Sunday, April 28, 2019

Noam Chomsky Attacks Anarcho-Capitalism

The below video contains completely bizarre comments by Noam Chomsky.

Chomsky is clearly unfamiliar with libertarian (anarcho-capitalist) literature.

He raises two points during his comment, the problem of pollution/environmentalism and the problem of public transportation and suggests that libertarians have not considered how to deal with these problems in an anarcho-capitalist society.

This is simply not true.

The anarcho-capitalist Walter Block has written an entire book on the question of transportation in such a society, Privatization Of Roads And Highways: Human And Economic Factors. One chapter is even titled "Public Goods and Externalities: The Case of Roads." Throughout the book, there is a discussion of mass transportation and how it would develop under an anarcho-capitalist system.

Block has also edited a book, Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation, from different 11 contributors who discuss everything from acid rain, air pollution and environment in general and how it could be dealt with from a private property perspective.

It is understandable how someone not familiar with private property solutions would be alarmed by a stateless society but the alarm is only because the alarmed person is not familiar with the stateless solutions. The solutions are there. (For the stateless solution to the national defense question, see my book, Foundations of Private Property Society Theory: Anarchism for the Civilized Person).

This is, of course, in addition to his general confusion that he believes corporations can be oppressors when it is the state, the vehicle by which he wants to eliminate oppression, that is the great oppressor.

In short, he wants to invite the distributor of poison to society to stop poison from being distributed in society. That has worked out really well.



  1. Isn't that amazing? From a professional, too. It's bad enough when the "man on the street" doesn't understand libertarianism at the level available within 2 minutes on wikipedia (but still wants to argue against it, of course).

    But it's absolutely mind-blowing that professional writers and/or pundits can be under the impression that the followers of an age-old philosophy haven't even considered -- let alone solved! -- how a libertarian framework can address the most basic issues in economics! Do they really think we're that simplistically childish?

  2. I share your reaction and I have found it to apply to basically anything that is different from status quo. I think simplistic knee jerk questions, such as "but who will build the roads?", reflect the extent to which they have considered the position (close to none). The universality of these simplistic questions is also remarkable. I have heard the "who will build the roads?" question from people with all sorts of cultural backgrounds.

    Of course, being different from status quo isn't enough to make something right. I'm only commenting on the poor quality questions people immediately ask when confronted with a position like libertarianism.

  3. Wasnt too long ago the EPA poisoned th Animas with a chemical spill. They declared themselves immune to paying damages because of a law that identifies them from responsibility. BP, on the other hand, sure had to pay big time for clean up and fines.