{"title":"论国家的实用性:为什么我必须有一个国家?","authors":"Ž. Bošković","doi":"10.5771/9783748923770-77","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are many well-articulated reasons to favor a stateless society. Chomsky de‐ parts from many anarchists in believing that such a society is more likely to be achieved through a long, drawn out process that slowly erodes the machinery of the state rather than a single revolutionary moment. As a result, as Chomsky has empha‐ sized in many places,1 in the current political situation a stateless society can only be considered a long term goal. In the short run, the goal should actually be to strength‐ en the state in certain respects, namely, in the contexts where it helps achieve a freer and more just society—clear examples of this are providing a check on the power of large corporations and what has become a derogatory term on the right, the “welfare state”—which includes such horrible things as recognizing the right of every child, including those born to poor parents, to have food and get health care.2 In a way, then, the state can be pragmatically used in the process of moving toward a more equitable stateless society. There is a conflict here between theory and what is prac‐ tical, which is reflected in the long run vs short run opposition—the latter boils down to practical reasons. The conflict is only apparent however. Chomsky’s politi‐ cal work is not an academic research exercise, in its heart is political (and economic, since the two are really inseparable) activism. There is pragmatism that comes with activism. This activism-motivated pragmatism is the reason why for Chomsky there is no contradiction, as there would be in a pure academic research exercise, between holding anarchist ideals, including stateless society, and using the state to achieve re‐ forms that will lead to a more just society that is closer to anarchist ideals. There is also a reflection of Chomsky as a scientist here—if you are a scientist, say a physi‐ cist, you will use whatever methods you can to enlighten the issues you are investi‐ gating.3 On a par with that, regarding his political work, Chomsky says:4","PeriodicalId":400828,"journal":{"name":"Chomsky on State and Democracy","volume":"142 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the (Im)practicality of the State: Why do I have to have a Country?\",\"authors\":\"Ž. Bošković\",\"doi\":\"10.5771/9783748923770-77\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There are many well-articulated reasons to favor a stateless society. Chomsky de‐ parts from many anarchists in believing that such a society is more likely to be achieved through a long, drawn out process that slowly erodes the machinery of the state rather than a single revolutionary moment. As a result, as Chomsky has empha‐ sized in many places,1 in the current political situation a stateless society can only be considered a long term goal. In the short run, the goal should actually be to strength‐ en the state in certain respects, namely, in the contexts where it helps achieve a freer and more just society—clear examples of this are providing a check on the power of large corporations and what has become a derogatory term on the right, the “welfare state”—which includes such horrible things as recognizing the right of every child, including those born to poor parents, to have food and get health care.2 In a way, then, the state can be pragmatically used in the process of moving toward a more equitable stateless society. There is a conflict here between theory and what is prac‐ tical, which is reflected in the long run vs short run opposition—the latter boils down to practical reasons. The conflict is only apparent however. Chomsky’s politi‐ cal work is not an academic research exercise, in its heart is political (and economic, since the two are really inseparable) activism. There is pragmatism that comes with activism. This activism-motivated pragmatism is the reason why for Chomsky there is no contradiction, as there would be in a pure academic research exercise, between holding anarchist ideals, including stateless society, and using the state to achieve re‐ forms that will lead to a more just society that is closer to anarchist ideals. There is also a reflection of Chomsky as a scientist here—if you are a scientist, say a physi‐ cist, you will use whatever methods you can to enlighten the issues you are investi‐ gating.3 On a par with that, regarding his political work, Chomsky says:4\",\"PeriodicalId\":400828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chomsky on State and Democracy\",\"volume\":\"142 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chomsky on State and Democracy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748923770-77\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chomsky on State and Democracy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748923770-77","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
On the (Im)practicality of the State: Why do I have to have a Country?
There are many well-articulated reasons to favor a stateless society. Chomsky de‐ parts from many anarchists in believing that such a society is more likely to be achieved through a long, drawn out process that slowly erodes the machinery of the state rather than a single revolutionary moment. As a result, as Chomsky has empha‐ sized in many places,1 in the current political situation a stateless society can only be considered a long term goal. In the short run, the goal should actually be to strength‐ en the state in certain respects, namely, in the contexts where it helps achieve a freer and more just society—clear examples of this are providing a check on the power of large corporations and what has become a derogatory term on the right, the “welfare state”—which includes such horrible things as recognizing the right of every child, including those born to poor parents, to have food and get health care.2 In a way, then, the state can be pragmatically used in the process of moving toward a more equitable stateless society. There is a conflict here between theory and what is prac‐ tical, which is reflected in the long run vs short run opposition—the latter boils down to practical reasons. The conflict is only apparent however. Chomsky’s politi‐ cal work is not an academic research exercise, in its heart is political (and economic, since the two are really inseparable) activism. There is pragmatism that comes with activism. This activism-motivated pragmatism is the reason why for Chomsky there is no contradiction, as there would be in a pure academic research exercise, between holding anarchist ideals, including stateless society, and using the state to achieve re‐ forms that will lead to a more just society that is closer to anarchist ideals. There is also a reflection of Chomsky as a scientist here—if you are a scientist, say a physi‐ cist, you will use whatever methods you can to enlighten the issues you are investi‐ gating.3 On a par with that, regarding his political work, Chomsky says:4