The system doesn't just manufacture consent. It also manufactures dissent and decides which dissidents you're allowed to hear.
Michael Parenti published "Inventing Reality" in 1986. Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" came out in 1988.
Chomsky cited Parenti exactly once, for an article, not the book that preceded his own on the same subject.
Same thesis: media serves power. But the books are not the same.
On "conspiracy": Chomsky dismisses structural analysis that names actors as "conspiracy theorism." Parenti: "The alternative to a conspiracy theory is an innocence theory… the CIA is by definition a conspiracy."
Chomsky wanted you to protest… abstractly. Never name the names.
Right-wing anticommunism is obvious. But they needed someone to attack socialism from the left, to gut-punch communism from inside the tent. Enter Chomsky.
Chomsky equates Stalin with Goebbels, called Leninism "counterrevolution."
Parenti documented the real gains: full employment, free healthcare, free education, free housing.
He wrote about how the existence of the USSR forced concessions in the capitalist countries: social programs, worker rights, formal decolonization.
Capital had to compete with an alternative Chomsky made sure you wouldn't defend.
On empire: Chomsky framed US foreign policy as blunders and mistakes. Parenti said "the Iraq war has not been a mistake", it succeeded for the class it serves. Your taxes, your children's lives. Their profits, their reconstruction contracts. Externalized costs, privatized gains.
On intervention: Chomsky supported the NATO no-fly zone over Libya. Parenti opposed it, listed what Libyans would never see again after "liberation."
On elections: Chomsky did the "lesser evil" dance every four years, vote Democrat in swing states. Parenti broke with Bernie Sanders over the bombing of Yugoslavia.
Chomsky got MIT, The Guardian, documentaries, Jacobin. Parenti barely got lecture halls and public access TV.
Parenti was the one they didn't want you listening to, so they put Chomsky in front of you.
Not to mention Chomsky opposed bds like the good little Jew he is
Has it always been this bad or is there some sort of leftcom raid happening on this piece of shit board
Treating """""marxist academics"""""" like sports teams is fucking wild.
>Parenti documented the real gains: full employment, free healthcare, free education, free housing.Meanwhile Marx, Engels and Lenin called all this shit petit-bourgeois reform. I didn't know "communism" was about increasing the size of the middle-classes. Who gives a shit?
>>2665235What the fuck does "leftcom" even mean anymore?
>>2665240>What the fuck does "leftcom" even mean anymore?someone who dares to criticize ML cultists sacred cows
>>2665248
Dissolved whenever the economy takes a hit like all reform.
>>2665250“Sacred-cow” lmao, name one influential “left-communist” who has done anything for the movement to abolish the present state of things and wasn’t just a fag philosopher
MLism isn't communism.
>>2665100>trades with Nazis and Zionists on your way >>2665095Parenti was a retard parroting american propagnada
>>2665448Is this a troll or do you genuinely work for the FBI
>>2665460Parenti was a visiting fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. Parent was a fed. That is why he called China a poor, neoliberal nation that was colonizing tibet.
>Chomsky equates Stalin with Goebbels, called Leninism "counterrevolution."
Both Stalin and Goebbels used to be marxists communists. Both fell to opportunism. Leninism is an invention of stalinist counter revolution, as if lenin invented something new instead of holding orthodox invariant marxist line.
>>2665095Naming actors is not a structural analysis
>>2665235It's always been this bad, but in different ways depending on the flavor of the month. The older you get, the less patience you have for the general concept though.
>>2666322<goebbels and stalin were totes the sameit turns out you can just say stuff lmao
>>2665235"left-communism" is the spectre that is haunting leftypol
>>2665281name a ML that has
>>2665240>Meanwhile Marx, Engels and Lenin called all this shit petit-bourgeois reform. I didn't know "communism" was about increasing the size of the middle-classes. Who gives a shit?OK, then. Who gives a shit about your utopianism? What do you have to offer the working class other than vague posturing and generally wasting oxygen and space? You're going to have to come up with something real if you want to actually change the world instead of being effectively controlled opposition.
>>2665235>Has it always been this bad or is there some sort of leftcom raid happening on this piece of shit boardIs it really a raid when the administration all but openly approves of it? That is, when they're not openly engaging in the trolling themselves?
>>2665095lol @ the feds bumping this thread while trying to derail
<muh left anticommunismyou right-communists who espouse nothing but a cultlike devotion to your favorite failed states need to get a new term for anyone who happens to dislike these things for their very real and very documented decisions
>>2665235>le heckin' leftcom raiders from r/ultraleft are behind this!i suggest you take your meds and realize people don't want your MLism, they instead want this to be a board that analyses things from an actual communist perspective
>>2667147you're a fedjacketing coward
>>2667200There is no communist perspective because communism doesn’t exist
>>2665100Hail Sakai and Israel!
>>2666578>utopianismWhat does this even mean? Why the fuck do Marxists think their delusional ideas are less utopian than the previous ones?
>>2666325Structures don't exist without actors, lmao
It takes a special type of larp to use a self-assigned label as proof that you're part of a real historical continuity with figures you have never met and their so called 'successes' in which you played no role.
>>2666578>controlled oppositionYou're the retard who presents milquetoast reform easily achievable under capitalism as "communism", dipshit.
>utopianismYou don't even know what this means. For example, communism doesnt do "land reform", communism abolishes land ownership altogether. The bolsheviks were conscious of this, which is why they clearly stated the "peace, land, and bread" slogan was merely an expression of their role in executing the tasks of the democratic (read: not socialist) revolution. Meanwhile you are a disingenuous larper who calls literally anything under the sun "communism".
>>2667405>Why the fuck do Marxists think their delusional ideas are less utopian than the previous ones?Calm down Mises.
"Utopianism" here refers to socialisms that ground themselves on ready-made visions of the future rather than the dynamics of class struggle. MLs intentionally misinterpret this to throw concrete analysis out of the window completely because the future of communism hinges on pretending bourgeois nation-states with an untouched capitalist mode of production are actually Existing Socialism(tm) because their leaders larp as communist revolutionaries.
Writing recipes for the cookshops of the future is not the domain of marxists, but it's not difficult to analyze the present and conclude we haven't moved past a capitalist MOP anywhere yet.
>>2665240>Who gives a shit?Can't all those things be considered part of the modernization process that allowed the USSR to not get destroyed by the Nazis? I think the people (among them proles) who avoided getting genocided thanks to that gave a shit. Dealing with the inevitable counter-revolution is part of communism too, I know the USSR failed at this in the long run, but still.
>>2667416>communism doesnt do "land reform", communism abolishes land ownership altogetheryou cannot erase ownership, but only transfer it
the "abolition" of property is simply the theft of property
>>2666578marxists often actively promote harm against the working class to make them more "revolutionary". why would reforms be bad to anyone besides an enemy of the working class? really make you think.
Unique IPs: 22