Noam Chomsky: Putin, Ukraine, China, and Nuclear War
政治与社会历史与文明音乐与艺术技术与编程心理与人性
📋 章节目录
暂无章节信息
🔑 关键词
warstatesukraineunitedchinarussiaputinnatorussianinternationaldoncalledinvasioncoursepropagandathreatorderpolicypositionnuclear
💬 精彩语录
"actually not leaks, actually presented by U.S. intelligence and U.S. leaders about the long build up to the war."
实际上不是泄密，实际上是美国情报部门和美国领导人介绍的有关战争长期准备的信息。
— Noam Chomsky （20:31.000）
"Is that false? No, it's true. Is it propaganda? Of course it's propaganda because of what's not said and because of what's presupposed."
这是假的吗？不，这是真的。是宣传吗？当然，这是宣传，因为没有说出来，也因为有预设。
— Noam Chomsky （35:20.000）
"So as long as we have a political organization dedicated to gaining power at any cost, maximizing profit, no matter what the consequences, no future for human civilization."
所以只要我们还有一个不惜一切代价获取权力、追求利益最大化的政治组织，不管后果如何，人类文明就没有未来。
— Noam Chomsky （46:04.000）
"Noam, thank you for talking today. Thank you for talking once again. And thank you for fighting for the future of human civilization. Again, thank you."
诺姆，谢谢你今天的发言。谢谢你再次讲话。感谢你们为人类文明的未来而奋斗。再次感谢您。
— Noam Chomsky （46:22.000）
"Why did Russia invade Ukraine on February 24th? Who do you think is to blame? Who do you place the blame on?"
俄罗斯为何在2月24日入侵乌克兰？你认为这应该归咎于谁？你把责任归咎于谁？
— Noam Chomsky （14:07.000）
🎙️ 完整对话（340 条）
Lex Fridman (00:00.000)
Will there be a war between U.S. and China in the 21st century?
21世纪中美之间会发生战争吗？
Lex Fridman (00:05.000)
If there is, we're finished.
如果有的话，我们就完成了。
Lex Fridman (00:08.000)
A war between the U.S. and China would destroy the possibilities of organized life on Earth.
美国和中国之间的战争将摧毁地球上有组织的生命的可能性。
Lex Fridman (00:18.000)
The following is a conversation with Noam Chomsky, his second time on the podcast.
以下是与诺姆·乔姆斯基的对话，这是他第二次参加播客。
Lex Fridman (00:23.000)
This episode is focused on the war in Ukraine.
本集聚焦于乌克兰战争。
Lex Fridman (00:27.000)
And it is a departure from the way I usually do this podcast in several ways.
这在很多方面都与我通常做这个播客的方式不同。
Noam Chomsky (00:32.000)
Noam is a strong and healthy 93 year old, but this conversation is remote to be cautious.
诺姆是一位强壮健康的93岁老人，但这次谈话距离遥远要谨慎。
Noam Chomsky (00:40.000)
It is brief, only one hour.
时间很短，只有一个小时。
Noam Chomsky (00:42.000)
It is more of an interview than a conversation due to the limitations of our audio and video connection.
由于我们的音频和视频连接的限制，这更像是一次采访而不是对话。
Noam Chomsky (00:50.000)
I decided it's best to get Noam's clear thoughts on this war
我决定最好了解诺姆对这场战争的清晰想法
Lex Fridman (00:54.000)
and the complicated geopolitics of today and the rest of the 21st century that is unrolling before us,
以及今天和 21 世纪余下时间在我们面前展开的复杂地缘政治，
Noam Chomsky (01:01.000)
with our decisions and actions fully capable of either helping humanity flourish
我们的决定和行动完全有能力帮助人类繁荣
Lex Fridman (01:06.000)
or unleashing global destruction and suffering.
或引发全球破坏和苦难。
Noam Chomsky (01:10.000)
As a brief aside, perhaps you know this, but let me mention that I traveled to Ukraine
顺便说一句，也许你知道这一点，但让我提一下我去了乌克兰
Lex Fridman (01:16.000)
and saw, heard, felt things that are haunting and gave me a lot to think about.
看到、听到、感受到那些令人难以忘怀的事情，给了我很多思考。
Noam Chomsky (01:22.000)
Because of that, I've been really struggling to edit the videos I recorded.
正因为如此，我一直在努力编辑我录制的视频。
Lex Fridman (01:27.000)
I hope to finish it soon.
我希望尽快完成它。
Noam Chomsky (01:29.000)
I'm sorry for these delays, and I'm especially sorry to the people there who gave me their time,
我对这些延误感到抱歉，尤其是对那些给我时间的人感到抱歉，
Lex Fridman (01:34.000)
their story, their heart.
他们的故事，他们的心。
Noam Chomsky (01:37.000)
Please be patient with me.
请耐心等待我。
Lex Fridman (01:39.000)
I hope you understand.
Noam Chomsky (01:41.000)
This is the Lex Readman Podcast.
