Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Noam Chomsky

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Poll Question: Noam Chomsky
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
3 [23.08%]
4 [30.77%]
2 [15.38%]
1 [7.69%]
3 [23.08%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Noam Chomsky
    Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 04:06
Originally posted by okamido

Put up some of his wonderful works, Toltec. I might be interested in ripping them to shreds.Smile 
 
I did in the OP, here it is again, rip away................
 
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 04:13
Originally posted by Don Quixote

Originally posted by Toltec

Chomsky is an anarchist (in your right wing definition, a libertarian that supports the minimal state)
 

That's right, that's why don't see his as a leftist at all, I wrote on that.
As for antisemitist - I don't see him like this either, he is disagreeing with the methods with which Israel suppresses a possibly viable Palestinian state, with the settlements that cantonize the so called "Palestinian territory", not that he opposes the right of Israel to exist.
 
Trouble is in the US not supporting fundementalist zionism and agreeing that 100% of Palestinian lands can and should be taken away from them and the population ethnically cleansed means your anti-semite. A defintion which makes half of Israelis and almost all non-American Jews anti-semites too.
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 15:50
Toltec, let me see, you are referring me to Noam Chomsky's website to see 'everything he's ever published on Cambodia'? Isn't that a bit like going to Newt Gingrich's website to obtain everything he's ever written on a subject? That requires a level of trust in either that I lack.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 21:31
Originally posted by Toltec

Originally posted by okamido

Put up some of his wonderful works, Toltec. I might be interested in ripping them to shreds.Smile 
 
I did in the OP, here it is again, rip away................
 

 I listened to the talk, and most lamentably I think the facts are quite right. I would like someone to prove him wrong, I'd feel better. I'm not sure about his statements that US's main aim in Iraq is to suppress democracy there, but the facts about Haiti and Iran, AFAIK, are quite right.


Edited by Don Quixote - 16-Apr-2012 at 22:00
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 22:40
I like this talk Chomsky did in Oslo, I like it because it underlines what Libertarian Socialism/Anarcho-Syndicalism as a branch of Anarchism is, what are the institutions that are suggested in it, and a short history of the Spanish Anarchism that was destroyed by Communists exactly because it was coming together quite successfully. The most important part is that the dramatic difference between Libertarian Socialism/Anarcho-Syndicalism and Socialism and Communism are; since I here so much the Chomsky is leftist, which I don't think is correct, because the Anarchism he is talking is is actually direct democracy, which is the complete opposite of Communism.

Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 22:51
Originally posted by lirelou

Toltec, let me see, you are referring me to Noam Chomsky's website to see 'everything he's ever published on Cambodia'? Isn't that a bit like going to Newt Gingrich's website to obtain everything he's ever written on a subject? That requires a level of trust in either that I lack.
 
Did you apply the same high standards of scrutiny with the source of information for the accusation you made?
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Apr-2012 at 22:53
Originally posted by Don Quixote


 I listened to the talk, and most lamentably I think the facts are quite right. I would like someone to prove him wrong, I'd feel better. I'm not sure about his statements that US's main aim in Iraq is to suppress democracy there, but the facts about Haiti and Iran, AFAIK, are quite right.
 
I like the bit about him showing that government's relationship to big bisuness is that of a socialist system.


Edited by Toltec - 16-Apr-2012 at 22:54
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Apr-2012 at 02:47
Yes, state socialism. I had seen a lot of this in communist Bulgaria - factories that produce what there is no market for, or are returned due to their low quality, and were supported artificially; the ginormous bailouts that Obama made here are exactly such a socialist feature.

Here an interview Chomsky gave, I like his musing on the psychological effects of state endorsed consumerism as a form of control, and his thoughts on globalism.


Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Apr-2012 at 23:00
Toltec, in your boy's own words:

"
Before looking more closely at Ponchaud's book and its press treatment, we would like to point out that apart from Hildebrand and Porter there are many other sources on recent events in Cambodia that have not been brought to the attention of the American reading public. Space limitations preclude a comprehensive review, but such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review, the London Economist, the Melbourne Journal of Politics, and others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly qualified specialists who have studied the full range of evidence available, and who concluded that executions have numbered at most in the thousands; that these were localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from the American destruction and killing. These reports also emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false. They also testify to the extreme unreliability of refugee reports, and the need to treat them with great caution, a fact that we and others have discussed elsewhere (cf. Chomsky: At War with Asia, on the problems of interpreting reports of refugees from American bombing in Laos). Refugees are frightened and defenseless, at the mercy of alien forces. They naturally tend to report what they believe their interlocuters wish to hear. While these reports must be considered seriously, care and caution are necessary. Specifically, refugees questioned by Westerners or Thais have a vested interest in reporting atrocities on the part of Cambodian revolutionaries, an obvious fact that no serious reporter will fail to take into account."

You can find it here:          http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm

Now, notice how carefully he (the royal 'we') did that: Citing others, but reinforcing the idea that reports of genocide "on the part of Cambodian revolutionaries" were overstated, exaggerated, are in all likelihood wrong.

For the record,  I equate Chomsky to L. Ron Hubbard, and Chomskyites to Scientologists.

   


Edited by lirelou - 17-Apr-2012 at 23:06
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Apr-2012 at 23:29
Thank you for the info and the source, lirelouSmile. However your link came out dead - to make it alive you have to click on the little icon left of the smiley face, the one with globe and a bow, and paste the url inside, then click on ok.

I'm not trying to defend Chomsky in the case, obviously he commited a blunder; just I want to remark that no history is objective - we see it through very different POVs, and everyone, consciously or not, roots for something; so the only honest way to deal with historical representations, as far as I can see, is jut to admit that no one is fully objective and look for the reality somewhere in the middle.

I don't know the Scientologists well enough to give an opinion for on your comparison, but I mentioned before, that anarchism is an ideal, like Christianity - it cannot be really put in practice, because of many reasons, mostly the reality of life, that will not allow it; at best it can be used a something like a marker as to where we are and how we are doing compared with the ideal plan of how we wish things to be. Anarchism is based on the idea that human beings can livbe in harmony, collectivistic, and share choices and responsibilities, not taking in account that life itself is antagonistic, and the actions like accumulation of goods, strive for power, etc, are part of the survival instinct, if one is to lose those, one dies really fast, eaten by others.


Edited by Don Quixote - 17-Apr-2012 at 23:36
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Apr-2012 at 00:13
To illustrate my above point, I'll post one of Chomsky's lectures with a humble commentary by yours truly:

The lecture starts with the very founding of the US, which was thought by the founding fathers as a 'nascent empire", goes through what he calls "genocide of the Native Americans" /to which I'll say that there isn't nation, culture or population on the world that wasn't genocided at one or another point, that's just part of the circle of life/ , continues with the Manifest Destiny and goes on blasting every involvement of the US win world politics as being imperialistic, making it sound as only US in the whole history of humanity behaves like that - while obviously is just a human pattern of existence, which goes on the natural Darwinian lines. Every country and culture dreams of being a world power, not everyone becomes, but this is not because they wouldn't do that if they could, but because they couldn't do that in the first place for whatever reasons.

He goes on blasting the idea that US is not some fortress of justice, /like anyone above the age of 14 can really believe that this is so/, and that it behaves like Great Britain, USSR, etc, imperialistic in their time powers - and? This is what any country would do if they can, because this is an instinct for survival on a state level. If and when US cannot do it anymore, someone else will, an maybe in far more cruel way. It's not like when US steps down there won't be another superpower, because superpowers always existed, and always will, this is a  part of the natural selection. It sounds awful, but this is what it is - life is based on power, and if one survives it's because more or less one fought back, stole back, killed back and raped back - committing all those things to survive.

