Neil Hopcroft

A digital misfit

Book review: Failed states by Noam Chomsky

Failed states” is another fairly typical Chomsky book. I find his writing style quite an easy read, he has a kind of clarity that you rarely get with political writing.

For this book he compares the actions of the United States government with their descriptions of countries they have attacked, and specifically the justifications for attacking them. His premise is very much that there are the words they say and the actions they perform, and that watching the actions would give you a very different impression to listening to the words.

There is a very clear political message in his books, people either love or hate his work because of the politics. Which is a shame because he presents a lot of interesting information which ought to be known by people who disagree with his political stance. (Personally I largely agree with what he has to say, but I do think he reads a *little* too much into things sometimes. I would like to find someone as easy to read and well informed on the other side of the debate, so that I could understand a bit more of their point of view)

In many ways this is just another Chomsky book – if you’ve already read him you probably don’t need to read this one, its more of the same. If you haven’t read his work then this is probably not a bad place to start.

Who should read this book: anyone who feels they are under-informed about the international political situation, especially the relationship between the US and the middle east.


4 comments

  1. His premise is very much that there are the words they say and the actions they perform, and that watching the actions would give you a very different impression to listening to the words.

    There is a very clear political message in his books, people either love or hate his work because of the politics. Which is a shame because he presents a lot of interesting information which ought to be known by people who disagree with his political stance.

    Interesting stuff; so what are his politics then?

    • He doesn’t think the US government is acting in the best interests of the US people. A lot of (the ‘substantial’) people dislike his work because they find it puts information about quite how corruptly they are running the country into the hands and heads of more people.

      His works are quite US centric, he doesn’t seem to talk much about other countries except in the context of their foreign policy exchanges with America.

      Some of his views are a little surprising (to me at least) because they’re more pragmatic than I had expected (…dammit, would like to give an example but can’t think of one…).

      You can get a feel for his views by looking at the cover of Failed States: an outline of the boundary of the US with the words “Failed states” stencilled in the centre.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.