Lex Fridman (01:43.000)
To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description.
Lex Fridman (01:46.000)
And now, dear friends, here's Noam Chomsky.
Noam Chomsky (01:50.000)
You have studied and criticized powerful leaders and nations in times of global conflict and struggles for power.
Lex Fridman (01:58.000)
So let me ask you, what do you think motivates Vladimir Putin?
Lex Fridman (02:03.000)
Is it power, legacy, fame, geopolitical influence, or the flourishing of a nation he loves and represents?
Noam Chomsky (02:11.000)
I have no particular insight into Putin's mind.
Noam Chomsky (02:18.000)
I can only watch the actions over the last 20, 25 years and read the statements.
Noam Chomsky (02:28.000)
Took power about almost 25 years ago, has held it since as prime minister or president.
Lex Fridman (02:38.000)
His first task was to try to overcome the chaos and disarray of the 1990s.
Noam Chomsky (02:51.000)
During the 90s, Gorbachev had a proposal, he called for a cooperative enterprise with the West.
Lex Fridman (03:08.000)
They would share an effort to rebuild what he called a common European home,
Noam Chomsky (03:15.000)
in which there would be no military alliances, just Russia, Western US accommodation,
Noam Chomsky (03:24.000)
with a move towards social democracy and former USSR and comparable moves in the United States.
Noam Chomsky (03:36.000)
Well, that was quickly smashed. The United States had no interest in that.
Lex Fridman (03:42.000)
Clinton came along pretty soon, early 90s.
Noam Chomsky (03:47.000)
Russia was induced to adopt what was called shock therapy,
Lex Fridman (03:56.000)
a harsh, quick market transformation, which devastated the economy,
Noam Chomsky (04:03.000)
created enormous social disarray, rise of what are called oligarchs, kleptocrats, high mortality.
Lex Fridman (04:17.000)
And Clinton started the policy of expanding NATO to the East
Noam Chomsky (04:23.000)
in violation of firm, unambiguous promises to Gorbachev not to do so.
Noam Chomsky (04:30.000)
Yeltsin, Putin's friend, opposed it. Other Russian leaders opposed it, but they didn't react.
Noam Chomsky (04:39.000)
They accepted it. When Putin came in, he continued that policy.
Lex Fridman (04:45.000)
Meanwhile, did reconstruct the Russian economy.
Noam Chomsky (04:49.000)
Russian society became a viable, deeply authoritarian society under his tight control.
Lex Fridman (04:58.000)
He himself organized a major kleptocracy with him in the middle,
Noam Chomsky (05:06.000)
apparently became very wealthy. On the international front,
Lex Fridman (05:10.000)
he pretty much continued the former policies as US diplomats,
Noam Chomsky (05:17.000)
practically every diplomat who had any contact with Russia had been dispatched there,
Lex Fridman (05:24.000)
knew about it, as they all warned from the 90s that what Clinton was doing,
Noam Chomsky (05:30.000)
expanded by Bush afterwards, was reckless and provocative,
Lex Fridman (05:38.000)
that Russia did have a clear red line before Putin, which he adhered to,
Noam Chomsky (05:46.000)
namely no NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia.
Lex Fridman (05:51.000)
This is pretty much how things went on through the 2000s.
Noam Chomsky (06:00.000)
In 2008, President Bush did invite Ukraine to join NATO.
Noam Chomsky (06:10.000)
That was vetoed by France and Germany, but under US pressure, it was kept on the agenda.
Noam Chomsky (06:17.000)
The Russians continued to object. Western diplomats,
Lex Fridman (06:22.000)
including the present current head of the CIA and his predecessors,
Noam Chomsky (06:29.000)
warned that this was reckless, provocative, shouldn't be done, continued.
Lex Fridman (06:35.000)
Putin didn't do much. He stayed with it until pretty recently.
Noam Chomsky (06:41.000)
After 2014, the uprising that threw out the former president,
Lex Fridman (06:51.000)
who was pro Russian, instituted anti Russian laws.
Noam Chomsky (06:56.000)
The United States and NATO began a policy of moving to effectively integrate Ukraine
Noam Chomsky (07:07.000)
into the NATO command, joint military exercises, training, sending weapons and so on.
Noam Chomsky (07:17.000)
Putin objected. Other Russian leaders objected. They're unified on this, but didn't do much.
Lex Fridman (07:26.000)
They continued with the proposals that Ukraine be excluded from NATO,
Lex Fridman (07:37.000)
and that there be some form of autonomy for the Donbass region.
Lex Fridman (07:43.000)
Meanwhile, in reaction to the uprising, the Maidan Uprising 2014,
Noam Chomsky (07:51.000)
Russia moved in and took over Crimea, protecting its warm water base and major naval base.
Noam Chomsky (08:01.000)
The US objected and recognised it, but things continued without notable conflict.
