Copyright 1998 Caledonian Newspapers Ltd.
The Herald (Glasgow)
January 24, 1998
SECTION: Pg. 31
LENGTH: 3457 words
HEADLINE: Chomsky and the Scots
BODY:
Noam Chomsky is the most famous intellectual in the western world. As much for his radical politics, as for his ground-breaking linguistics. Part of his intellectual background is a deep appreciation of the major figures of the Scottish Enlightenment: Adam Smith, David Hume, Adam Ferguson, and others. Canadian academic Robert Barsky, author of the acclaimed recent Chomsky biography, A life of Dissent (MIT), makes the connections.
There are strong and lasting links between Noam Chomsky's works, and those commonly associated with the Scottish Enlightenment
Charting these links allows us to recall valuable ideas from a significant past movement. But it also begins to anchor the ideas of Chomsky to those of previous eras - counteracting his reputation as someone who stands so completely outside of mainstream thought as to be on his own island.
It is true that with the exception of David Hume and Adam Smith, who Chomsky sometimes recalls in his discussions of classical liberal thought, few thinkers from the eighteenth century Scottish Enlightenment figure as prominently in Chomsky's work as do (say) Wilhelm von Humboldt, Rene Descartes, Mikhail Bakunin or Rudolph Rocker (for different reasons).
Nevertheless, I think that there is something that is often described as "typically American" in the way that Chomsky appeals to rationalism, common sense, and solid small-c conservative values - even as he stands up for the "rabble" of the world. Place these appeals in the context of the Scottish Enlightenment, and some unexpected concordances are illuminated. Furthermore, there is in Chomsky's work frequent mention of James Madison and Benjamin Franklin, who were strongly influenced by the Scots. At the very least, to map the complex relationships between Chomsky, the Scottish Enlightenment and U.S. constitutional history can perhaps demonstrate that "good ol' American values" are a degree more anti-capitalist than the contemporary elite would have us believe.
Philadelphia and Edinburgh
Perhaps some of the concordances are not entirely coincidental; there was during the period now referred to as the Scottish Enlightenment some fascinating links between Philadelphia, Chomsky's birthplace, and Edinburgh. This is not to say that an even more fruitful concordance couldn't be traced between Jewish thinkers and the community of Jews in Philadelphia, as a means of understanding the milieu from which Chomsky comes. But to complete the picture, it is interesting to recall that in the eighteenth century, thinkers from both Philadelphia and Edinburgh "aimed to create a society that was modern and progressive, at least in the eyes of significant sections of their controlling elites, rather than provincial and backward" (Andrew Hook). Indeed David Daiches suggests that "there were some
common factors in the Scottish and American situations in the eighteenth century that made Americans especially receptive to Scottish concern with language, and more especially with the language of political persuasion".
There were many occasions for Americans and Scots to exchange ideas; Benjamin Franklin visited Scotland in 1759 and 1771, and in the course of these visits met Hume, Kames, Sir Alexander Dick, William Robertson, Adam Ferguson, Joseph Black, William Cullen, the two Monros (Alexander and John), Adam Smith, Robert Simson, Alexander Wilson, The Foulis brothers (Robert and Andrew), John Anderson, John Millar, David Gregory and Patrick Baird. He considered that Edinburgh contains "a set of as truly great Men, Professors of the several Branches of Knowledge, as have ever appeared in any Age or Country" (The Papers of Benjamin Franklin).
Andrew Hook comments that "such a view would soon be commonplace among American intellectuals, but Franklin's position in Philadelphia's intellectual world was so central that his words gain much more than a personal significance: if in Scotland he was a kind of intellectual ambassador for his own country, then he was inevitably a channel of the most significant kind for the conveyance of almost every aspect to the Scottish Enlightenment into Philadelphia's cultural scene". Overall, says Hook, "the pattern of education in Philadelphia owed a specific debt to aspects of the Scottish Enlightenment," the legacy of which can be found in the rationalist, ethical and commonsensical Noam Chomsky.
