Customer Reviews

Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance

5 star:		(40)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(15)

 

 

You don't have to agree with everything Chomsky writes to find value in his work and his arguments. Before you accept any label that's been pinned on him, give his work a chance. His biggest crime just might be paying attention to facts, and questioning the praise we pour on ourselves, and actually caring about things like morality, and hypocrisy, and people.

Chomsky is the antithesis of the kind of intellectual and pundit that corporate media prefers, and he directs much criticism toward this 'establishment'; indeed, he has compared intellectuals and elite opinion-makers to the commisars of Soviet Russia.

This book is a sort of summation of material he has covered extensively before and since in different formats. The book proposes some important questions and considerations about this point in history. America finds itself in a state of unparalleled power in history. How do we use it? What is the cost of the quest for global dominance? The stakes are higher than ever. Terrorism, WMD, nuclear capability--these are things that threaten our existence. Are our current leaders really concerned with ending terrorism? Were they ever? What does the doctine of pre-emptive action mean, especially as applied to Iraq? And how long will people buy the same old stories that don't hold up under scrutiny? Who stands to really gain from global hegemony?

Chomsky reviews recent events like 9/11, world reaction, the National Security Strategy of 2002, announcing a doctrine of pre-emption, and, of course, Iraq, which is being played out as an outstanding example of hypocrisy and blind embrace of power. Once again, he goes through some useful facts about Iraq and America, namely that Saddam was a US client who had to be punished when he stopped following US orders. But of course, we now care so much about the Iraqi people, you know, we liberated them. And we cared so much about them when we supported Saddamn's reign by wrecking the country with sanctions. It's such a sham, you wonder how Bush himself can not crack up when he defends the 'reasons' for the war (WMD, democracy, etc, etc), or how he and most politicians can hide their utter contempt for the man on the street, or for anyone who actually looks at reality.

What is now clear in Chomsky's work is a very self-reflexive element, because Chomsky realizes how his work is viewed through the traditional doctrinal filters. Therefore, much of it seems like very, very bone dry humor, as he exposes the BS of politicians, elites, and ultimately ourselves. We're spreading democracy in Iraq...but are we really spreading democracy? Do we realy care about democracy, or the rights of all people, or freedom for everyone? Running through one case after another, the answer is quite different.

There's a very good reason Chomsky is often dismissed, or simply despised. His work concerns elementary moral questions, intellectual honesty, and general concern for PEOPLE, not institutions, or even states. He's anything but anti-American, if anything, he's very American. He cherishes freedom, and he routinely states that many of our American freedoms are unique and unprecedented. He reminds us that in a democracy, in a real democracy, you don't 'rally to the leader', you don't blindly worship the state. If we believe in freedom, real freedom, then we question power structures and their authority over us, and we reject them if they're not legitimate.

Chomsky is not a 'liberal', he is radical, his criticism is for the entire system and its track record. He does not have a 'master plan', and he would reject anyone who claims to. Notice he's been called everything under the sun: Marxist, Nazi, Stalinist, Communist, anti-American, deranged, etc, etc, etc. His answer? Yeah, you DO have to be deranged to pay attention to things like elementary morality, and to actually have concern for your fellow man. Highly recommended reading for anyone who wants to think about current events, to seriously think, and to look outside the very narrow spectrum of debate in this country that is favored by the media and intellectuals.

Yes, Chomsky tends to be repetitive and to rehash old stuff, so take away one-star. However, and I say this as the #1 Amazon reviewer of non-fiction about national security, to suggest that Chomsky is ever anything less than four stars is to betray one's ignorance and bias. He adds new material in this book, and perhaps even more importantly, he delivers this book at a time when America is faced with what may well be its sixth most important turning point in history (after independence, the civil war, two world wars, and the cold war). How America behaves in the 2004 election is going to determine whether the Republic deteriorates into a quasi-totalitarian and bunkered society with a lost middle class and a gated elite, or whether we restore the world's faith in American goodness, moral capitalism, and inclusive democracy.

Chomsky brilliantly brings forth a theme first articulated in recent times by Jonathan Schell ("Unconquerable World") by pointing out that the *only* "superpower" capable of containing the neo-conservative, neo-totalitarian, neo-Nazi militarism and unilateralism of the current Bush Administration is "the planet's public."