Noam Chomsky (08:09.000)
I won't go through all the details. When Joe Biden came in,
Noam Chomsky (08:14.000)
he expanded the program of what US military journals call a defective integration of Ukraine within NATO,
Noam Chomsky (08:27.000)
proposed September 2021, proposed enhanced program of preparation for NATO mission,
Noam Chomsky (08:40.000)
extended with a formal statement in November. We're now practically up to the invasion.
Noam Chomsky (08:48.000)
Putin's position hardened. France, mainly France, to an extent Germany,
Lex Fridman (08:55.000)
did make some moves towards possible negotiations. Putin dismissed them,
Lex Fridman (09:04.000)
moved on to the direct invasion. What are his, to get back to your question, what motivates him?
Noam Chomsky (09:16.000)
I presume what he's been saying all along, namely establishing his legacy as a leader
Noam Chomsky (09:26.000)
who overcame the extensive destruction of Russia, massive weakening over it,
Lex Fridman (09:35.000)
restored his position as a world power, prevented Ukraine from entering NATO.
Noam Chomsky (09:42.000)
It may have further ambitions as to dominating and controlling Ukraine, very likely.
Noam Chomsky (09:50.000)
There is a theory in the West that he suddenly became a total madman who wants to restore the great Russian empire.
Noam Chomsky (10:02.000)
This is combined with the gloating over the fact that the Russian military is a paper tiger that can't even conquer cities
Noam Chomsky (10:16.000)
a couple of kilometers from the border, but defended not even by a regular army.
Lex Fridman (10:23.000)
But somehow along with this, he's planning to attack NATO powers, conquer Europe, who knows what.
Noam Chomsky (10:32.000)
It's impossible to put all these concepts together. They're totally internally contradictory.
Lex Fridman (10:39.000)
So what's my judgment? I think what motivates him is what he's been demonstrating in his actions.
Noam Chomsky (10:48.000)
Restore Russia as a great power, restore its economy, control it as a total dictatorship,
Noam Chomsky (11:00.000)
enrich himself and his cronies, establish a legacy as a major figure in Russian history,
Noam Chomsky (11:09.000)
make sure that Ukraine does not join NATO, and probably by now he's hardened the position,
Noam Chomsky (11:19.000)
maintain Crimea and the southeastern corridor to Russia, and some ambiguous agreements about the Donbass region.
Lex Fridman (11:32.000)
That looks like his motivation. There's much speculation that goes beyond this,
Lex Fridman (11:39.000)
but it's very hard to reconcile with the assessment of the real world by the same people who are making the grandiose speculations.
Lex Fridman (11:54.000)
I don't think anything's changed.
Noam Chomsky (12:04.000)
It seems to me his policies are about the same as what they were. They've changed in response to changed circumstances.
Lex Fridman (12:14.000)
So very recently, right before the invasion, a few weeks before, for the first time,
Noam Chomsky (12:22.000)
Putin announced recognition of the independence of the Donbass region. That's a stronger position than before, much stronger.
Noam Chomsky (12:34.000)
Up till then, he had pretty much kept to the longstanding position of some kind of accommodation within a federal structure
Noam Chomsky (12:45.000)
in which the Donbass region would have considerable autonomy. So that's a harshening of the position.
Lex Fridman (12:53.000)
So even the human mind of Vladimir Putin, the man?
Noam Chomsky (12:57.000)
I can't read his mind. I can only see the policies that he's pursued and the statements that he's made.
Noam Chomsky (13:04.000)
There are many people speculating about his mind. And as I say, these speculations are, first of all, not based on anything.
Noam Chomsky (13:15.000)
Never said anything about trying to conquer NATO. But more importantly,
Noam Chomsky (13:21.000)
they are totally inconsistent with the analyses of Russian power by the same people who are making the speculations.
Lex Fridman (13:31.000)
So we see the same individual speculating about Putin's grandiose plans to become Peter the Great and conquer,
Noam Chomsky (13:46.000)
start attacking NATO powers, on the one hand saying that, on the other hand gloating over the fact that his military powers
Lex Fridman (13:55.000)
so minuscule he can't even conquer towns a couple miles from the border.
Lex Fridman (14:03.000)
Well, it's impossible to make sense of that position.
Lex Fridman (14:07.000)
Why did Russia invade Ukraine on February 24th? Who do you think is to blame? Who do you place the blame on?
Noam Chomsky (14:17.000)
Well, who's to blame? Any power that commits aggression is to blame. So I continue to say, as I have been for many months,
Noam Chomsky (14:29.000)
that Putin's invasion of Ukraine is on a par with such acts of aggression as the U.S. invasion of Iraq,
Noam Chomsky (14:41.000)
the Stalin, Hitler invasion of Poland, other acts of supreme international crime under international law.
Noam Chomsky (14:55.000)
Of course he's to blame.
Noam Chomsky (14:58.000)
The U.S. committed $6.9 billion in military assistance to Ukraine since the Russian invasion.
Lex Fridman (15:04.000)
Should U.S. keep up with this support?
Noam Chomsky (15:08.000)
There are two questions. One has to do with providing support for defense against the invasion, which is certainly legitimate.
