Ratings: 3 Stars
You cannot easily disregard the conclusions drawn from this book. There is no such thing as a responsible superpower, irrespective of the ideology. While the British empire was more conspicuous and unshackled by the need to be politically correct, USA has engaged in doublespeak while carrying out its noble agenda of spreading freedom and democracy across the world, while also securing its “strategic interests”.
Those memes of oil, democracy and American obsession make you laugh. You just didn’t know how deep is that obsession. The range of illegal, immoral and brutal acts that it has conducted in pursuing its interests across a range of countries, cannot give USA any high ground to conduct ‘war against terror’. Aggression by other nations against USA is an ‘act of terror’, while vice versa is deemed to be ‘self-defense’, ‘expanding the frontiers of democracy’, ‘minor casualties in securing its interests’, ad nauseum.
How does USA maintain its hegemony?
Step 1: Pick a narrow short-term interest: Oil, promoting US businesses abroad etc.
Step 2: Identify a country with utter inability to retaliate
Step 3: Plaster a spurious noble agenda on your short-term interest: Rooting out socialism, deposing off a brutal dictator (even though the recalcitrant dictator was once a recipient of US largesse), and the all-time favorite: fostering democracy in the region
Step 4: Nudge the “enemy” in attacking you, even “intent to attack” or “threat to US interests” is valid here. A peace rally, a democratically elected leader in the said country who doesn’t consider the primacy of US interests, and if there is no proof of aggression towards US – create one (Saddam Hussain possessing weapons of mass destruction)
Step 5: Shower on “enemy” US brand of justice till it has a pliant puppet of a leader who prioritizes US interests over the population of that country
Disregarding pleas from UN and the rest of the world, US would wreak havoc on the rogue nation who had the temerity to stand against US interests, in their own country.
Noam Chomsky’s ‘Hegemony or Survival’ is indeed an insightful book. But it would have been much better as a 2000-worded blog post! The book is extremely repetitive and it has nothing to build on. The first chapter is same as the last and everything in between. It’s like an extremely long essay by an MBA grad with a singular insight. Chomsky talks in circles. And in quotes. Different people saying the same thing, all compasses pointing towards north. After the first chapter, Chomsky’s sarcasm is no longer biting, it’s simply boring. Just as he criticizes US polity for using excessive repetition to prove its point, Chomsky succumbs to the same fallacy. And he blames US for everything under the sun. Even North Korea is a banal state suffering inequity at the hands of a ruthless tyrant, namely USA. Not only does Chomsky not provide any solution as to how US can correct itself, the criticism is so repetitive that it becomes a rant. Chomsky has an axe to grind.
After a point (the first chapter itself), your attention starts wandering – “OH BOY! WE DISCUSSED THIS IN THE FIRST CHAPTER! MOVE ON!” Even the “new afterword”, written two years after the publication of the book, says the same exact things! Arundhati Roy believes that this book is “necessary reading” and “it’s Chomsky at his best”. I shudder to think what Chomsky would be at his worst! Not for me this “towering intellect” who repeats himself like a computer code on loop.
Alienman 