, during a 2003 interview by Brian Lamb, for C-SPAN's "In Depth" program....
Anarchism, Libertarian Socialism & Anarcho-Syndicalism (Noam Chomsky)
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 32407
"Anarchism, Libertarian Socialism & Anarcho-Syndicalism: Workers' self-management and Democracy from below". Excerpts from "Conversations with...
Noam Chomsky Agrees with Ron Paul ... on Foreign Policy
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 40360
good clip from democracy now
Noam Chomsky: "Free Markets?"
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 144829
This talk by Noam Chomsky was filmed at Northeastern University, Boston on Dec. 5, 1997
Noam Chomsky - Ron Paul's ideas are savage
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 77578
Noam Chomsky at Kutztown University in Nov 2011 speak about Ron Paul at the Reppublican debates, and Libertarian ideas.
Libertarian vs. Socialist heated debate ensues
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 147626
At a time when the economy is still insecure, why is there an endless debate over capitalism versus socialism and which financial system actually...
Conversations with History: Noam Chomsky
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 406013
On this edition of Conversations with History, UC Berkeley's Harry Kreisler is joined by linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky to discuss...
Libertarian Vs. Tea Party
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 119205
An average libertarian learns what an average Tea Partier believes. Obviously, this doesn't reflect everyone's views. But it is based on my own...
Bill Gates: How to Fix Capitalism
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating
Views: 517167
TIME Magazine editor Richard Stengel discusses creative capitalism with Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates.
Noam Chomsky on Ron Paul Model of Libertarianism - TestTransmission1984
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 58351
Chomsky discusses the difference between the capitalist right wing libertarianism, practiced by Americans such as Ron Paul, versus it's origins in...
What Is Libertarianism? What Does the Libertarian Party Stand For? Ron Paul
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 16806
http://thefilmarchive.org/ 1988 The Libertarian Party is the third largest and fastest growing political party in the United States. The...
William Buckley Loses it against Chomsky

Views: 286039
Irritated after being rigorously cross-examined about his distortions by Chomsky, Bill Buckley loses it and has a FOX news moment... watch.
Obama is worse than George Bush and Tony Blair says Noam Chomsky
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 269429
Look at the record, says Chomsky: Obama is in many cases worse than George Bush and Tony Blair -- on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Israel, Egypt -- and...
Noam Chomsky on right wing Tea Party protests, " People with real grievances"
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 104365
Noam Chomsky talks about the rise of right wing protesters and about the people who belong to this movement.
Ron Paul: "Libertarianism is the enemy of all racism"
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 71403
http://ronpaul.soup.io on PBS -- January 4, 2008
Ron Paul and the six kinds of libertarianism
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 118898
Too many people define Ron Paul as a libertarian without even understanding what a libertarian is. Here I explain the six most common styles of...
Noam Chomsky versus young conservative
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 141525
A young conservative accuses Chomsky of hating America, and is promptly refuted. From Chomsky's book, "9-11." "When countries are attacked they...
Debate Noam Chomsky & Michel Foucault - On human nature [Subtitled]
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 175163
The full tv debate by Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault on the question of Human Nature. Subtitles: English, Portuguese. Proper subtitles. [Dutch &...
What is a Libertarian?
Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating 
Views: 63561
What does it mean to be "Libertarian"? I've gotten several messages requesting a video along these lines so I hope this fits the bill. How do you...

Comments:

Author Michael Giove (14 days)


Author Vuk11 (26 days)
2:40 he is saying unsubsidised capitalism has existed as if that is a claim
that a free market has existed. Africa being the continent with the highest
regulation I don't know how we can say that it's an example of a free
market.

Places like "muh Somalia" were failed states instantly taken over by
warlords. To an Ancap, Statism = Violent Coercive monopoly, which is
exactly what a Warlord it. We do not advocate revolt, as that does leave it
open for Warlords and outside states, we advocate gradual
multi-generational change, towards a more morally based society, one based
on principle and free association. 

Author Justin Lee (1 month)
But without government who will murder millions of people?

Author esmifrado (2 months)
Why is this guy so respected? I never heard him saying anything sensefull
or based in real facts...

Author 03Blackbeard (5 months)
Good speech.

Author Gufberg (2 months)
Its truely comedic to see half-assed idiots, who can barely type out a
grammatically correct sentence, talk about how "stupid" this guy is or how
"he is just and old man who doesn't know what he is a talking about".
He is one of the most renowned and respected Professors in the world. His
ideas have sent reverberations through the fields of History, Economics,
Philosophy and ofcourse linguistics. He is daily invited to University
Symposiums all across the world ... What about you? What are you doing that
gives you the authority to call this guy an idiot? Get out of here.