Noam Chomsky (15:18.000)
The other is seeking ways to end the crime before even worse disasters arise.
Lex Fridman (15:28.000)
Now that second part is not discussed in the West, barely discussed.
Noam Chomsky (15:33.000)
Anyone who dares to discuss it is immediately subjected to a flood of invective and hysterical condemnation.
Lex Fridman (15:43.000)
But if you're serious about Ukraine, there are two things you ask.
Lex Fridman (15:48.000)
One, what can we do to support Ukraine in defense against aggression?
Noam Chomsky (15:54.000)
Second, how can we move to end the war before it leads to even worse destruction of Ukraine, more starvation worldwide,
Noam Chomsky (16:06.000)
reversing the limited efforts to deal with global warming, possibly moving up an escalation out of the war, the nuclear war.
Lex Fridman (16:17.000)
That's the second half of the borrow, a phrase attributed to Winston Churchill.
Noam Chomsky (16:27.000)
There's a lot of war, war, but no joy, joy, joy.
Lex Fridman (16:33.000)
And there ought to be joy, joy if you care about Ukraine and the rest of the world.
Noam Chomsky (16:39.000)
Can it be done? We don't know.
Noam Chomsky (16:41.000)
Official U.S. policy is to reject a diplomatic settlement, to move to weaken Russia severely so that it cannot carry out further aggression,
Lex Fridman (16:56.000)
but not do anything on the joy, joy side, not think of how to bring the crimes and atrocities to an end.
Lex Fridman (17:07.000)
That's the second part of the question.
Noam Chomsky (17:10.000)
So, yes, the U.S. should continue with the kind of calibrated support that's been given.
Noam Chomsky (17:20.000)
The Pentagon wisely has vetoed initiatives to go well beyond support for defense up to attack on Russia.
Lex Fridman (17:34.000)
So far, the Pentagon, which seems to be the dovish component in the U.S. administration,
Noam Chomsky (17:42.000)
has vetoed plans which very likely would lead on to nuclear war, which would destroy everything.
Lex Fridman (17:49.000)
So calibrated provision of weapons to blunt the offensive, allow Ukraine to defend itself,
Noam Chomsky (17:58.000)
if sensible, combined with efforts to see if something can be done to bring the crimes and atrocities to an end
Lex Fridman (18:11.000)
and avert the much worse consequences that are in store, that would be instead the U.S. only dealing with the first.
Lex Fridman (18:21.000)
And all of our discussions limit themselves to the first in the United States and in Britain, not in Europe.
Lex Fridman (18:29.000)
Do you worry about nuclear war in the 21st century? How do we avoid it?
Noam Chomsky (18:35.000)
Anyone who doesn't worry about nuclear war doesn't have a gray cell functioning.
Noam Chomsky (18:41.000)
Of course, everyone is worried about nuclear war, or should be.
Noam Chomsky (18:46.000)
It's very easy to see how steps could be taken, even been recommended, that would lead to nuclear war.
Lex Fridman (18:54.000)
So you can read articles even by liberal commentators who say we should drop all the pretenses, just go to war against Russia.
Lex Fridman (19:05.000)
They have to be destroyed.
Noam Chomsky (19:08.000)
You can see proposals coming from Congress, the leading figures, saying we should establish a no fly zone.
Noam Chomsky (19:19.000)
Pentagon objects. They point out correctly that to establish a no fly zone, you have to have control of the air,
Noam Chomsky (19:29.000)
which means destroying Russian air defense systems, which happen to be inside Russia.
Lex Fridman (19:37.000)
We don't know that Russia won't react.
Noam Chomsky (19:41.000)
Even the call, now almost universal, to ensure that Ukraine wins, drives out all the Russians, drives them out of the country,
Lex Fridman (19:53.000)
sounds nice on paper, but notice the assumption.
Noam Chomsky (19:58.000)
The assumption is that Vladimir Putin, this madman who just seeks power and is out of control, will sit there quietly,
Noam Chomsky (20:10.000)
accept defeat, slink away, not use the military means that of course he has to destroy Ukraine.
Noam Chomsky (20:20.000)
One of the interesting comments that came out in today's long article, I think Washington Post reviewing a lot of leaks,
Noam Chomsky (20:31.000)
actually not leaks, actually presented by U.S. intelligence and U.S. leaders about the long build up to the war.
Noam Chomsky (20:41.000)
One of the points it made was surprised on the part of British and U.S. leaders about Putin's strategy
Lex Fridman (20:50.000)
and his failure to adopt, to fight the war the way the U.S. and Britain would, with real shock and awe,
Noam Chomsky (20:59.000)
destruction of communication facilities, of energy facilities and so on.
Lex Fridman (21:04.000)
They can't understand why he hasn't done all that.
Noam Chomsky (21:07.000)
If you want to make it very likely that that will happen, then insist on fighting until somehow Russia faces total defeat.