Chomsky updates his work with both excellent and well-balanced footnotes and an orderly itemization of the arrogance, militarism, contempt for international law, arbitrary aggression, and--Bible thumpers take note--proven track record for supporting dictators, Israeli genocide against Palestinians, and US troop participation in--directly as well as indirectly--what will inevitably be judged by history to be a continuing pattern of war crimes.

Chomsky, past master of the topic of "manufacturing consent" now turns his attention to the manner in which the Bush Administration is attempting to establish "new norms" that, if permitted to stand, will reverse 50 years of human progress in seeking the legitimization of governance, respect for human rights, and collective decision-making and security.

He is especially strong on documenting the manner in which US aid grows in direct relation to the degree to which the recipient country is guilty of genocidal atrocities, with Colombia and Turkey being prime examples. The case can be made, and Chomsky makes it, that the US arms industry, and US policies on the selling and granting of arms world-wide, are in fact a direct US commitment to repression, genocide, and terrorism sponsored by one big state: the US. He is most interesting when he discusses the new US approach to repression, the privatization of actions against the underclasses of the world.

Morality plays big with Chomsky, who brings new ideas in with his discussion of moral asymmetry and the lack of moral integrity in US decision-making. Sadly, the US public is both ignorant and unengaged, and do not realize the crass immorality of all that is being done "in their name."

Chomsky reminds us that George Bush the Second pardoned a known international terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles, because of his ties to the extremist Cuban-American community that his brother Jeb Bush is so dependent upon for support.

Over the course of the middle of the book Chomsky addresses the competing models for national development, with Cuba prominent as an alternative model that the US has sought to destroy, as the US worked very hard to destroy Catholic "liberation theology" because of its temerity in believing that the poor should be protected against repressive governments and their American corporate paymasters. Chomsky is correct, I believe, when he states and documents that the US model of capitalism has pathologically high rates of inequality and poverty (even CNN has noticed--as I waited for an airplane in Salt Lake City, a bastion of common sense, the lead story was the collapse of the US middle class).

Chomsky moves from his discussion of exceptions to US capitalism to a discussion of the importance of regional differentiation, and this is of course in direct competition with the US view that the world should be a homogenized generic variation of the US culture, with one big difference: 80% of the benefits for the US, while the rest of the world shares the left-overs.

Chomsky agrees with Dr. Col Max Manwaring and other mainstream strategists (see my review of "The Search for Security" when he identifies the legitimacy of governments, and the sanctity of human and civil rights, as the two litmus tests for determining if balance and fairness exist in a society. By this measure, the US is now failing.

The book begins to conclude with a semantic discussion of terrorism, what is terror, who sponsors terror, and here Chomsky draws on both his linguistic and historical background to make the case that the US is the primary sponsor of terrorism in the world (something both the Indonesian and Malaysian leadership would tend to agree with), and he notes that the US, in a bi-partisan manner among the elite, has consistently been hypocritical about terrorism. Nelson Mandela, and his resistance party, were labeled terrorists by the US for many years.

Are we in a passing nightmare, or the beginning of a renaissance? The jury is still out. I personally believe that John McCain would have been a vastly superior president that this lightweight bully that we have now, with his out-of-control neo-conservatives, none of whom ever served in uniform and some of whom--as with Dick Cheney--were active draft dodgers. However, I also believe that both John McCain, and Dick Gephardt if he were to be elected, are too close to the "business as usual" crowd of beltway politicians capitalized by beltway bandits. In other words, Howard Dean would not have been possible without the excesses of George Bush Junior. God does indeed work in mysterious ways, and I pray that the American public will both read Chomsky, and understand that they represent the only super-power that can restore legitimacy, sanity, comity, and prosperity to the American Republic. Down with the carpetbaggers--El Pueblo Avansa--EPA!.

During the 1990s, quite a few Chomsky books were compilations of previously-published material. He built books out of transcripts of talks, long interviews, and articles from Z magazine. Those books are all very good, but many of them had a scattered feel to them. In "Hegemony or Survival," he returns to the days when he sits at the typewriter and pounds out a new book.

