Chomsky usually is careful not to appeal to conspiracies since his detractors tend to describe many of his views as conspiracy theories and, thus, try to discredit the views. He usually replies that what he is describing is the cultural and institutional inertia of capitalist and governmental institutions. It is the ingrained culture and framework of presuppositions that lead to problematic behavior and not necessarily an agreed conspiracy among the powerful.
That said, it was with a bit of a disappointment that I read his views on suburbanization. He appeals to a conspiracy explicitly.
...take the fact that so many people live in the suburbs and everybody has to drive their own car everywhere. Was that the result of a "free market"? No, it was because the U.S. government carried out a massive social-engineering project in the 1950s to destroy the public transportation system in favor of expanding a highly inefficient system based on cars and airplanes -- because that's what benefits big industry. It started with corporate conspiracies to buy up and eliminate streetcar systems, and then continued with huge public subsidies to build the highway systems and encourage an extremely inefficient and environmentally destructive alternative. That's what led to the suburbanization of the country -- so you get huge shopping malls in the suburbs, and devastation in the inner cities.
Noam Chomsky; Understanding Power; p.256
Keep in mind that this is a transcript of an off-the-cuff talk he gave in the early 1990's and, as such, his simplification could, perhaps, be excused. The passage does have a footnote dedicated to justifying the accusation of "conspiracy".
I'm close to finishing the book, so I'll post a critical analysis sometime in the near future.
What's the beef here? There really *was* such a conspiracy, not just "plans", and it was proven in court. Chomsky has noted repeatedly
that corporations and people in government
constantly conspire, per the dictionary
definition of the word. His complaint about
conspiracy theories is directed to those who
think that there are secret cabals, and if
we could just rid the world of those we
would be ok.
Posted by: ts | August 31, 2004 at 04:44 PM
Chomsky is truly refering to "conspiracies" as Eric stated earlier, and having read of this in several other books, i would agree.
Posted by: Tim | March 13, 2004 at 09:47 AM
I'll be curious to hear your reaction after you have finished the book.
If there was indeed a conspiracy to suburbanize America and sell more cars, the majority of Americans were co-conspirators.
Posted by: David Sucher | January 04, 2004 at 09:15 PM
Well, "plans" allows for a possible reading where corporations simply identified what was in their interest independently of each other and planned accordingly:
"It started with corporate [plans] to buy up and eliminate streetcar systems,..."
"Conspiracies" adds that additional element of inter-corporate communication and coordination.
"It started with corporate conspiracies to buy up and eliminate streetcar systems,..."
That said, given his documentation in the footnote I am less queasy about his use of "conspiracies" (the word) in this case.
Posted by: Eric | December 29, 2003 at 12:20 PM
While I agree that charges of "conspiracies" muddy the waters considerably, I want you to re-read the passage from Chomsky and substitute the word "plans" for the word "conspiracies."
Lose anything?
I don't see it.
Firmly established by the public record?
Absolutely.
Posted by: Dale | December 29, 2003 at 12:07 PM