Noam Chomsky (21:21.000)
Then it's a gamble, but if he's as crazy and insane as you claim, presumably will use weapons that he hasn't used yet to destroy Ukraine.
Lex Fridman (21:35.000)
So the West is taking an extraordinary gamble with the fate of Ukraine.
Noam Chomsky (21:41.000)
Gambling that the madman, lunatic, mad Vlad won't use the weapons he has to destroy Ukraine
Lex Fridman (21:52.000)
and set the stage for escalation of the latter which might lead to nuclear war.
Lex Fridman (21:58.000)
It's quite a gamble.
Lex Fridman (22:00.000)
How much propaganda is there in the world today in Russia, in Ukraine, in the West?
Lex Fridman (22:06.000)
It's extraordinary.
Noam Chomsky (22:08.000)
In Russia, of course, it's total.
Lex Fridman (22:12.000)
Ukraine is a different story.
Noam Chomsky (22:14.000)
They're at war.
Lex Fridman (22:15.000)
They expect propaganda.
Noam Chomsky (22:17.000)
In the West, let me quote Graham Fuller, very highly placed in U.S. intelligence,
Noam Chomsky (22:28.000)
one of the top officials for decades dealing mostly with Russia and Central Asia.
Noam Chomsky (22:36.000)
He recently said that in all the years of the Cold War, he's never seen any extreme Russia phobia to the extent that he sees today.
Lex Fridman (22:49.000)
I think that's pretty accurate.
Noam Chomsky (22:53.000)
I mean, the U.S. has even canceled Russian outlets, which means if you want to find out what Sergei Lavrov or other Russian officials are saying,
Lex Fridman (23:10.000)
you can't look it up on their own outlets.
Noam Chomsky (23:14.000)
You have to go through Al Jazeera, Indian state television or someplace where they still allow Russian positions to be expressed.
Lex Fridman (23:27.000)
And of course, the propaganda is just outlandish.
Noam Chomsky (23:31.000)
I think Fuller is quite correct on this.
Lex Fridman (23:34.000)
In Russia, of course, you expect total propaganda.
Noam Chomsky (23:38.000)
There's nothing, any independent outlets such as there were have been crushed.
Lex Fridman (23:46.000)
If the media is a source of inaccuracies and even lies, then how do we find the truth?
Noam Chomsky (23:54.000)
I don't regard the media as a source of inaccuracies and lies.
Lex Fridman (24:01.000)
They do exist.
Lex Fridman (24:03.000)
But by and large, media reporting is reasonably accurate.
Noam Chomsky (24:09.000)
Reporters, the journalists themselves, as in the past, do courageous, honest work.
Noam Chomsky (24:19.000)
I've written about this for 50 years.
Lex Fridman (24:23.000)
My opinion hasn't changed.
Lex Fridman (24:26.000)
But they do pick certain things and not other things.
Lex Fridman (24:31.000)
There's selection, there's framing, there's ways of presenting things.
Noam Chomsky (24:37.000)
All of that forms a kind of propaganda system, which you have to work your way through.
Lex Fridman (24:45.000)
But it's rarely a matter of straight, outright lying.
Lex Fridman (24:50.000)
So there's a difference between propaganda and lying?
Lex Fridman (24:54.000)
Of course, a propaganda system shapes and limits the material that's presented.
Noam Chomsky (25:02.000)
It may tell the truth within that framework.
Lex Fridman (25:05.000)
So let me give you a concrete example, which I wrote about extensively.
Noam Chomsky (25:12.000)
I have a book called Manufacturing Consent jointly with Edward Herman.
Lex Fridman (25:19.000)
It's about his term, which I had accepted a propaganda model of the media.
Noam Chomsky (25:26.000)
A large part of the book is defense of the media.
Lex Fridman (25:30.000)
Defense of the media against harsh attacks by Freedom House.
Noam Chomsky (25:36.000)
Several volumes they published attacking the media,
Noam Chomsky (25:40.000)
charging that the media were so adversarial and dishonest that they lost the war in Vietnam.
Noam Chomsky (25:47.000)
Well, it took the trouble of reading through the two volumes.
Lex Fridman (25:52.000)
One volume is charges, the next volume is evidence.
Noam Chomsky (25:57.000)
Turns out that all of the evidence is lies.
Lex Fridman (26:01.000)
They had no evidence.
Noam Chomsky (26:03.000)
They were just lying.
Lex Fridman (26:05.000)
The media, in fact, the journalists were doing honest, courageous work.
Lex Fridman (26:11.000)
But within a certain framework.
Noam Chomsky (26:16.000)
A framework of assuming that the American cause was basically just, basically honorable,
Noam Chomsky (26:24.000)
making mistakes, doing bad things.
Lex Fridman (26:28.000)
But the idea of questioning that the United States was engaged in a major war crime.
Noam Chomsky (26:38.000)
That's off the record.
Lex Fridman (26:40.000)
So unfortunately, there was this crime and that crime which harmed their effort to do good and so on.
Noam Chomsky (26:50.000)
Well, that's not lying, it's propaganda.
