Chomsky:
Economic
Crisis Will
Not End US
Hegemony
By Afshin
Rattansi,
14/10/08
"Press TV"
-- Tehran --
The
following is
Press TV's
exclusive
full-length
interview
with
American
linguist,
philosopher,
political
activist,
author and
MIT
professorNoam
Chomsky:
Press TV: Noam
Chomsky,
obviously
the markets
are all
down; in
your
propaganda
model, you
lay great
store by the
commercial
interests in
the media, I
guess the
media has
been saying
that there
was not a
grave
economic
problem in
the system,
but if the
markets are
collapsing,
presumably
down to
advertising,
will we
expect a
better
corporate
media?
Chomsky: I
don't see
any reason
to expect
that the
structure of
the media,
their
institutional
structure
remains
unchanged.
In fact,
apart from
investment
banks, the
general
institutional
structure of
the state
capitalist
system
remains the
same. There
may be some
modifications,
I mean
obviously,
the media
cannot
overlook the
financial
crises; it
is indeed
very
serious. No
one doubts
that.
So yes, they
recognize
it, but in
fact it was
predictable
and
predicted.
Also the
reasons for
it were
understood
long ago and
they have
barely been
given
expression
in the
media, or
for that
matter by
most
economists,
although
some knew
and wrote a
about it.
Press TV:
But
independent
media --
often
independent
media that
certainly
promoted
your work --
predicted
all of this,
and
predicted a
market
collapse. Do
you think
investors
are
beginning to
realize
though, that
cooperate
media is not
trustworthy?
Also,
unemployment
rates
certainly
seem to be
going up in
the United
States and
look set to
be going up.
Can we
expect a
shift in
attitudes in
the United
States?
Chomsky:
Well,
popular
attitudes in
the United
States are
highly
negative
toward the
media, and
in fact
toward all
institutions,
so this
doesn't get
reported,
but editors
know the
polls pretty
well.
About 80
percent of
the
population
says that
the country
is run by a
'few big
interests
looking out
for
themselves'
meaning
corporations
and not for
the people.
About 95
percent of
the
population
objects to
the fact
that the
government
does not pay
any
attention to
public
opinion.
I don't
remember the
exact
numbers on
the media,
but the
negative
attitudes
are very
high. In
fact, they
are very
high for
just about
every
institution.
We read
about George
Bush's
historically
low
popularity
rating, in
fact very
low, but the
fact is
congress is
even more
unpopular.
Press TV:
We've had
politicians
in Europe
and Russia
talking
about the
end of US
hegemony.
Even if the
US cannot
pay its
bills it
still has
the largest
military on
earth. You
have written
about the
power of
that
military.
Doesn't that
military in
itself
confer
power?
Chomsky:
Oh
sure, and I
don't agree
with the
conclusions
about loss
of US
hegemony. I
mean, first
of all this
financial
crisis is
very likely
going to hit
Europe even
harder than
the United
States.
Several
European
countries
have already
declared
official
recession,
which the US
has not.
Banks are
collapsing
rapidly in
Europe. The
immediate
problem, not
the deep
problem, the
immediate
one is toxic
assets and
mortgage-based
securities.
We do not
have the
details,
it's all not
very
transparent,
but the
general
estimate is
that about
half of them
are held in
European
banks. One
country,
Iceland, is
practically
on the verge
of declaring
bankruptcy
because of
its enormous
exposure to
the tides of
financial
globalization.
Press TV:
What about
supranational
institutions,
the Security
Council and
the
international
courts? It
seems that
we see a
waning of
some US
power…
Beijing and
Moscow
vetoing
decisions of
the Security
Council
certainly on
Iran, and
the decision
by the
General
Assembly to
refer the
recognition
of Kosovo.
Chomsky:
We
saw that,
but that is
normal.
Since you
brought up
the media,
it's
interesting
to see the
reporting of
it.
The vote,
which I
think, was
77 to 6 or
something
like that
was reported
that there
was a
division in
the vote and
that it was
polarized,
but what was
not reported
was that
joining the
United
States, were
Albania the
Marshal
Islands, and
I think
probably
Israel,
practically
nobody.
But that is
normal, for
example on
the embargo
against
Cuba, the
regular
votes in the
UN year
after year,
are on order
180 to 4 or
something
like that,
with the US
supported
only by
Israel and a
few Pacific
Islands.
That doesn't
usually get
reported.
And that's
actually
nothing new.
As far as
the Security
Council is
concerned,
what is not
too
well-known
and you do
not get the
reports, is
that since
the United
Nations
pretty much
fell out of
control by
the 1960s as
a result of
decolonization
and the
recovery of
other
industrial
countries;
since the
mid 60s, the
United
States is
far in the
lead in
vetoing
Security
Council
resolutions.
Britain is
second, and
no one else
is even
close, so we
do not see
anything new
in terms of
US isolation
in
international
institutions.
The US is
also the
only country
right now
that has
rejected an
official
world court
decision. It
had been
joined
earlier by
Albania and
Libya, but
they have
since
accepted
them. So
this
isolation is
consistent.
As for US
hegemony, it
is based on
objective
factors.
One is what
you
mentioned,
the military
view, the US
military is
approximately
at the scale
of the rest
of the world
combined,
and far
ahead
technologically.
But it's
also a very
rich country
with plenty
of resources
and it is
homogenous
unlike
Europe.
Europe is
roughly on
the same
scale
economically
but it is
not
homogenous.
You could
see that in
the
reactions to
the
financial
crises, in
the United
States
they're
uniform
taken by the
federal
government
and in
Europe they
are national
and not
consistent.
For about 35
years it has
become
clear. I've
written
about it and
so have
others, that
the world is
becoming
more
diverse. It
is becoming
what has
been called
tri-polar,
with three
major
economic
centers and
only one
military
center.
The economic
centers are
North
America
based in the
US, Western
Europe based
mainly in
Germany and
France and
the
northeast
Asia based
in Japan,
increasingly
China and
South Korea
is a major
industrial
power …
these three
centers
differ
substantially
in their
characteristics.
And to some
extent, in
my opinion,
the Asian
center is
increasing
in its role
in world
affairs and
we can see
it in this
crisis.