Hegemony or survival

Noam Chomsky: Hegemony or Survival

What I am reading seems to echo some ideas that have already taken hold in the general public's minds. To what extent has Chomsky's book already contributed?

The Penguin publication describes Chomsky's achievements - he is regarded as having (helped to) revolutionise modern linguists, and is also the author of several best-selling political books. He is also noted to be working as a professor of Linguistics and Philosophy at MIT. Well, I've known about his linguistic contributions since my days as an undergraduate - I'm just wondering what makes him an authority in politics. Surely not the fact that the books are best-sellers ...?

I'm trying to read quickly, since the main ideas aren't too heady. Two ideas have stuck with me so far - firstly the description of war on Iraq as a preventive war (as opposed to a preemptive war), and the biased rationalisation process the defenders of that strategy use to support it. Chomsky's contention is that "preventive war falls within the category of war crimes".

Secondly the fact that the US administration is completely at ease with the use of international force in international disagreements at the expense of international law. From the descriptions in the book, the current US administration's view of international affairs is that the US is above any international law, and not subject to the same procedures of law it imposes on others. And the motive, so far, appears to be the protection of the USA as the world's superpower. Any threat to its status and there is trouble.

PS: A reminder that a nation and its people should not be judged by the deeds and thoughts of their country's administration. The psyche of the "average American" is much bandied about, often in an anecdotal way - in the latter form it often looks like a strategy to prop up the speaker's self-esteem ...

Does The Average American qualify as a stereotype yet? Just wondering. The stereotype's characteristics appear to be: (a) uninformed about international affairs and goings-on in other parts of the world, (b) a sophisticated consumer of artificially diverse and superficial things, (c) fat, (d) stupid in the myopic sense of the word (similar to (a)), (e) arrogant and over-confident (esp. about American values).

Well, apart from (b) and (e), the rest could describe an average anybody from just about any country, I guess. Although "fat" is disputable as well. But if that is even a vaguely accurate reflection of the stereotype, I can see why the American retort might be: "You are just jealous of our way of life!" Hmmm, now before we get too deep into something I know too little about - adieu!