Lex Fridman (26:53.000)
So how do we find the truth?
Lex Fridman (26:55.000)
How do we find the truth?
Lex Fridman (26:58.000)
That's what you have a brain for.
Noam Chomsky (27:01.000)
It's not deep.
Lex Fridman (27:03.000)
It's quite shallow.
Noam Chomsky (27:05.000)
It's not quantum physics.
Lex Fridman (27:07.000)
Put a little effort into it.
Noam Chomsky (27:09.000)
Think about, look for other sources.
Lex Fridman (27:13.000)
Think a little about history.
Noam Chomsky (27:15.000)
Look at the documentary record.
Noam Chomsky (27:18.000)
They're all pretty well fools together and you can get a reasonable understanding of what's happening.
Lex Fridman (27:25.000)
If you could sit down with Vladimir Putin and ask him a question or talk to him about an idea, what would you say?
Lex Fridman (27:35.000)
I would walk out of the room, just as with almost any other leader.
Noam Chomsky (27:40.000)
I know what he's going to say.
Lex Fridman (27:42.000)
I read the party line.
Noam Chomsky (27:43.000)
I read his pronouncements.
Lex Fridman (27:45.000)
Doesn't want to hear from me.
Lex Fridman (27:47.000)
Am I going to say, why did you carry out a crime that's comparable to the US invasion of Iraq and the Stalin Hitler invasion of Poland?
Lex Fridman (27:59.000)
Am I going to ask that question?
Noam Chomsky (28:02.000)
If I met with John F. Kennedy today, would I ask, why did you radically escalate the war in Vietnam, launch the US Air Force, start authorized napalm, drive launch programs to drive villagers who you know are supporting the National Liberation Front,
Lex Fridman (28:26.000)
drive them into concentration camps to separate them from the forces they're defending?
Lex Fridman (28:32.000)
Would I have asked him that?
Lex Fridman (28:34.000)
Of course not.
Lex Fridman (28:36.000)
Do you think the people who led us into the war in Vietnam, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, the war in Ukraine are evil?
Noam Chomsky (28:50.000)
I mean, it's very hard to be in a position of leadership of a violent, aggressive power without carrying out evil acts.
Lex Fridman (29:03.000)
Are the people evil?
Lex Fridman (29:06.000)
I mean, I'm not their moral advisors.
Noam Chomsky (29:11.000)
I don't know anything about them.
Lex Fridman (29:13.000)
I look at their actions, their statements, their policies, evaluate those.
Noam Chomsky (29:19.000)
Their families can evaluate their personalities.
Lex Fridman (29:24.000)
Will there be a war between US and China in the 21st century?
Noam Chomsky (29:29.000)
If there is, we're finished.
Noam Chomsky (29:33.000)
A war between the US and China would destroy the possibilities of organized life on Earth.
Noam Chomsky (29:43.000)
In fact, we can put it differently. Unless the US and China reach an accommodation and work together and cooperatively,
Lex Fridman (29:55.000)
it's very unlikely that organized human society will survive.
Noam Chomsky (30:00.000)
We are facing enormous problems, problems, destruction of the environment, endemics, threat of nuclear war.
Noam Chomsky (30:14.000)
None of these decline of democratic functioning of an arena for rational discourse.
Noam Chomsky (30:23.000)
None of these things have boundaries.
Noam Chomsky (30:26.000)
We either work together to overcome them, which we can do, or we'll all sink together.
Noam Chomsky (30:34.000)
That's the real question we should be asking.
Lex Fridman (30:37.000)
What the United States is doing is not helping.
Lex Fridman (30:42.000)
So the current US policy, which is perfectly open, nothing secret about it, is to what's called encircle China with sentinel states,
Noam Chomsky (30:57.000)
South Korea, Japan, Australia, which will be heavily armed, provided by Biden with precision weapons aimed at China,
Noam Chomsky (31:14.000)
backed by major naval operations, huge naval operations just took place in the Pacific.
Noam Chomsky (31:23.000)
Many nations participating, RIMPAC didn't get reported here, as far as I know, but an enormous operation threatening China.
Noam Chomsky (31:32.000)
All of this to encircle China, to continue with policies like that.
Noam Chomsky (31:41.000)
Somebody like Pelosi, just to probably make her look more, I don't know what her motives are, taking a highly provocative,
Noam Chomsky (31:56.000)
stupid act, opposed by the military, opposed by the White House.
Noam Chomsky (32:02.000)
Yes, acts like that, which of course called for the response of highly dangerous.
Noam Chomsky (32:09.000)
We don't have to do that. We don't have to increase the threat.
Lex Fridman (32:14.000)
I mean, right now, the last NATO summit, take a look at it.
Noam Chomsky (32:20.000)
For the first time, it invited to attend countries that are in the sentinel states surrounding China and circling China from the east.
Lex Fridman (32:33.000)
And it, in fact, extended the range of NATO to what's called the Indo Pacific region.