The same thing with the globalisation /which he defines as taking the work from the poor to give it to even poorer, which is quite true/, and proposes all why not instead the top 3% of people with highest standard, /like himself/, give up some of their ridiculously luxuries and give them to the poor countries in a form of capital so they develop their own industry; well, because this will never happen - people strive to accumulate, not to give up, this is survival instinct, hence is undestrictible. What he proposes is simply impossible, not part of life, can exist only in dreams. What people can do is protest against what they see as wrongly done, and win a right or two, but this is all, there is no more.

He says that US is not a real democracy - well, it's not, its' a representative democracy; a real, direct democracy existed only in Classical Athens, and left out like 2/3 of the population of Athens anyway, in the shape of women and slaves. All other democracies after that were in teh best representative ones, which is not much of a democracy, because the ones elected never live up to their promises, so in fact whoever elected them has no control over them. It's a little better in small towns, there is more conrol over what local people one elected, but not on large scale. Why? Because it physically cannot be done on a large scale. So, beyond the realization that life sucks, that the poor are poor and the rich are rich everywhere, and that no rich will give what they accumulated to the poor, on no scale, what is all the fuss about, one may ask?

 The fuss is that in his lectures Chomsky shows that US is not a nation of blue-eyed romantics and behaves like everyone else under the sun all across the map and along the time scale - which is not a surprise to anyone. US gives millions in aids - Chomsky says that it's all to keep control over whoever gets it - and? There is no free lunch, and of course no one does anything for someone else only for their blue eyes, they do it to get something out of it - friendships and marriages are all based on that, even in out most intimate relationships we participate because we get something out of it; so why should anyone give aid and want no influence, and this on a state level? What he wants is impossible to put in reality, if it was possible, would be great, but it's not. Now, I'm, saying this as an amateur anarchist....ideals are great, one can try to put something from them in practice, but keep in mind that it cannot work in it's pure form.

But I enjoy him anyway - he is thought provoking, and I don't necessarily have to agree with anyone to enjoy what they have to say.



Edited by Don Quixote - 18-Apr-2012 at 00:17
Back to Top
Toltec View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Shape Shifter

Joined: 12-May-2011
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1748
  Quote Toltec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Apr-2012 at 05:37
Originally posted by lirelou

Toltec, in your boy's own words:

"
Before looking more closely at Ponchaud's book and its press treatment, we would like to point out that apart from Hildebrand and Porter there are many other sources on recent events in Cambodia that have not been brought to the attention of the American reading public. Space limitations preclude a comprehensive review, but such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review, the London Economist, the Melbourne Journal of Politics, and others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly qualified specialists who have studied the full range of evidence available, and who concluded that executions have numbered at most in the thousands; that these were localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from the American destruction and killing. These reports also emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false. They also testify to the extreme unreliability of refugee reports, and the need to treat them with great caution, a fact that we and others have discussed elsewhere (cf. Chomsky: At War with Asia, on the problems of interpreting reports of refugees from American bombing in Laos). Refugees are frightened and defenseless, at the mercy of alien forces. They naturally tend to report what they believe their interlocuters wish to hear. While these reports must be considered seriously, care and caution are necessary. Specifically, refugees questioned by Westerners or Thais have a vested interest in reporting atrocities on the part of Cambodian revolutionaries, an obvious fact that no serious reporter will fail to take into account."

You can find it here:          http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19770625.htm

Now, notice how carefully he (the royal 'we') did that: Citing others, but reinforcing the idea that reports of genocide "on the part of Cambodian revolutionaries" were overstated, exaggerated, are in all likelihood wrong.

For the record,  I equate Chomsky to L. Ron Hubbard, and Chomskyites to Scientologists.

   
 
 
 
 
This is a case of moving the goal posts.
 
In your original post you made the claim
 
1. He denied the Cambodian Holocaust
2.  and denied he denied it. 
 
Your quote above shows him disputing the actual number of executions.
 
 
 
Originally posted by lirelou

Whatever his contribution to linguistics, and it is presently under attack from some quarters, I must judge him as a polemicist rather than a serious historian. He denied the Cambodian holocaust while it was on-going, then denied that he ever denied it. So, as Don Q had noted, any chance he has for his reputation surviving into the future will depend upon how well his work on linguistics stands the test of time. Even if overturned, he will be remembered for having stood out in his era.
 