This time, Chomsky sums up over 30 years of research on US foreign policy. He uses the current war in Iraq and the history of our policy toward Cuba as his key cases. That's not to say he leaves out other countries. In fact, this book mentions one country after another in which the US government worked hard to overthrow democracy abroad while covering it up at home. But, by putting emphasis on Cuba and Iraq, Chomsky shows the consistency of US policy --- the methods, the tactics, the justifications, and the effects.

It's the wide range of information that makes the book so convincing. Chomsky doesn't write opinion pieces. He presents you with a flood of facts, fully documented, and allows those facts to convince you. As you read, you'll say "Wow. Is that really true?" and flip to the footnotes. You'll find credible sources every time. You'll shake your head, wondering how you could have missed such important information. At some point, you end up reading with a finger wedged in the footnote section, flipping back and forth and making mental notes to double-check some of those sources later.

If you haven't read Chomsky before, start with one of the better interview books such as "Understanding Power" and "Chronicles of Dissent." Then read this one. If you want to understand "Why do they hate us?" (and why that isn't even the right question to ask), Chomsky has the answers.

To read Chomsky's HEGEMONY OR SURVIVAL is to visit a world turned upside down. A world where the characterization by U.S. elites of the 90s as the "decade of humanitarian intervention" is sharply questioned, it's also a place where interventions in the name of the "war on terror" are shown to be just the latest manifestations of an expansionist U.S. administration determined to hold onto long-range strategic imperatives, to disable rival systems and people that threaten its imperial objectives, and to strictly enforce its true animating principle -- the pro-market, anti-human ethos of the neo-liberal economic system. In other words, it's not the fumigated middle-school version of US foreign policy offered to Americans on TV

Readers accustomed to the usual sycophantic justifications of U.S. foreign and policy may have a difficult time with Chomsky's remapping of recent political history. Those on the right will reject it as a Chomskyite confabulation. Moderates will wonder why he seems to hate America so much. Those on the left will be upset that the policies of Democrats are seen as little different from that of Republicans. Chomsky sees the two parties as nearly indistinguishable, calling them the two "business parties, one slightly less reactionary than the other." And here's Chomsky quoting Dewey on the narrow U.S. political spectrum.: "...John Dewey scarcely exaggerated when he described politics as 'the shadow cast on society by big business.'

One of his main themes is that the United States, like its imperial predecessor, Great Britain, employs an idealizing and utopian language (the language of democracy and freedom) to justify its opposition to and extirpation of any countervailing force, even those founded upon the democratic or populist impulse, e.g., Nicaragua, Guatemala. This is not, of course, an insight original to Chomsky. But what is so disorienting and unique about Chomsky's renarration of recent events is that he is exquisitely alive to the efforts of those in power to efface the historical record, to enforce forgetfulness and unknowing through a steady diet of fear and triumphalist propaganda. Reinscribing history, he quotes mainstream sources, official records, military and diplomatic experts, many of whom are unsympathetic to his point of view, and builds a compelling case to support his thesis that even the "exceptional" United States unexceptionally behaves like powerful states typically do: enhancing their power through violence, and legitimizing their policies through whatever discourses are available. And while its not original to Chomsky that absolute power corrupts absolutely, what is fine and bracing is the way he marshals legions of facts to show how those in power, unchecked in our "open society," move to stifle or subvert the will of its citizens in favor of the money power it truly serves.

One of the more memorable examples he cites in making this case is the special wrath of the present administration for "Old Europe" when it failed to march in lockstep into the war in Iraq. Chomsky notes that, in fact, the leaders of France and Germany by refusing to along were giving voice to and representing their citizens, great majorities of whom were against the war. He notes that the citizens of "New Europe" were even more opposed to the war than citizens of "Old Europe," and futher, notes that public opinion polls in South America showed more opposition than "Old Europe," too.