Lex Fridman (32:41.000)
So all of us by now, the North Atlantic includes the whole Indo Pacific region to try to ensure that we can overcome the so called China threat.
Lex Fridman (32:55.000)
Certainly, we might ask exactly what the China threat is. It's done sometimes.
Lex Fridman (33:03.000)
So former prime minister of Australia, Paul Keating, well known international diplomat, had an article a while ago in the Australian press.
Noam Chomsky (33:16.000)
That's right in the claws of the dragon asking, going through what the China threat is.
Noam Chomsky (33:22.000)
He ran through the various claims, finally concluded the China threat is that China exists.
Lex Fridman (33:30.000)
It exists. It does not follow U.S. orders. It's not like Europe.
Noam Chomsky (33:36.000)
Europe does what the United States tells it to do, even if it doesn't like it.
Lex Fridman (33:42.000)
China just ignores what the U.S. says. There's a formal way of describing this.
Noam Chomsky (33:49.000)
There are two versions of the international order.
Noam Chomsky (33:54.000)
One version is the U.N. based international order, which theoretically we subscribe to, but we don't accept.
Noam Chomsky (34:04.000)
The U.N. based international order is unacceptable to the United States because it bans U.S. foreign policy.
Noam Chomsky (34:14.000)
Literally, it explicitly bans the threat or use of force in international affairs, except under circumstances that almost never arise.
Noam Chomsky (34:27.000)
Well, that's U.S. foreign policy. Try to find a president who isn't engaged in the threat or use of force in international affairs.
Lex Fridman (34:36.000)
So obviously we can't accept the U.N. based international system, even though under the Constitution, that's the supreme law of the land.
Noam Chomsky (34:48.000)
It doesn't matter. So the United States has what's called a rule based international order.
Lex Fridman (34:56.000)
That's acceptable because it's the United States that sets the rules.
Lex Fridman (35:02.000)
So we want a rule based international order where the U.S. sets the rules.
Noam Chomsky (35:08.000)
In commentary in the United States, even in scholarship, almost 100 percent calling for a rule based international order.
Noam Chomsky (35:20.000)
Is that false? No, it's true. Is it propaganda? Of course it's propaganda because of what's not said and because of what's presupposed.
Noam Chomsky (35:31.000)
An answer to an earlier question. Well, China does not accept the rule based international order.
Lex Fridman (35:39.000)
So when the U.S. imposes demands, Europe may not like them, but they follow them.
Lex Fridman (35:47.000)
China ignores them. So take, for example, the U.S. sanctions on Iran.
Noam Chomsky (35:55.000)
The U.S. has to punish Iran because the United States pulled out of the, unilaterally pulled out of the Iran nuclear agreements.
Lex Fridman (36:08.000)
So in order to punish Iran for wrecking the agreements in violation of Security Council orders, we impose very harsh sanctions.
Noam Chomsky (36:19.000)
Europe strongly opposes the sanctions, condemn them harshly, but it adheres to them because you don't disobey U.S. orders.
Noam Chomsky (36:35.000)
That's too dangerous. China ignores them. They're not keeping to the rule based international order.
Noam Chomsky (36:43.000)
Well, that's unacceptable. In fact, it's said pretty openly. You can hear the Secretary of State and others saying China is challenging our global hegemony.
Noam Chomsky (36:58.000)
Yes, they are. They don't accept U.S. global hegemony, especially in the waters off China.
Noam Chomsky (37:05.000)
They do a lot of rotten things, China. I mean, internally, there's all kind of repression, violence and so on.
Lex Fridman (37:16.000)
But first of all, that's not a threat to us. And second, the U.S. doesn't care about it because it easily accepts and supports comparable crimes and atrocities internal to allies.
Noam Chomsky (37:29.000)
So, yes, we should protest it, but without hypocrisy. We have no standing to protest it. We support comparable things in all sorts of other places.
Noam Chomsky (37:41.000)
Just take a look at the U.S. foreign aid. The leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid is Israel, which is engaged in constant terror, violence and repression, constant, almost daily.
Noam Chomsky (37:57.000)
Second leading recipient is Egypt, one of the worst dictatorships in Egypt's history.
Lex Fridman (38:05.000)
About 60,000 people in jail, political prisoners tortured and so on. Do we care?
Noam Chomsky (38:13.000)
Second leading recipient. I mean, what are we talking about? That's why most of the world just laughs at us.
Noam Chomsky (38:21.000)
There's a lot of failure to understand here about why the global South doesn't join us in our proxy war against Russia, fighting Russia until it's severely weakened.
Lex Fridman (38:38.000)
They don't join us. Here, the question is, what's wrong with them?
Noam Chomsky (38:43.000)
They look into their minds to figure out what's wrong. They have a different attitude. They say, yes, we oppose the invasion of Ukraine, terrible crime.
Lex Fridman (38:56.000)
But what are you talking about? This is what you do to us all the time. You don't care about crimes like this. That's most of the global South.