Looking Backwards
The whole idea of placing Chomsky's work into the appropriate historical paradigms is, for me, of paramount importance. In doing so, not only can we find ways of productively examining the relationship between Chomsky's ideas and a dizzying array of movements and intellectual currents (which - depending upon the subject matter - include rationalism, anarchism, classical liberalism and anti-Bolshevik Communism). His work can also serve as a gateway into whole domains of still-valuable knowledge, too-seldom recalled in a 'postmodern' era that favours references to fashionable contemporary intellectual trends over historical research.
Chomsky constantly reminds us, implicitly and explicitly, that works by a range of thinkers from different eras - notably Mikhail Bakunin, Ken Coates, Rene Descartes, Zellig Harris, Paul Mattick, George Orwell, Anton Pannekoek, Rudolph Rocker, Bertrand Russell, and Wilhelm Von Humboldt - are put aside at our own peril. For example, in Language and Mind, Chomsky considers past linguistic contributions in relation to contemporary research. And he finds that Rene Descartes, Juan Huarte, the Port Royal grammarians, Wilhelm von Humboldt, and others contributed to a "rationalist theory of language" that offered "a set of simple concepts that provided the basis for some startling successes".
Comparative Indo-European studies in the nineteenth century had led to the founding of a new domain, linguistics, which was "largely defined by the techniques that the profession itself has forged in the solution of certain problems", the success of which shifted interest away from classical problems. Regrettably, says Chomsky, these successes were somewhat narrow : "I think we can now see clearly that the disparagement and neglect of a rich tradition proved in the long run to be quite harmful to the study of language" which was "surely unnecessary". The reorientation of the field towards a revitalized interest in deep structures and universal grammar - an interest which Chomsky stimulated with his early work - is testament to the value that this forgotten approach could have for the field.
There was no consistent view of language amongst the Scottish Enlightenment: but some of the texts written by (for example) Adam Ferguson do operate with the kinds of assumptions that underwrote works by the Cartesian linguists. For instance, in Principles of Moral and Political Science, Ferguson suggests (in a vein that resembles Chomsky's) that "parts of speech, which, in speculation, cost the grammarian so much study, are in practice familiar to the vulgar: The rudest tribes, even the idiot and the insane are possessed of them: They are soonest learned in childhood; insomuch, that we must suppose human nature, in its lowest state, competent to the use of them; and, without the intervention of uncommon genius, mankind, in a succession of ages, qualified to accomplish in detail this amazing fabric of language, which, when raised to its height, appears to much above what could be ascribed to any simultaneous effort of the most sublime and comprehensive abilities".
Another example, this time from the domain of politics, reinforces the view that it's worth looking backwards for insights and explanation. Chomsky has frequently suggested that the importance of the New Left was that it "reawakened interest in industrial democracy, workers' control, possibilities of free association of producers, and has also contributed to a renewed concern for human needs that are socially and collectively expressed in place of the ugly and now destructive 'possessive individualism' of an anachronistic social system, and in general, concern for freedom and domination by state or private power... I'm not suggesting that the New Left has made some new theoretical contribution in these areas. On the contrary, we've barely recovered the level of understanding achieved at the time of the great decline of Western radicalism after the first world war" (Powers and Prospects). Notice that, in both cases, the preceding movements were not only significant, but they were more significant in terms of contemporary concerns than current work.
Finding the roots of useful intellectual or political projects is one motivation for examination of past movements. Another is that such research allows us to evaluate the ground upon which the claims of politicians and others are made, to judge the legitimacy of their actions. For example, Chomsky recalls the views of America's Founding Fathers (in particular James Madison, who was deeply influenced by Scottish Enlightenment thought) - both as a way of identifying central trends of classical liberalism, and as a means of dismantling claims made by contemporary American politicians about what "traditional American values" actually are.
In a speech delivered at the Progressive Challenge, an educational forum held on Capital Hill on January 9, 1997, Chomsky said that "background issues are worth attention, because it's important, I think, to recognize how sharply contemporary ideology has departed from traditions and values which are quite important and significant and which it claims it upholds. That divergence is worth understanding and I think it carries a lot of direct lessons about the current scene". The "background issues" to which he refers here are both factual-historical issues and entire theoretical approaches - such as the "common sense" approach to language and action, itself an important component of Scottish Enlightenment thought.