Author Travis Collier (2 months)
This analysis is spot on. In fact the first person to call himself a
libertarian was the anarcho-communist DeJacque who criticized the free
market religion triumphed by a-cap loons. Libertarian ideals in the most
simple sense are the antithesis of authoritarianism.

Author Jorg Ancrath (1 month)
Coming from someone who tried to downplay the Cambodian genocide to talk up
the potential for collective farming in the region I am little and less
convinced.

Author Durruti Bielski (1 month)
Do you know where i can read the stuff from chomsky?
Some internet library somewhere?

Author Urbestestbuddy (4 months)
Libertarian Party is an oxymoron. Libertarianism opposes the initiation of
force and political parties aim to control and participate in a monopoly of
force.

Author 9thchild (1 month)
So because we can't reach perfect liberty (in his opinion), then we
shouldn't even bother to try for more liberty than we have? And because
capitalism can't work without perfect liberty we shouldn't bother with that
either? Very hard to follow his logic. I know he's famous and all, but
sometimes people are just wrong. 

Author Joey Clavette (3 months)
It cuts off at the good part. Where is the rest?

Author AyaxTelemonio (4 months)
I respect this guy as an anti-establishment intellectual but really, who
listens to him? Only marxist, socialist collectivists. I´ve never heard
about anarco-socialists excepting him, because he never convinced anyone in
the socialist ivy league. he is an anti-statist worshiped by statists.

Author Marcus Porcius Cato TheYounger (5 months)
Chomsky is a linguist (SP?) What can he possibly know.
He does not criticise Economics. He criticized some simple minded straw men
and makes up Historical Facts. He does not even understand what Economics
is about. Example:Are you both better off when you trade? If prices go up,
does demand OR quantity demand fall? Ceteris Paribus? Is Aggregate Demand a
real demand curve?
Chomsky is only listened to by college Marxist liberals who want the USA to
be Socialized either in the European sense or the Classical sense. In
short, he is a prophet for Sociology, Anthropology, Pol. Sci…..etc. None of
these are Sciences. If you think the afore mentioned are sciences,tell me
where is their Laboratory were they prove causality. In Economics the
Laboratories are Game theory and Microeconomics Models. Economists laugh at
these Chomsky followers. They are simple not worth the effort to take them
seriously. So why does anyone listen to Him or Zinn or any Humanity or Arts
or Literature Professors? It is baffling ?

Author Olivier Francoeur (15 days)
Chomsky has a gift;
He can speak for hours without saying anything.

Author Nick Coons (11 days)
In order to refute something, you have to make arguments. Chomsky made no
arguments in this video, he clarified what he believed historical people
meant when they wrote stuff, and provided conclusion that didn't draw from
those statements. Therefore, he refuted nothing. The title of this video is
misleading.

Author Juan Manuel Correa Caicedo (23 days)
The division of labour leads to so much efficiency that i can get 15 years
of education without working. That's not as stupid and as ignorant for a
human to be. If adam smith said it, adam smith was wrong

Author theElasticJesuz . (3 months)
Feudalism - sorry I mean't capitalism (as it's spelt in St Louis) - in a
nutshell.

1. I conquer your land.
2. I force you to pay rent for the land I stole from you.
3. I force you to produce my food of which, if you work hard enough, I'll
allow you 1 turnip as reward.
4. You start to breed since there's little else to relieve the tedium of
your slavery (*sorry I meant freedom* ) BUT YOUR incessant breeding gives
me a headache.
5. Some of my clever mates invent something called machinery and a
light-bulb starts to flash.
6. Machine makes items that the brats WILL need only they don't know it yet
since I haven't yet built the 17th century version of Saatchi and Saatchi.
7. Brats work in factories. Brats make products that they WILL need - OR
ELSE!!!

[note: I SET THE PRICE OF EVERYTHING SINCE I INVENT THE ECONOMICS THAT
INVENT THE INVIVIBLE HAND THAT SETS THE PRICE OF EVERYTHING.

C'mon!!! Keep up. It's not that difficult. I went to Oxford, you know!!! ]

7 cont... Brats get paid just enough to stop them revolting but not enough
to make them fat and lazy.
8. I win. They lose. I make plenty of profit and Saatchi and Saatchi get a
nice reward for convincing the plebs they're free to leave anytime they
want so long as they have the ticket fare to the non-Capitalsed Moon.

