DER SPIEGEL (2008): So for you, Republicans and Democrats represent just slight variations of the same political platform?
Chomsky: Of course there are differences, but they are not fundamental. Nobody should have any illusions. The United States has essentially a one-party system and the ruling party is the business party.
DER SPIEGEL (2008): To conclude, perhaps you can offer a conciliatory word about the state of the nation?
CHOMSKY: The American society has become more civilized, largely as a result of the activism of the 1960s. Our society, and also Europe’s, became freer, more open, more democratic, and for many quite scary. This generation was condemned for that. But it had an effect.
i.e. "The Business Party" (Chomsky).After all, the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world. — Calvin Coolidge, 1925
“There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties.”
Then don’t bother voting since whoever gets into office is the same guy :lol: — invicta
Another is ideological narrowness. There is a dynamic with two parties that tends towards narrowness, and extremity on one side of the political spectrum. Suppose one party veers to the left or the right. This is seemingly a blunder: the logical response for the other party is to move along with them. After all, the constituents on "their" side of the spectrum have no alternative, while they may acquire new moderate voters who are turned of by the other side's extremity. But then, this moves the ideological spectrum of the whole country towards the direction of the more extreme party, including those contested moderate voters. This leads to ideological narrowness and a veering towards one ideological direction.
Chomsky is just doing what demagogues always do, boiling down a complex problem filled with feedback loops, shifting alliances, histories of unintended consequences from reforms, etc. into a simple story of "bad, evil, greedy people make society bad. The truth is that everything is coordinated behind the scenes by a monolithic group. Thus, if we all unite we can replace the evil people with the righteous (us) and all shall be well forever." — Count Timothy von Icarus
How better to extend tyranny than to provide the illusion of freedom? — Tzeentch
People run for office, but without any party label. — Mikie
A one party state isn't of necessity repressive. — BC
if I had organized the January 6 attack on Congress, I'd be in solitary confinement in a federal prison. Trump, being the president at the time, has been able to escape a similar fate, so far — BC
Noam Chomsky maintains that the US is a one-party state. The Business Party rules, and maintains the illusion of a two party system through the continual jockeying between its two very similar wings. — BC
How would a 'no party' system work? Say more about that. — BC
When it comes to welfare, healthcare, guns, abortion, and LGBT issues, there is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans, and so it’s overly simplistic to say that because they’re both pro-business that it’s a one party state. — Michael
I think it would be childish to suggest that Chomsky literally meant that the two parties were identical in every way. He was obviously making the point that they weren't significantly different. So a counter-argument has to contain measures of significance, not merely the presence of differences. — Isaac
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.