Noam Chomsky (39:06.000)
We can't comprehend that because we're so insulated that we are just obviously right and everyone who doesn't go along must be wrong.
Lex Fridman (39:17.000)
Do you think the United States as a global leader, as an empire, may collapse in this century? Why and how will it happen and how can we avoid it?
Noam Chomsky (39:29.000)
The United States can certainly harm itself severely. That's what we're doing right now. Right now, the greatest threat to the United States is internal countries tearing itself apart.
Noam Chomsky (39:49.000)
I really don't have to run through it with you. Take a look at something as elementary as mortality. The United States is the only country outside of war, life expectancy is declining, mortality is increasing.
Noam Chomsky (40:12.000)
It doesn't happen anywhere. You take a look at health outcomes generally. They're among the worst among the developed societies and health spending is about twice as high as the developed societies.
Noam Chomsky (40:28.000)
You look at the charts, all of this starts around the late 1970s, early 80s. If you go back to that point, the United States was pretty much a normal developed country in terms of mortality, incarceration, health expenses, other measures.
Noam Chomsky (40:50.000)
Since then, the United States has fallen off the chart. It's gone way off the chart. Well, that's the neoliberal assault of the last 40 years. It's had a major effect on the United States.
Noam Chomsky (41:05.000)
It's left a lot of anger, resentment, violence. Meanwhile, the Republican Party has simply drifted off the spectrum. It's not a normal political party in any usual sense, not what it used to be.
Noam Chomsky (41:21.000)
Its main policy is block anything in order to regain power. That's its policy, stated almost openly by McConnell, followed religiously by the entire Congress.
Noam Chomsky (41:39.000)
That's not the acts of a political party. Of course, democracy has declined. Violence has increased. The judgements, the decisions of the Supreme Court, the court's the most reactionary court in memory.
Noam Chomsky (42:00.000)
To go back to the 19th century, decision after decision is an effort to create a country of white supremacist Christian nationalists. I mean, scarcely hidden, if you read the opinions of Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and others.
Lex Fridman (42:28.000)
So yes, we can destroy ourselves within. And in fact, the ways we're doing it are almost astonishing. So it's well known, for example. Everybody knows that U.S. infrastructure, bridges, subways, and so on, is in terrible shape, needs a lot of repair.
Noam Chomsky (42:49.000)
The American Association of Engineers gives it a failing mark every year. Finally, Congress did pass a limited infrastructure bill, say rebuild bridges and so on.
Noam Chomsky (43:03.000)
It has to be called a China Competition Act. We can't rebuild their bridges because they're falling apart. We have to rebuild their bridges to beat China. It's pathological.
Lex Fridman (43:19.000)
And that's what's happening inside the country. Take Thomas's decision in the recent case in which he invalidated a New York law.
Noam Chomsky (43:34.000)
This is last October, a couple of weeks ago, and validated a New York law going back to 1913 that required people to have some justification if they wanted to carry concealed weapons in public.
Noam Chomsky (43:51.000)
He went through that with a very interesting decision. He said the United States, he said, is such a decaying, collapsing, hateful society that people just have to have guns.
Noam Chomsky (44:08.000)
I mean, how can you expect somebody to go to the grocery store without a gun in a country as disgusting and hideous as this one? It's essentially what he said. Those weren't his words, but they were the import.
Lex Fridman (44:24.000)
What gives you hope about the United States, about the future of human civilization?
Noam Chomsky (44:33.000)
Human civilization will not survive unless the United States takes a leading position in dealing with and overcoming the very severe crises that we face.
Noam Chomsky (44:50.000)
The United States is the most powerful country, not only in the world, but in human history. There's nothing to compare with it.
Lex Fridman (44:58.000)
What the United States does has an overwhelming impact on what happens in the world.
Noam Chomsky (45:06.000)
When the United States alone pulls out of the Paris agreements on dealing with climate change and insists on maximizing the use of fossil fuels and dismantling the regulatory apparatus that provides some mitigation.
Noam Chomsky (45:29.000)
When the United States does that, as it did under Trump, it's a blow to the future of civilization.
Noam Chomsky (45:37.000)
When Republican states today, right now, say they're going to punish corporations that seek to take climate change into account and their investments.
Noam Chomsky (45:53.000)
The U.S. is telling the world, we want to destroy all of us. Again, not their words, but their import. That's what they mean.
Lex Fridman (46:04.000)
So as long as we have a political organization dedicated to gaining power at any cost, maximizing profit, no matter what the consequences, no future for human civilization.
Noam Chomsky (46:22.000)
Noam, thank you for talking today. Thank you for talking once again. And thank you for fighting for the future of human civilization. Again, thank you.
Lex Fridman (46:35.000)
Thank you.
Noam Chomsky (46:37.000)
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Noam Chomsky. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description.
Lex Fridman (46:44.000)
And now, let me leave you with some words from Voltaire. It is forbidden to kill. Therefore, all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers, and to the sound of trumpets.
Noam Chomsky (46:59.000)
Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
🔗 相关节目