One of the themes that Chomsky returns to habitually is that of the power of repressive systems. The Soviet Union, during its heyday, had legions of spies and informers, but the undercurrent of humor was always present. People living there knew they were in a totalitarian system, and never really bought in. They were told what to believe, and most pretended to believe. (The intellectual classes, true believers, glommed on to power just as they do here.) The threat to the power system there was extant throughout – not that people would learn of their condition, but rather that they would organize. Consequently, the repression of the Soviet state was most effective in spying on its own people.
What brought them down? It was not Ronald Reagan, for sure. I have no special insight, but have heard others say that mere knowledge of life outside the USSR had a large role. Kids knew about music, cars and consumer products, and were restive. The Soviet Union collapsed with hardly a whimper. The people, wise to their leaders, were also unified. No government can survive long without popular support. In other places like Prague and Budapest, similar uprisings made it clear that unless they were willing to engage in massacres of historic proportions, the game was up. (Similarly, in Iraq, the US was forced to withdraw its troops and close down its bases, as hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were in the streets telling them to go away.)
Repression in the Soviet Union was ham-handed and clumsy, and in the end, did not work. In the United States, under a much more effective propaganda system, we are not about to dislodge the overlords. Here, we really believe the nonsense. That is the sign of a truly effective indoctrinary system.
It is only in the last couple of decades that spying on us has come out in the open, and the next step, openly murdering citizens, has been unveiled. The Bill of Rights, just a piece of paper anyway if people don’t fight for it, is out the window. Our propaganda system, once the best in the world, has assumed clumsy dimensions now, as if there were some threat to it. I certainly see no threat, so maybe I am on the wrong track here.
But I did want to mention two forms of oppression that we take for granted here and that we are taught to believe is normal:
One, that unless living on legacy, our children must pay for their advanced education out of future earnings. We call their college costs “debt,” and chain them to desks. They cannot even dislodge the debt by means of bankruptcy.
There is no economic underpinning for that debt, no substance to it. Education cannot be measured in future earnings, as many of our most valuable professions, such as teachers, nurses and lab technicians, do not pay well in comparison to the cost of training. The idea that the “market” puts a proper value on career choices is a fallacy. The cost of education is part of the commons, and should be treated as such, with each child given opportunity to advance as far as ability and effort takes her and without financial burden. Even the Soviets knew this much.
Secondly, the idea that medical care is a commodity, like cars, that we must purchase as we need it, does not withstand even cursory scrutiny. It too is part of the commons. Someone in a valuable profession, like teaching or civil engineering, is no less susceptible to high-cost medical risk as a janitor or burger flipper. Basic health care needs to be available to all on the same basis. If wealthier people want to purchase extras, like private nursing, rooms and attendants, that is their right. But basic care itself is also a right, and not a privilege. Even the ham-handed Soviets knew this.
Both of these matters are part of a system of oppression – to pay for that elusive education debt, or basic health care, we have to work for someone else, and keep our heads down. Losing a job, even a crappy one that we do not like (the normal situation for most) can mean personal disaster.
That’s an oppressive system, but here is the key: We think it is normal, and accept it.
Piece of Mindful 