The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: Chaplin and son in "A King in New York"

Re: Chaplin and son in "A King in New York"
Posted by Marcello (Guest) - Friday, September 25 2015, 19:22:12 (UTC)
from 71.107.63.61 - pool-71-107-63-61.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net Network - Windows NT - Safari
Website: http://www.us.mg1.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.g)x=1&.rand
Website title: Document Has Moved

Chaplin, who was a leftist, would point out the authoritarian clownish dogmatism of his own group; well, not really his "group", since he was an individual first and foremost, just as Woody Allen is, and continues to be. If you compare the anarchist kid played by Chaplin's son, Michael, to Charlie's satirical depiction of Hitler in the 1940s film, "The Great Dictator", you can see quite a bit of similarities. Anarchists, and I believe that Chaplin was an anarchist, unlike Marxists who focus only on Class Struggle. Here's Chomsky's definition of anarchism:

Well, anarchism is, in my view, basically a kind of tendency in human thought which shows up in different forms in different circumstances, and has some leading characteristics. Primarily it is a tendency that is suspicious and skeptical of domination, authority, and hierarchy. It seeks structures of hierarchy and domination in human life over the whole range, extending from, say, patriarchal families to, say, imperial systems, and it asks whether those systems are justified. It assumes that the burden of proof for anyone in a position of power and authority lies on them. Their authority is not self-justifying. They have to give a reason for it, a justification. And if they can’t justify that authority and power and control, which is the usual case, then the authority ought to be dismantled and replaced by something more free and just. And, as I understand it, anarchy is just that tendency. It takes different forms at different times.

Anarcho-syndicalism is a particular variety of anarchism which was concerned primarily, though not solely, but primarily with control over work, over the work place, over production. It took for granted that working people ought to control their own work, its conditions, [that] they ought to control the enterprises in which they work, along with communities, so they should be associated with one another in free associations, and … democracy of that kind should be the foundational elements of a more general free society. And then, you know, ideas are worked out about how exactly that should manifest itself, but I think that is the core of anarcho-syndicalist thinking. I mean it’s not at all the general image that you described — people running around the streets, you know, breaking store windows — but [anarcho-syndicalism] is a conception of a very organized society, but organized from below by direct participation at every level, with as little control and domination as is feasible, maybe none.

Wilson: With the apparent ongoing demise of the capitalist state, many people are looking at other ways to be successful, to run their lives, and I’m wondering what you would say anarchy and syndicalism have to offer, things that others ideas — say, for example, state-run socialism — have failed to offer? Why should we choose anarchy, as opposed to, say, libertarianism?

Chomsky: Well what’s called libertarian in the United States, which is a special U. S. phenomenon, it doesn’t really exist anywhere else — a little bit in England — permits a very high level of authority and domination but in the hands of private power: so private power should be unleashed to do whatever it likes. The assumption is that by some kind of magic, concentrated private power will lead to a more free and just society. Actually that has been believed in the past. Adam Smith for example, one of his main arguments for markets was the claim that under conditions of perfect liberty, markets would lead to perfect equality. Well, we don’t have to talk about that! That kind of —

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/noam-chomsky-kind-anarchism-i-believe-and-whats-wrong-libertarians


Chaplin seems to fall into the camp of European Libertarian-Socialists, or Anarchists. Chomsky points out that the word "anarchy" or "anarchism" got a bad rap due to the actions taken by 19th century anarchists -- like the Jewish Narodniks who assassinated Tsar Alexander II; or Alexander Berkman, comrade to anarchist, Emma Goldman, who's failed attempted assassination of "Henry Clay Frick in response to Frick's role in the massacre of workers during the Homestead Strike" led to his arrest and imprisonment. And when anarchist Leon Czolgosz shot to kill President McKinley, anarchists were deemed as today's "terrorists". And then there was the anarcho Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), also known as "the Wobblies", which were seen as a major threat to the business classes, especially since they welcomed races and genders to join their union, unlike other unions which were mostly all white. Then of course there was the Sacco and Vanzetti trial which ended with the two Italian anarchists given the electric chair, while many south Europeans (Italian Catholics) were forcibly deported by the by the WASP Nativists in power. From then on the "bomb throwing anarchists" became the norm in political discourse regarding these groups as refugee terrorists, and as a consequence, a Frenchman decided to call anarchists: Libertarian Socialists. And of course, the Republicans who wanted to smoke dope, own large caches of guns and watch porn appropriated "Libertarian-ism" or anarcho-Capitalism (an oxymoron) -- as opposed to Libertarian Socialism, a political European philosophy to which individuals such as Franz Kafka belonged, as did the writer of "The Treasures of Sierra Madre", the elusive B. Traven, among many others.



---------------------


The full topic:



Connection: close
X-varnish: 1494560187
X-forwarded-for: 71.107.63.61
X-onecom-forwarded-proto: http
X-onecom-forwarded-ip: 71.107.63.61
Cookie: *hidded*
Accept-language: en-US,en;q=0.8
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?Re_Chaplin_and_son_in_A_King_in_New_York-3Mcg.Phpw.REPLY
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/45.0.2454.99 Safari/537.36
Upgrade-insecure-requests: 1
Origin: http://www.insideassyria.com
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,image/webp,*/*;q=0.8
Cache-control: max-age=0
Content-length: 6187
Host: www.insideassyria.com



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9