A simplified explanation: The way I've understood it from other sources of information is that Anarcho-Syndicalism is a way of achieving an Anarchist society by working through unions to eventually take over the workplace. The tactics and strategies might vary, but the end goal is worker owned means of production and workplace democracy with a flat hierarchy.

the most destructive tenet of all societies is the notion that the grounds of any type of social organization is self justified and should not be questioned

Yo why tf did I get a Trump ad on this

You think he ever gets tired of this question

"Well I didn't vote for you!"

This was a great segment. But, I really have to applaud Noam for keeping the train on the tracks with this interviewer. Responses of, "So, what you're saying is _____" followed by sometime he didn't say at all. Noam picked up the slack. Multiple part questions asked that has little to no relation to reach other that would require his of face time to address one by one as their own categories. Noam find the common denominator between them all and answered with the utmost simplicity. And, last but not least, something that is seemingly inherent in modern journalism, cornering. Asking questions that aim to discredit instead of verify.

Thank you for mentioning Yugoslavia's self-menagment! 😊

Could Capitalism become a form of Anarcho-Syndicalism if company's were turned into Cooperatives and company income shared evenly? Or is the Capitalist system just going to turn those involved with the most profitable Cooperatives into the new ruling class? Would love to hear people ideas about this!

2:14 OMG thank you!

Syndicalist here! I think workers should elect their directors and CEOs and distribute profits among themselves. Anarchism, I am quite skeptical about rejecting total hierachy. I think there should be a transition instead of direct overthrow as it may encourage chaos.

So the broadest way to describe anarcho syndicalism is no hierarchies?

Watch it, Share it!👍

Red world anyone?

All the syndicalists in the chat I have a question for you, instead of organizing the economy decentrally under labor unions electing representives to the trade union congress, could you organize the economy under worker cooperatives instead? And if so how would that work? Sorry if my comment is confusing or long.

We need a revolution whether it be through blood or through diplomacy we shall rise up against the enemy we need syndicalism we must rise up over our corporate overlords and decide our own fate

I still don't know what anrcho- syndicaliam is

This is what they don't want you to know about.

Question: is it possible that some hierarchies are legitimate? For example, competency hierarchies? Or do anarchosyns only care about the financial hierarchies? Serious question, I want to learn.

@TheAwillz I guess it's very fragile. If you have a direct democratic form of collective decision making the people can decide to break up that co-op

This is not an answer. Chomsky has had 50 years to prepare an articulate explanation of anarcho-syndicalism and answer some basic questions that any first year undergrad in political theory would think to ask: How is power distributed and what body makes the decisions, and according to what processes? What is the scale of decision making... local, regional, national, global? How much autonomy is granted to local communities, and when are their decisions overridden by the will of larger political bodies? How do you facilitate cooperation and avoid conflict/violence between autonomous communities that disagree profoundly about fundamental issues of great importance to them?

Industry without hierarchy, make this make sense. And I believe in anarchy

PLS CHOMSKY STOP GIVING THAT DEFINITION OF ANARCHISM, MINARCHISTS ARE ENTERING THE MOVEMENT THINKING THEY'RE ANARCHISTS, AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Help, help! I'm being repressed!

Is Chomsky against hierarchy as such or just against hierarchies which are not self-justifying?

Anarchy starts at home! Is your father a dictator?

Why does he always sound like he's just telling you about his morning.

DO NOT listen to Noam Chomsky if you have ADHD Can't pay attention to save my own life jesus christ

I am a staunch lefty, and I ask this because I'm interested in this ideology, what incentives would there be for people to innovate or invent new products if they wouldn't be able to own their business and wouldn't become rich for successfully seeing the idea through to the point of profit?

Intersting how chomsky is averse to coercion here yet supports coercion in people taking covid vaccines

SSDD

Rehashed marxism.

Another important video from chomsky besides his video on corporate capitalism and on crony corporate capitalism which is the current variation/version of capitalism widely-known and commonly-referred to neo-liberal/neo-libertarian/neo-conservative white-market corporate capitalism or just neo-liberalism/neo-libertarianism/neo-conservatism in academic circles/intelligentsia circles since capitalism itself won't be replaced for the next 150/200 year's-and-decades decades-and-centuries centuries-and-millennias to 800 year's-and-decades decades-and-centuries centuries-and-millennias since we live-and-breathe in secular liberal/libertarian representative democratic capitalist republic's so democratic dialogue either as public passive discussion or as public passionate debate has to happen over year's-and-decades decades-and-centuries centuries-and-millennias

I think Blockchain is a technological solution that could make this form of governance a reality.

.

*but vote blue no matter who, especially biden.* the end must have been clipped.

how can I achieve financial freedom without contributing the existent capitalist system?

The biggest problem with capitalism today is not capitalism at all, but government influence in the market. Corporations, as they exist today, can not exist without government authority. They are registered and formed by government authority. In a free market, there is no way to separate the owner of the business and the liability thereof. If a business causes harm to the environment or to others, the owner is liable for damages. Thanks to government intervention in the market, we now have the concept of limited liability, a government fiat that says "you can't directly sue person X because he paid us to be separate from the business he owns." In a true free market, the owner is inseparable from his business and liability. If the business causes harm, he is personally liable for damages and THAT is why he will not want to cause harm. The EPA doesn't prevent pollution. They literally license it. If you know your factory is going to create X amount of pollution, you buy a license for that amount from the EPA and then you just pollute. If damage is caused by that pollution or people get sick from it, they can't sue you for damages because the GOVERNMENT won't let them. You bought their protection. Without the EPA and without government constructed limited liability, all damages can be held against the business operator, which removes the profit incentive. Without a profit incentive, a business takes no action ... which means it creates no pollution. All freedom is rooted in economic freedom. If you are a free person, you should be able to buy and sell any product or service at any price you can voluntarily agree to with another willing economic participant. Free people should not be dictated to regarding the terms of their transactions and relationships.

Anyone who has taken an economics class understands why syndicalism is a horribly inefficient system that would create huge amounts of poverty. Fun fact, it's not illegal to run a syndicalist business, it's not done because nobody is going to start a business when every worker they add means their own less and less of their own business. Syndicalism also rejects specialization, so good luck getting an appointment with a doctor when he has spend part of his shift being the janitor, the cook, the taxi driver, etc. That is assuming anyone even becomes a doctor, since there would no longer be any financial incentive to go through years of grueling training to become a Doctor.

mob rule??

anarcho nationalist syndicalism riiise

Read Economics my guy

We have one example we know of where anarcho-communism did indeed fail in absolute terms. That would be the Jonestown massacre in 1978. It had no state, no hierarchies, no money, no wage labor, no private property, had community meetings, community shared property.

Philosophy major here. Read Chomsky in Philo 101 and also some of his linguistics work. I simply cannot fathom how someone of intelligence like Chomsky, who is able to connect the dots on so many issues, can suggest that the concept of anarchy and society, can co-exist. What is even more bizarre, is the knowledge that he grew up in a religious environment, a very top down, hierarchical structure of belief in law, albeit that of God. I can understand how his current views might be a reaction to that but it boggles the mind to think that society can exist without some organizing features that at some point, require managers to organize efforts to solve problems that confront the community. Is there any evidence that Chomsky once worked as a member of, or managed a team, dedicated to solving a concrete problem? Glad I got this off my chest.

syndicalism is just edgy communism

Not to be taken seriously. He's been a gate keeper for years.

Deus Fuckin Vult

Our society's hierarchies are naturally formed. People are not equal. People differ in IQ, interests etc. Only the elite in terms of IQ and trait conscientiousness can occupy the highest positions in our society, which require these traits.