Chomsky does not simply offer a counternarrative of facts in his recovery of the historical record. He offers insightful interpretations of facts to attack that seemingly endless supply of elite apologists who offered cool intellectual frameworks for deciding whether the war in Iraq was "just or unjust," reminding us that their bloodless formulas fail to take into account the experience of people in the "New Europe" and South America who lived through other "just wars" and the installation of "democracy." He suggests that citizens of South America, are just a tad more gun shy than most of "Old Europe" after having experienced liberation at the hands of the United States in the form of secret terroristic training of death squads and the support of military dictators and anti-Castro insurgents during the Kennedy and subsequent administrations. And the citizens of Eastern Europe, having experienced the creative destruction of the free-market system under the Reagan-Bush I and Clinton regimes -- an exercise in freedom which has pauperized them and made them dependent upon the goodwill and largesse of the international bankers -- have seen first hand the discrepancy between the liberatory promise of Western democracy and reality of the neo-liberal economic system, a system which has served to mightily prosper the upper echelons of the ruling class

Chomsky does make the case he begins with: that humanity is now situated at the brink of biological destruction, and the survival of the species depends upon worldwide resistance to the U.S. regime. Concentrating on the murderous antics of nation states and their elites, he shows how the U.S. is creating enemies around the world, enemies who, through the example of North Korea, have come to see that states with nuclear weapons need not fear US invasion. He shows how our policies conjure new and more powerful enemies out of the ground, enemies who will perhaps help us achieve the nuclear Armageddon our leaders appear to so badly want for us.

Here's Chomsky at his best on the neo-liberal agenda: "We are instructed daily to be firm believers in neoclassical markets, in which isolated individuals are rational wealth maximizers. If distortions are eliminated, the market should respond perfectly to their 'votes,' expressed in dollars or some counterpart. The value of a person's interests is measured in the same way. In particular, the interests of those with no votes are valued at zero: future generations, for example. It is therefore rational to destroy the possiblity for decent survival for our grandchildren, if by so doing we can maximize our own 'wealth' -- which means a particular perception of self-interest constructed by vast industries devoted to implanting and reinforcing it.'

The book exposes many, many state terrorism acts and mind control sponsored and conducted by the US. They are deadly and sad.

Even if Chomsky is half right, I believe the propaganda machine is so strong, it successfully confuses the minds of most simpletons -- it certainly has done me wrong so far.

Bin Laden and his crew brought out the worst in Americans. So we still see God Bless America and similar bumper stickers. Those who flash such platitudes have no interest in how we trained the terrorist when they served OUR purposes, in the Mideast and elsewhere (especially, perhaps, Nicaragua). Dubya could train the army to goose step down the mall and many would still support him.

As usual Professor Chomsky challenges us with facts. While we wallow in our self-righteousness, we ARE responsible for some of the world's worst--and certainly longest term--terrorist acts. He brings these about in paragraph after paragraph. THESE are history, not the fairy tales we continue to read in the mainstream media. To find what they are, read the book.

My only objection to it is that I listened to it, got the audio version. Because Chomsky is so fact and data oriented, I suggest you'll get far more out of the volume by reading it. There's just too much to ingest while listening to it.

Then get more and pass them around to people who need to know what's really going on in the world.

Rely on Chomsky for valuable information, then spread it liberally. But do so in print so that the reader has time to ingest the degree of the terror for which he or she is responsible until we try to do something about it.

Classic Chomsky although my favourite is still Manufacturing Consent. I suggest reading Manufacturing Consent and Hegemony - probably in that order as it helps to understand the layered arguments in Hegemony. Before I briefly comment on what I think is a key message of Chomsky, I would like to address some of the critical reviews. Even for books I do not like, I will not criticise with statements that are untrue. Chomsky does construct arguments and backs them up meticulously and to state in reviews that he simply 'proclaims' and this makes it true is a lie. I believe in free speech but saying things of a book that are clearly untrue is unhelpful to the purpose of reviews which are to help potential readers decide whether a book is for them or not. Now to discuss Hegemony.

One of the main jists is; if you rely entirely on the mainstream media, we would believe that our intentions are 'good' and theirs' are 'evil'. Really? That contention is for fairy tales and bad Hollywood movies. The comic strip X-men reveals the flaws and hopes and dreams of both the 'good' guys and villains alike - their humanity.

When we see humanity only in ourselves and lose our ability to see it in others, then we have lost our humanity.

