Not to argue with the venerable Chomsky, but...
So we have this phenomenon where someone is taking positions that would have been considered pretty mainstream during the Eisenhower years, that are supported by a large part, often a considerable majority, of the population, but he’s dismissed as radical and extremist.
Health insurance was indeed important to Eisenhower as can be witnessed
Here.Unfortunately not much seemed to come from it so despite the fact that it was pretty mainstream, Congress still didn't put forth an effort to make it happen. Unlike Chomsky and yourself, I really don't remember those years since I was just a wee tyke. On the other hand it could have been nothing more than platitudes passed out to the masses when Ike, nor Congress, ever had any intention of collecting the taxes or creating the programs to insure less fortunate Americans. Nothing came of it then just as nothing has come of it now despite its mainstream popularity.
he has mobilized a large number of young people, these young people who are saying, "Look, we’re not going to consent anymore." And if that turns into a continuing, organized, mobilized—mobilized force, that could change the country—maybe not for this election, but in the longer term.
Now this is a jewel! And the reason I so admire Chomsky. He recognizes the genuine takeaway of the Sanders phenomenon. Even though he minces words a bit here, the fact is that Sanders has deeply affected the future politics of this country. In fact, even though he will lose this election, he has planted seeds in the minds of the next generation. A huge generation of voters who want more from government and are better connected, through social media, than any generation in the past. Perhaps, because he lost, he will be better remembered than if he won and then failed to bring these seeds to fruition himself. His acolytes will carry on and the oligarchs will eventually be toppled.