Three cheers for William the Bastard, as they sing down in Eton...and
Harvard...and Yale...and........... 

Author AskaLizzy (2 months)
A rich person or a large company, without government to service it and
protect its monopoly, can't cage you or kill you if you disobey it, and
governments only present the theatre, the appearance, that people get a
voice, that it isn't there to cage and murder those who disobey the one it
really serves, the special interests with pull. When he says "everywhere
else" he means in Marxist dominated countries, where the Frankfurt School
social engineering has mind controlled everyone.

Author Alfonso Gutierrez (28 days)
The tenets of anarchism is brutal and wreckless. Anarchism and its
perspective represent a society that has no accountability or
responsibility to its social compact. 

Author Thomas m (27 days)
Ughhh i can't stand chomsky he talks such shiiiiiit 

Author GlennJericho (4 months)
Let me see if I got this right...
The Chump-man says that he's against state-subsidized capitalism.
So in its place, he (the socialist) proposes Smithian laissez-faire
capitalism, but says that the only places that do this are backward
third-world countries, and that the only reason that England, Germany, and
France ever developed and became places with the highest living standards
in the world at all is because of crony capitalism.
So the thing he claims to hate more than anything in life is the source of
all human improvement, the thing he supports is the opposite of what he
claims to be and is also a leading source of poverty and backwardness.
The man is brilliant, but only in the sense that a wet lump of coal is
brilliant.

Author Metaterrestrial (2 months)
Anarcho-capitalist societies would never develop beyond scattered pig
farms. No roads, no internet – just a few unhealthy families living with
their backwards free trade indoctrination. The only question is whether the
government serves special interests or the population, because it's not
going anywhere. Libertarianism or anarcho-capitalism isn't even worth a
debate, a total fantasy. The problem is there's enough propaganda victims
to take it all seriously and support destructive policies that serve the
corps and the elite.

Author Steffen Zander (4 months)
+GVStudios:
You keep proclaiming BS!
There are no "free markets". You´re the one reciting "catchphrases"!

Author Mark Vance (1 month)
He just says that libertarianism doesn't mean the same thing as it does
elsewhere. I have yet to hear a solid ancap refutation from anyone
anywhere. All you can do is speculate on what the outcome would be from a
purely capitalist society, but that's pretty much it. Anarcho-Capitalist
ideas are theoretical at this point, you can't refute something that has
never been tried.

Author Rich Beer (1 month)
Chomsky is brilliant on many levels but is not all knowing. He has ideas,
some good, some great and others maybe neither but at least he has ideas
that provoke others to question their own beliefs. Whether you agree with
the viability of anarcho-capitalism or not, it is worth looking at if only
because it is becoming increasingly popular with a subculture of highly
intelligent youth.

Author Richard Stanford Brown (5 months)
In this clip Chomsky speaks 100% crap.

Author Michael Coleman (5 months)
Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitalism

Author Aaron Brenneman (5 months)
So the terms "liberal", "leftist", "progressive", and "socialist" have all
been co-opted to mean something other than society based on freedom to
produce and trade, and he's determined to take "libertarian" as well. He's
a linguist in the Orwellian sense - trying to define opposition out of
existence. Add to that a few straw men and refusal to talk about real
laissez-faire (which has existed in degrees, though not perfectly), and you
have this video. 

Author Joe Kidd (5 months)
... brilliant analysis. 

Author Rich Grise (5 months)
He serioucly misunderstands what "Libertarian" means, unless he thinks that
maximum individual liberty and a state that only protects property rights
is "tyranny."

Author confabulator99 (4 months)
This is not a refutation. This is typical Chomsky befuddlement about the
meaning of the words "liberty" and "equality" as used by 18th century
economists. Adam Smith meant that in perfect liberty markets will lead to
equality of opportunity, not as Chomsky says,of outcome. Chomsky simply
misreads and misunderstands Classical Liberalism and its connection to
modern Libertarianism. It's he who has got the meaning of the words
backwards. The man loves his semantic games. But serious people don't take
Chomsky seriously on any subject other than linguistics.

Author A Dios (4 months)
Anytime the word "refute" is used with respect to non-mathematical or
non-scientific (in other words, non-objective) subject matter, it's a very
safe bet that the person who chose to use it is overcompensating for the
fact that the argument does not actually refute what they claim it to.
Arguments in non-deductive fields such as political philosophy hardly ever
(if not never) actually refute anything. It is merely an opposing argument.