This is a graph of the star ratings that had been posted as of 3.12.2004:
-------------------------------
(12) 1|************
(03) 2|***
(04) 3|****
(10) 4|**********
(24) 5|************************
-------------------------------
Total 53 reviews
Mean 3.59 stars

The distribution of ratings shows a polarized audience. Clearly, this book is very controversial, due to the unabashed criticism of US foreign policy. Thus, such division among reviewers is to be expected. Look to the center! For a more objective review, check out Ted Rushton's review that totes a 3 star rating. (Click "view all reviews" towards the end of the first page of reviews. Then select from the drop down menu "3-star ratings only." Go!)

It is difficult for many to accept that his assertions are even plausible. However, careful review of his facts reveals that his arguements are well founded. His work is quite impressive.

Read some Chomsky. Then think about his ideas as you watch the news, keeping in mind the limitations of the media (check out the Censored series by Project Censored). Rethink Afghanistan. Rethink Iraq. Rethink Haiti. Oh, and if Chomsky isn't enough for you, check out Cardoso & Faletto's Development and Dependency in Latin America (originally in Spanish) for a taste of dependencia theory. That will get your juices flowing.

The basic theory of HEGEMONY OR SURVIVAL is found in its subtitle that the United States has and has had (back to at least JFK and perhaps the end of WW II) a goal of America's Quest for Global Dominance (The American Empire Project). Noam Chomsky uses specific examples from the past four decades to defend his argument that owning the world and militarily space have been the real objectives of American foreign and domestic policy. Chomsky also parallels the American global empire building to that of the eighteenth and nineteenth century British Empire where the sun never set until 1942 in North Africa. He insists the current administration is willing to risk human survival to prove they are right. He succinctly and intelligently supports his thesis by tracking the U.S. government's aggressive pursuit of attaining "full spectrum dominance" at any cost.

This tome is extremely well written and worth reading as the historical based logic is quite easy to follow and seems so valid that the spin is the USA is the freedom providers and anyone opposing America is a vicious totalitarian. Chomsky's belief that a global empire must fail like the British did, but in this NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical WMDs) age will lead to an orb- wasteland is not as reliable of a conclusion as its defense seems more of a supposition. Still this is an eye opener that will receive praise from the left, condemnation from the right, sadly ignored from the middle, and never reach the global unaligned masses more interested in surviving leaders who know what is best for everyone.

Harriet Klausner

I got this book on audio CD, and I have to say that this book really open my eyes about how the United States puts itself out there in the world. Noam Chomsky goes through some good issues such as the Bay Of Pigs invasion during the Cuban Missle Crisis, and through the total history of the last 20th century.
Also Noam then talks about during WW2, during the Allied Occupation of Italy, the allies brought back the secret police because the Italian people would not accept democracy and they only chose to get back to facism under the dictatorship of Mussiolini. Noam then turns his attention to the War in Afghanistan and Iraq. See America's dominance first started in WW2 and has moved forward with the overthrow of democratically elected governments in Iran, Brazil, and Guatamelia. Then he turns his attention in the book in the 80's to the Iran-Contra scandal which the Pentagon gave weapons to the Contra's in Central America and to release the hostages at the former American Embassy where the hostages where being held for 444 days until Reagen was elected president in 1980. It was then that he ordered the invasion of Grenada, Haiti, and Operation Just Cause where the local's where gassed by the American military in Panama to capture CIA-backed but now enemy combatant Noreiga. He then addressed the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan where the CIA and the ISI flowed weapons to the jihadist fighting against the Soviet's and the Soviet-backed Communist government in Kabul. Once the Soviet's left, Afghanistan then fell into chaos where the world turned a blind eye to what was going on until some 13 years later when Al-Qaida terrorist flew planes into the World Trade Center on Sept.11th. When Sept.11th happen, everyone was sympantic to the Americans, but the people of Central America did not show any sympanty to the Americans because they knew that the American government overthrew democratically-elected leaders which were replaced with dicators who were loyal to the United States and comitted genicide which the U.S. government turned a blind eye of what was happening there. Noam then goes forward with America's passion for a military space program which was called Star Wars where missiles from satellites can be fired anytime at any country that provokes harm at the United States. So far this is a very good book, and if you want to know the truth, then read this book.