主题：【讨论】米国的“愤青” -- 颜子

After stint in Navy became anti-war hippie, ran off to the West Coast ... lived in communes, hippie school buses... started writing about holy men, countercultural figures, rock stars and the American scene in 1971 ... lived in Boulder Colorado until mid 1980s ... 14 years in all ... became a Marxist and a half-assed Buddhist ... Traveled to Central America to write about third World issues...

Moved to the Coeur d'Alene Indian reservation in Idaho, built a cabin, lived without electricity, farmed with horses for seven years ... tended reservation bar (The Bald Eagle Bar), wrote for regional newspapers... generally festered on life in America ... Moved to Moscow, Idaho, worked on third rate newspaper there ... Then moved to Eugene Oregon, worked for an international magazine corporation pushing insecticides and pesticides to farmers worldwide.

Then back to hometown of Winchester VA to settle some scores with the bigoted, murderous redneck town I grew up in. I love'em but they need a good ass kicking.

Died in 2000 when George Bush got elected ... died along with 275 million other Americans ... Plan to rise again from the dead when he is tossed out ...maybe reincarnate as a Commie terrorist on Wall Street ... maybe as a sex worker in Amsterdam ... can't decide ... both have their advantages.

Joe Bageant

I can truly say that at one time or the other both sides have tried to shut me down. I have experienced the same from "free thinking" libertarians, who are free thinking only inside their own box.

The Chinese work for less, you see, and free trade economists say lowering costs makes us better off.

What US corporations and the free trade economists overlook is that giving Americans' jobs to foreigners raises foreign incomes and lowers American incomes. When credit cards and home equity lines are maxed out, there will be nothing to support the US consumer market. The American corporations who moved their capital and technology to China will have to find new customers.

Maybe the Chinese government will let the relocated US firms sell to Chinese customers, or maybe the Chinese government will let the US firms go bankrupt. The latter favors China's strategic interest. Chinese businessmen will purchase the bankrupt firms, and Chinese businesses will sell to Chinese customers.

This means the end of US shipbuilding capability. Component suppliers to American shipbuilding are already skeletal thin, with most components only having sole suppliers. For example, Manufacturing & Technology News (July 8) reports that 80% of the components for the Virginia Class submarine come from sole sources.

Clearly, it is a mistake for the US government and economists to think of the imbalance as if it were produced by Chinese companies underselling goods produced by US companies in America. The imbalance is the result of US companies producing their goods in China and selling them in America.

Many believe the solution is to force China to revalue its currency, thereby driving up the prices of 70 per cent of the goods on Wal-Mart shelves.

Mysteriously, members of the US government believe that it would help US consumers, who are as dependent on imported manufactured goods as they are on imported energy, to be charged higher prices.

The only answer I could give the Chinese is that Americans would have been the perfect population for Mao and the Gang of Four, because Americans believe anything their government tells them.

This unseemly behavior belittles Europe and it is a huge loss of face in the East. I would suggest they shut up and start reading Chinese history and Japanese history. Or read my news service. The fact that the American empire does this too is very pathetic. We should fix our own affairs and shut up or we can act like international babies and be irresponsible and stupid. It is obvious which choice is the better.

Also we must take note of a funny horns of dilemma moment here: Europe is frightened that the Airbus orders will decline due to the euro being strong but this week, China artfully signed a huge Airbus contract. So China can always tear this up if the Europeans make too much trouble for the Dragon in its little dark cave. The Europeans know this and hope that China ignores their public pleas. I suspect they have this backroom deal going. One that is very secret. What do these bankers and negotiators say in private? We can only guess. I suspect they apologize to the Chinese and say, 'We must do this for political reasons.'

But Chinese patience will end. Everyone can see this. They can't be the world's financial and industrial engine while also being the villain for all the woes of the dying empires to the West.

Chomsky is credited with the creation of the theory of generative grammar, considered to be one of the most significant contributions to the field of linguistics made in the 20th century. He also helped spark the cognitive revolution in psychology through his review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior, in which he challenged the behaviorist approach to the study of behavior and language dominant in the 1950s. His naturalistic approach to the study of language has also affected the philosophy of language and mind. He is also credited with the establishment of the Chomsky hierarchy, a classification of formal languages in terms of their generative power.

According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar during the 1980–1992 time period, and was the eighth-most cited scholar in any time period.[2][3][4]

Beginning with his critique of the Vietnam War in the 1960s, Chomsky has become more widely known—especially internationally—for his media criticism and politics. He is generally considered to be a key intellectual figure within the left wing of United States politics. Chomsky is widely known for his political activism, and for his criticism of the foreign policy of the United States and other governments.

Noam Chomsky: I wouldn't expect the trade deals with China to transfer wealth from the US to China. Rather, in both countries it will contribute to transfering wealth to privileged sectors and away from the general populations -- though as always, they might enjoy some benefits, as an incidental by-product. The largest effect will probably within China. Opening China's borders to US imports and allowing a good part of its economy to be taken over by US financial institutions, and other concomitants of these agreements, are likely to be highly beneficial to elements of Chinese society that take part in these arrangements, possibly quite harmful to most of the population -- who have no voice. They are not represented by their government, surely not ours.

McLeod: Turning to China, you mentioned that China is becoming a major competitor to US power in Asia, and even that the US is “frightened by China”. How does China pose a threat to US interests in Asia?

Chomsky: China does not pose a military threat. In fact, of all the major powers, China has probably been the most restrained in building up its military forces. China poses a very serious threat because it cannot be intimidated [by the US].

Take for example Iran and Iraq. The US wants the world to boycott Iran in pursuit of US policies. Europe sort of shakes its fist, but Europe pretty much backs off. So when the US warns countries not to invest in Iran, European investors – banks and so on – tend to pull out, not entirely, they find some ways to get around it, but they do pretty much pull out.

But China on the other hand doesn’t pay any attention. They just go ahead and do what they want to do – they have been there for 3000 years…The idea that there is a potentially powerful state that cannot easily be intimidated is very threatening to people want to rule the rule the world.

[The US] is a little bit like the mafia. The Godfather does not tolerate disobedience, even in a small storekeeper, let alone somebody that matters, so that’s a threat.

However, the US relationship with China is also very ambivalent. On one hand, from the point of view of state power, China is threatening because it follows its own course.

On the other hand, powerful business interests in the US are of course highly influential in determining state policy. These businesses have a real stake in China – it is a wonderful platform for cheap exports and it’s a potential market. They want relations with China to be strong, but there is an internal conflict in the US.

Remember that China has enormous financial reserves that surpass Japan – it is the leading holder of foreign reserves – it is keeping the US economy afloat. So it’s a pretty tricky, complex relationship.

McLeod: Does Asia have much to worry about from China’s rising power and influence?

Chomsky: Anytime a big power is developing, everybody has to worry including the Chinese people.

Concentrations of power are dangerous. There is plenty of history about that.

How much does it have to worry? Well, that depends on how things progress. So closer relations between India and China, which are now developing, could be beneficial to Asia. It’s much better than having them muscle their neighbours.