There is no plausible theory under which the record of the Pentagon Papers can be interpreted as relating to the national defense.
That's the standard technique of privatization: defund, make sure things don't work, people get angry, you hand it over to private capital.
Interpretation
What this quote means
The quote critiques the process of privatization, highlighting the method used to transition public services to private ownership.
Noam Chomsky's quote explains a strategic approach to privatization wherein a public service is deliberately underfunded and neglected to incite frustration among the public. This anger then paves the way for privatization, allowing private entities to take over services that were once publicly managed, often with the promise of efficiency or better management, but usually at the cost of accessibility and quality for ordinary people.
Themes
In practice
Example use cases
In a political debate about the future of public services, one might quote Chomsky to highlight the dangers of privatization.
More from Noam Chomsky
All quotes βThe 'free-floating intellectual' may occupy himself with problems because of their inherent interest and importance, perhaps to little effect.
If you're teaching today what you were teaching five years ago, either the field is dead or you are.
There are very few people who are going to look into the mirror and say, 'That person I see is a savage monster;' instead, they make up some construction that justifies what they do.
The Republican Party has become overwhelmingly so extreme that it's hardly a traditional political party anymore.
There is still much debate about whether torture has been effective in eliciting information - the assumption being, apparently, that if it is effective, then it may be justified.
Similar quotes
I once said to my father, when I was a boy, 'Dad we need a third political party.' He said to me, 'I'll settle for a second.'
The soviet people want full-blooded and unconditional democracy.
A great state is a well-blended mash of something of all the people and all of none of the people. The liquor of statecraft is distilled from the mash you got.
If, then, the control of the people over the organs of their government be the measure of its republicanism, and I confess I know no other measure, it must be agreed that our governments have much less of republicanism than ought to have been expected; in other words, that the people have less regular control over their agents, than their rights and their interests require.
Any country is either becoming more democratic or less democratic. I think the United States hasn't tended to its journey toward democracy in a long time.
The problem is not that the U.S. economy won't be able to take care of its citizens - it is that taking away benefits, creating intergenerational warfare, and scapegoating will make for very difficult and bad politics. This is a tragedy that we can see coming. Early action would be relatively painless.