Common Sense
In a postmodern era, where the validity of all knowledges are regarded as provisional, and where events are taken to be mere 'simulacras', Chomsky ventures into the now-hazardous domains of truth and untruth. He even dares to speculate upon the nature of human nature. By doing so, he reminds us that those engaged in intellectual work should pay attention to "the real problems of society", and what we should be doing to promote the values of freedom and liberation.
By doing so, Chomsky imposes a heavy burden upon those who study or comment upon issues. For him, the deliberate distortion, concealment or obfuscation of ideas is more than just some fashionable observation upon the "non -referentiality of language". Rather, it has the very concrete and nefarious effect of directing our attention away from what is important for our own lives, and for those of persons around us.
Chomsky invokes Orwell in this regard, when he recalls in Radical Priorities that "Orwell once remarked that political thought, especially on the left, is a sort of a masturbation fantasy in which the world of fact hardly matters". Indeed, Chomsky's approval of straight-talking language recalls Orwell's words on the subject of 'Politics and the English
Language':
"Inflated style is itself a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics'. All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer".
An early source for this kind of approach, to which Chomsky refers in his 'Roots of Progressive Thought in Antiquity', is Aristotle's Politics, in which the main problem is how to achieve "the Common Good of All" in a state deemed to be "a community of equals". Not surprisingly, the Scottish Enlightenment, which emphasised the practical, social benefits of progress and improvement for the 'common good', also drew heavily from Aristotle. Thomas P. Miller remarks that Aristotle's civic humanism underwrote the Scottish approach to political and ethical theory, and that his approach to rhetoric, which "emphasized phronesis, practical wisdom or prudence", "led to the foundation of new traditions in rhetoric and moral philosophy" (Scotland and America). And these new principles, according to David Daiches, "informed the political rhetoric of the American Founding Fathers and their offspring for generations to come" (ibid).
The Common Good, Then and Now
The concept of the common good is "at the core of classical liberalism, of Enlightenment thinking", says Chomsky. And one of its proponents, whose name is most often invoked to uphold contemporary capitalist practices (testament to our ignorance of his work), is Adam Smith. There is no question that Smith's view of human nature does not accord with Chomsky's - since Smith's central premise is that human nature is defined by a propensity to truck and barter, to exchange goods (as opposed to the Chomskian idea, that humans have a natural propensity towards creativity).
But there is another side, as Chomsky points out: "Adam Smith, as everyone knows, advocated free markets; but if you look at the argument for free markets, it was based on his belief that free markets ought to lead to a perfect equality, which is a desideratum in a decent society. Like Aristotle, Smith understood that the common good will require substantial intervention to assure lasting prosperity of the poor by distribution of public revenues".
Common good also requires that we measure the effects of contemporary capitalist practices, including the division of labour, lest we fall prey to its deleterious effects. On this, Smith said that the division of labour "will turn working people into objects as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to be". The antidote was government action, which should be initiated to overcome devastating market forces.
Adam Smith was one conduit through which classical liberal ideas flowed into the United States; another was James Madison, whose interest in and connection to the Scots is well-documented. He was influenced by Hugh Blair's ideas of style, the results of which are reflected in his contributions to the American Constitution and in the tenth Federalist paper "in which he develops an idea put forward by David Hume in his 'Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth'" (David Daiches). Says Thomas Miller, "In his Federalist essays Madison not only drew on the political and rhetorical theories he encountered in Witherspoon's teaching. He also put them into practice by helping to build an American political consensus based on the idea of balancing competing interests to protect the shared interest".
As is suggested here, the link goes beyond the role of rhetoric in society. Chomsky recalls that "by 1792, shortly after the Constitution was established, Madison was already expressing deep concerns over the fate of the democratic experiment that he had crafted. He warned that the rising developmental capitalist state was leading to a real domination by the few under an apparent liberty of the many".
