Work #1520 · Early (political work) period

American Power and the New Mandarins

Chomsky's 1969 collection — the political-essays debut that established him as a public intellectual

Noam Chomsky · 1969 · English · Political essay collection

Tradition: American left-libertarian socialism / anti-imperialism / political philosophy of US foreign policy

Chomsky's 1969 political debut — the New Mandarins and US conduct in Vietnam

Published by Pantheon in 1969, 'American Power and the New Mandarins' is Chomsky's first major collection of political essays and the book that established him as a major public intellectual outside the narrow community of generative linguistics (Chomsky had been the leading younger linguist of the post-1957 generative-grammar revolution; his political writing had been confined to occasional pieces in the early 1960s before the major 'Responsibility of Intellectuals' essay of 1967). The book is built around 'The Responsibility of Intellectuals' (1967, originally published in the New York Review of Books) — the essay that had made Chomsky's anti-war reputation. The essay argues that intellectuals — the 'new mandarins' of US policy, the academic-political-bureaucratic class who staff the institutions of contemporary state power — have a special responsibility to expose the lies that underwrite imperial violence; the historical record of US conduct in Vietnam (and earlier in the Caribbean, Latin America, the Philippines, and the broader twentieth-century US imperial project) is not a matter of well-intentioned mistakes but of deliberate deception about the actual interests of US power. The other essays in the collection treat: the historical background of the Vietnam War; US Cold-War foreign policy; the failure of liberal-cold-warrior intellectuals (Arthur Schlesinger, Walt Rostow, McGeorge Bundy — the so-called 'best and brightest'); the moral logic of American imperial power; the relations between scholarly social science and state-imperial purposes; the question of what alternatives to the imperial system are conceivable. The book is methodologically distinctive in combining careful documentary-historical research (Chomsky's anti-war work was characterised throughout by careful citation of US government documents, congressional testimony, and primary historical sources) with sharp moral-political argument. It established Chomsky as a major American public intellectual and inaugurated the political-philosophical career that would extend through dozens of subsequent books across five decades.

Author

Editions cited

  • American Power and the New Mandarins (Pantheon Books, New York, 1969)
  • Reissued: New Press, 2002 (with new preface)
  • Companion works: At War with Asia (1970); For Reasons of State (1973); Counter-Revolutionary Violence (with Edward Herman, 1973)
  • Critical context: Robert F. Barsky, Noam Chomsky: A Life of Dissent (MIT, 1997); Wolfgang B. Sperlich, Noam Chomsky (Reaktion, 2006)

School Embodiments

Anarchism · 22%
Postcolonial Theory · 28%
Critical Theory · 14%
Humanism · 14%
Liberalism · 12%
Naturalism · 10%
Anarchism 22%

Chomsky's left-libertarian-socialist framework.

"The intellectuals' responsibility is to speak the truth and expose lies." (Responsibility of Intellectuals, in American Power)

Defining anti-imperialist critique of US Cold-War foreign policy.

"American power and the new mandarins who serve it." (American Power, title essay)

Critical-theoretical analysis of intellectuals' role in legitimating violence.

"The mandarins of US policy supply the ideological cover for empire." (American Power)
Humanism 14%

Humanist-moral framework — the universal duty to recognise human cost.

"It is the responsibility of intellectuals to insist on the truth." (Responsibility of Intellectuals)

Liberal-democratic values turned against Cold-War liberal-warrior intellectuals.

"Liberal anticommunism has betrayed liberal values." (American Power)

Naturalistic-empirical engagement with policy documents and history.

"The historical record, when impartially examined, supports a very different account." (American Power, preface)

Internal Tensions

The book that established Chomsky as a major political intellectual outside linguistics. Inaugurated the political-philosophical career that would extend through dozens of subsequent books across five decades; the 'Responsibility of Intellectuals' essay has been continuously cited in subsequent academic-anti-war and public-intellectual literature.

I. Time

1969 publication. Chomsky was 41, at the peak of US anti-war movement intensity (the Vietnam War was the immediate political context).

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: Deterministic Traversability: Linear Direction: Uni-directional Dimensionality: One

II. Space

MIT / Cambridge MA — Chomsky's institutional base since 1955. The intellectual-political space was the late-1960s American university-anti-war movement.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Curved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

III. Matter

Political-essay collection (~400 pages). Form is essay-collection with the 'Responsibility of Intellectuals' as anchor essay.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

IV. Observer

Chomsky as political intellectual breaking out from linguistics. The observer is the established generative linguist now articulating the political-philosophical position that would define his subsequent public career.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Knowledge Extent: Immediate Knowledge Retainment: Total Physicality: Embodied Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: None

V. Energy

Anti-war-political energies of the late 1960s. The book is the most concentrated single document of the academic-anti-war movement at its peak.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Six-essay collection plus introduction. The Responsibility of Intellectuals essay is the most-cited.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Non-conserved Granularity: Discrete

Personas that cite this work

Noam Chomsky

Personas with the nearest attribute fingerprint

Historical figures whose own classification on the same six-dimensional grid lands closest to this work's. Computed by attribute-agreement on coordinates both address.

Computed school proximity

The work's attribute fingerprint scored against all schools using the same quiz scorer. Useful as a sanity check on the hand-curated embodiments above.