Author Cipher Veri (1 month)
Let me guess, Stefan Molyneux Fanboys flooded the comment section of an
outstanding clip of chomsky refuting Anarcho-Capitalism and proceeded to
demonstrate how little they actually know about the definitions of words.

Author Edward Welsch (2 months)
Chomsky is totally confusing and distorting what libertarianism means and
its history. This is a short definition, and it applies no matter the
location or time period: In a free society, we own our selves and our
property and we have the equal opportunity to exercise rights over those.
This is the "perfect equality" of rights. What it doesn't include, and is
the source of Chomsky's confusion, is equality of outcomes. We our selves
differ just as our property differs, and our outcomes differ as a result.

What people in free societies don't have a right to do is to take another
person's rights away in order to make outcomes more "fair," which is what
Chomsky is advocating. Free societies don't aggress on personal rights in
the name of making outcomes equal. Certainly the current societies in the
U.S. and Western Europe fall short of being completely free by this
definition, but they are an improvement upon the past.

Chomsky calls this free system of equal rights and inequal outcomes
"extreme tyranny." That does an injustice to the reality of real tyrannies
that existed for most of human history, and is ignorant of the history of
human deprivation that plagued the communist societies that tried to
guarantee the equality of outcomes that he advocates.

People should remember that Chomsky's expertise and brilliance is in the
field of linguistics. Unfortunately he's used his well deserved success in
that field as a platform to pronounce on politics and economics, where not
only is he not qualified, but he's barely coherent.

Author Alex Schmidtka (4 months)
i think it's hilarious how this psychologist who studied basic development
of language in children is somehow now a figure in the war against
capitalism, this is an example of people clinging on to any bit of bias
they can find to soothe their mental dissonance. theres some psychology for
you

Author darrellray1964 (3 months)
He is a socialist, plain and simple. Anarchy means no government. As much
as you left-wing nuts like to think socialism is all about the workers
controlling the means of production, it isn't. Socialism will always need
government to force people into slave labor. If you think it is anything
other than that, then you are an idiot. There is no incentive in socialism
and therefore, for socialism to exist, it will need a police state to force
people into it. Because there is no incentive, there will be no innovation
and no economic growth unless people are force to produce. A system like
that isn't sustainable. Most countries today have mixed economies that are
partly state run and capitalism. They will all collapse without
capitalism. The left blame capitalism for things that government have
caused. Think about the housing bubble, that started because of low
interest rates. The low interest rates created speculative investment
which created malinvestment. In a free market, the interest rates would
have been at equilibrium. In a free market, we wouldn't be experiencing
boom and bust markets. In a free market, competition will keep prices
down. Prices go up when government gets involved in markets. And then you
can add inflation. Government creates inflation through monetary policy.
Inflation is getting out of control because government is printing too
much currency to pay for interest on their debt. Therefore, the purchasing
power of the U.S. Dollar diminishes.

Author Iktomeone (3 months)
There are an awful lot of logical fallacies being made in the comments
section.
Does anyone have a real criticism against Chomsky or his views?
I've yet to read a single coherent one.
Here or anywhere.

Author Anes Kurtovic (3 months)
John Doe Jr. go play some moron games...

Author Andy Curzon (5 months)
What an odd attitude....doesn't he know egalitarianism has been refuted?!

Author Roy Merritt (5 months)
Conservatism here = Nazism or Fascism or whatever ism you wish to apply.
Feudalism is probably the more appropriate term in the long run. 

Author version191 (27 days)
he is right libertarian and anarcho capitalists are absolute fucktard
idiots 

Author leGrand Fromage (1 month)
This makes me want to read Adam Smith. His philosophies sound more
complicated than I assumed.

Author Marcus Crassus (5 months)
Chom chom is an irrelevant, degenerate, reprobate. just die and go to hell
already.

Author Miguel Mendoza (5 months)
free people, free markets. Fascism union of government and corparation to
protect monoplolies.

Author zg76 (1 month)
It's too bad Prof. Chomsky has so little and so bad knowledge in Economy.

Author Joe C (2 years)
Libertarians - Watch this. Okay? Thanks

Author Ross Dmochowski (1 year)


Author Chet Gaines (2 years)
it's that time again...

Author Kevin Boston (1 year)
A-Greed. Chomsky is one of the greats!

Embed Video:

URL 
Link 

Search Video

Top Videos

Top 100 >>>

Videos

Analyse website