In a style more reminiscent of the radical left than the Founding Fathers - who are constantly invoked by corporate America as justification for its activities - Madison also deplored "the daring government, bribed by its largesse and overawing it with their powers and combinations, casting over society the shadow that we call politics". Chomsky finds important similarities between the fears that Madison expressed, and the approach that was taught by the Scottish thinkers, including Adam Smith: "Madison expected the threat of democracy to become more severe over time because he expected an increase in the proportion of those who 'will labour under the hardships of life and secretly sigh for a more equal distribution of its blessings'".
Madison was concerned by "the symptoms of a levelling spirit", recalls Chomsky, "and he warned of the future danger 'if the right to vote were to place power over property in hands without a share in it"". Needless to say, this is a far cry from the commonly-accepted view of the American values that underwrite contemporary politics. Chomsky brings Madison's ideas once again into line with those of the Scottish Enlightenment - and out of line with the current consensus. "Madison, like the rest of classical liberalism, was pre -capitalist and anti-capitalist in spirit. And he (Madison) expected the leadership to be benevolent and enlightened and so on".
How might one apply these insights to the present-day Scotland, on the eve of creating its own parliament? To work in the spirit of Noam Chomsky is to consult those enlightened references, past and present - thinkers and ideas which can help citizens instill appropriately inclusive and responsible values into all assemblies, large and small. Those associated with the Scottish Enlightenment certainly offer solid grounds upon which to base such a foundation.
But Chomsky would also turn to the 'rabble' - so often unconsulted and ignored, except by the James Kelman's of the world, who brings their voices to the fore, and offers some measure of their power, in the stories that he recalls and creates. It is this union of clear-headed, enlightened thinking and honest responsibility that brings out the best of human nature, so often moulded towards nefarious ends.
Robert F. Barsky is Assistant Professor at the Department of English, University of Western Ontario, Canada.
E-COMMENT
Selected Civil Society postings and Editor's E-mails about Barsky's essay (first published on the E2 web-site, 13 Dec 1997).
From NOAM CHOMSKY (chomsky@mit.edu)
I'm a great fan of the Scottish Enlightenment, which includes some of the few intellectual and moral "heroes" I'd own up to. But I guess it's just that that makes me more than ordinarily hesitant (to write about the Scottish Enlightenment ). I wouldn't want to do something casual, and even something brief, with the respect that the subject merits, would require a lot of work that I'd greatly like to do (and have, in fact, been doing for years, mostly for myself) but cannot even contemplate within a reasonable time frame. On Smith particularly, the distortions are extraordinary. He's not alone. Same with Scottish Enlightenment figures on others, Reid on Hume, for example. But it's a very serious topic. I wouldn't feel right, on (substantial) reflection, in taking it on without a lot more thought and attention than I can manage.
From ANDREW HOOK (A.Hook@englit.arts.gla.ac.uk), Glasgow University
Prof Barsky's piece on Chomsky and tha Scottish Enlightenment is finally about the struggle between conservatives and liberals for possession of the American Constitution. In relation to the Scottish contribution to the making of the US the key text is Garry Wills Inventing America - and in particular its reception in America. Wills argued that the Scottish Enlightenment, not Locke, was the key influence on Jefferson and the Declaration. The uproar that followed was ultimately occasioned by the implication that the original US was conceived of as a communal society-- the Scottish Enlightenment's emphasis on the social good in Hutcheson, Smith etc., and not as a Lockean blueprint for (capitalist) individualism. Hence the bitterness of the attacks on Wills, which went far beyond the usual academic disagreements.
From DAVID LOVITZ, Iowa
Isn't it absurd to pull Adam Smith into the camp of pre-corporatist anti -capitalism? Barsky tries to note the difference between Smith and Chomsky's views on human nature - one defining us as exchanger and traders, the other defining us as essentially creative. But surely both are the same - we create value by aspiring, by reaching beyond our species being, and that is best expressed through the play of desires and needs, the torrent of goods and symbols, that constitute market societies? And isn't Enlightenment thought always going to trip up if it doesn't realise that urge to exceed which is inherent to the human being?
If you want to respond to any of the pieces in E2, past or present, please go to www.e2-herald.com, and click on the Civil Society icon.
EXCLUSIVE ON THE WEBSITE
DAVID McCRONE ON NATIONALISM
IN THE 21st CENTURY
LOAD-DATE: January 27, 1998