How American Power and the New Mandarins resolves each dilemma

51 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 6 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way · 6 unaligned.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

Persistence, the future, and the direction of becoming.

Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Do you really choose?
If the brain is a physical system and physical systems are governed by laws, then every choice is also a chain of causes — which raises the question of what was really left to choose.
Choice is real within a determined order — agency and determinism aren’t opposites.
On this view, the future is determined and you are genuinely choosing. Those aren't contradictory because the determination runs through you rather than around you: your reasoning, deliberation, and assent are the way the determined outcome gets settled. Choice is what it feels like from …
Roads not taken The future is open and you are a genuine origin of it. (69%) · Choice is structural illusion — every event is fixed by the prior state. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, you are not the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Are addicts responsible for their addiction?
Addiction looks from one angle like the textbook case of agency failing — a person doing what they don't, in any meaningful sense, want to do. From another angle it looks like agency at work in hard conditions. Which it is depends on what agency is.
The addict is genuinely responsible within a determined order.
On this view, the addict is acting within a determined order but is genuinely acting — making decisions, endorsing or resisting urges, seeking or refusing help. Responsibility attaches not because some uncaused choice happened, but because the addict is the kind of agent through which …
Roads not taken The addict could have chosen otherwise — that's why recovery is real. (69%) · The addict's behaviour is the outcome of causes; 'responsibility' is a useful fiction, not a metaphysical fact. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, the addict isn't the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Should we hold AI systems responsible for what they do?
When an autonomous AI takes an action that harms someone, the question of who or what is responsible — the developer, the operator, the model itself — turns on whether the model is the kind of thing that can be a responsible agent.
The AI can be a genuine agent within determined conditions — and therefore genuinely responsible.
On this view, what makes a being responsible is not indeterminism but the kind of process the being is. An AI that deliberates, considers consequences, can be given reasons, and modifies its behaviour on reflection is doing what responsible agency is, even if its underlying …
Roads not taken An AI without a free will is not the kind of thing that can be responsible. (69%) · An AI's behaviour is fully determined by training and input; 'responsibility' applies if at all to its makers. (10%) · Neither AIs nor anyone else are the locus of free agency; the question is the wrong one. (6%)
6 mainstream positions
Matter · 7 dilemmas, all mainstream

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Is reality fundamentally digital?
Pancomputationalism, Planck-scale quanta, simulation theory and Kabbalistic letter-mysticism all say yes — but for very different reasons. The rest of the atlas says no.
Yes — bits, quanta, computational substrate.
On this view, the world is at bottom discrete and law-governed, with no metaphysical agency above or behind the substrate. Reality reduces to bits or their physical analogues; the continuous appearance of fields and flows is coarse-graining over discrete underlying structure.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. (44%) · No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. (37%) · Yes — but divinely-discrete: divine letters, momentary cognitions, atomistic theism. (6%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Are there indivisible units of experience?
Whiteheadian actual occasions, Buddhist moments of mind, Kabbalistic letter-cognitions, IIT phi-units — or the unbroken Jamesian stream? The atomism of experience cuts across naturalism and theism alike.
Yes — naturalist quanta of experience.
On this view, experience comes in discrete units defined by the substrate: information-theoretic phi-units, computational frames, discrete neural events. There is no further metaphysical agency that knits them; the appearance of a stream is the way many discrete events present to introspection.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. (44%) · No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. (37%) · Yes, theistic atomism — actual occasions, divine letters, momentary cognitions. (6%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Is memory stored or reconstructed?
Engrams and traces — or continuous re-narration each time you remember? The cognitive-science debate has a theological cousin: divine memory holding each hair, or the ancestors' continuous remembering.
Stored — discrete engrams, traces, weights.
On this view, memory is the readout of discrete information stored in the substrate: engrams, synaptic weights, file-like records. Reconstruction at retrieval is real but secondary; without the stored bits there would be nothing to reconstruct from.
Roads not taken Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. (44%) · Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. (37%) · Stored — in divine memory's discrete particulars, or in karmic-record units. (6%)
28 mainstream positions
Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 54% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 54% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. 50% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. 49% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. 49% What is our place in nature? Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. 48% Should we colonize space? Cultivating worlds beyond Earth is the next form of stewardship. 48% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Genetic modification is cultivation by other means. 48% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The observer is in time; foreknowledge across times raises real freedom problems. 46% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditators are bounded observers reporting unusual brain states; the 'timeless' is metaphorical. 46% Does prayer change God's mind? If there is an addressee at all, it is in time; prayer is communication, and may genuinely change what comes next. 46% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers are bounded by their own moment, and no further agency makes the dead present. 44% What makes someone the same person over time? You are your body — continuity is bodily continuity. 36% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? Same body, same person — even when the cognitive pattern has changed. 36% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? Different body, different person — you died in the scanner. 36% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? Animal minds are real because biology is the substrate of mind. 32% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? Brain tissue can in principle do what brains do; the question is integration. 32% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise whose conclusions a competent mind can in principle reproduce. 32% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? Revelation is evaluable by reason — and not above it. 32% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM can produce correct outputs but not reason to them; useful, not knowing. 32% What happens to "you" when you die? Death is genuinely the end. 30% Could an AI have a mind that matters? No — mind is what a biological brain does, and an LLM has no brain. 30%
6 unaligned
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
← #1519 The Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke All Works #1521 Reflections on Language →