 
 
 
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?

History Planet Website
<br /
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528
  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Apr-2012 at 12:21
And he is "disputing the number of executions" for what purpose? Could it be to induce the reader to consider reports of large scale killing equal to genocide to be unworthy of their attention? Something drummed up by the Western press to cast aspersions upon the "Cambodian revolutionaries". (Hmm, what a mild term that is.) "An obvious fact which no serious (reader) will fail to take into account."

Thank you. You've proven my point in re Chomsknologists. 
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Apr-2012 at 19:58
Well, Chomsky underplayed the terror in Cambodia, no matter who one looks at the said article. He probably wouldn't do that is the same was happening in Palestine. Which shows again that no one is fully objective.

I'm not comfortable with his parallels he does all the time that US is just like USSR was, because it isn't. I had seen real censure, when one cannot listen to radio because the waves are blocked 24/7, no newspapers but Russian ones are published, no news for anywhere but USSR are allowed, and all the books that are published are by writers who claimed sympathy with the regime. He mentioned on one of the vids I posted how a dissident, I don't remember for sure was in Lech Walesa came to the US and the American intelligentsia was enthralled by him, but they don't treat the same the American critics; which make me think that he sees himself as some American Soljenitsin or Saharov, which is simply not a parallel.

If he was to be dissident, in Russia, he would not only not have a  career, or publish books, but not be even alive; Solzhenitzin and Saharov were lucky to be left alive, but had to smuggle and publish in the west illegally. Solzhenitsin was imprisoned and exiled for what he mentioned in a private letter, and after being exhonerated was never allowed to do more than teach a secondary school, this is what a totalitarian society is and does. Chomsky is  far universe away being treated like that.

Also he was saying how communism brought Russia out of the Third World, and improved significantly the standard of living, and now how capitalism made Russia a third world country again - which is not true - I have an ongoing discussion on that with a Russian member on this thread http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31472&PID=672247#672247  a person who had seen both ends of the story, and says exactly the opposite from personal experience. I can vouch for the same for Bulgaria.

Anyway, we are all humans, we are all fallible, with our blunders, subjectivities, etc, no one is exempted of that. There is much value in some of Chomsky's views, and much trash in another such. I have to admit that I haven't heard those lectures before, I got on this because if this thread, so my comments go as I hear more from his views; so I find quite a bit that I disagree with.


Edited by Don Quixote - 18-Apr-2012 at 20:23
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4735
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2012 at 01:22
Couple of vids with lectures by Chomsky:
This one is on Palestine:

This one is on the Middle East as a whole. Some of the info is the same in both, I have some bones here and there, but as a whole I agree with him more or less



Edited by Don Quixote - 20-Apr-2012 at 01:24
Back to Top
ralfy View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 03-Apr-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 53
  Quote ralfy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2012 at 04:07
Superb use of verifiable sources, especially from the horse's mouth (e.g., the U.S. government). His only flaw is his acceptance of the official view of 9-11.

Back to Top
Abudhar View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 02-May-2012
Location: Algiers
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 77
  Quote Abudhar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jun-2012 at 10:22
NOAM cannot be rated as GENUIS the attribute is so hard to find out for a GREAT MAN and a WIDE PHILOSOPHER that does not care much about the Western critics for his support to many Arab and Islamic causes throughout the World , a FREE SOUL MAN , every wise HUMAN is to respect this positive creation of Almighty GOD!!!!
Seek Knowledge from the Cradle to the Grave-Prophet Mohamed(P.B.U.H)
Back to Top
TafeerKhan View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 13-Jul-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4
  Quote TafeerKhan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Jul-2012 at 06:18
I think he is a genius. He has become an icon of defiance to US foreign policy and hegemony. His analysis is sharp and truthful. His contribution is really important.
Back to Top
Drang nach Osten View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jan-2015
Location: Wladiwostok
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 22
  Quote Drang nach Osten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2015 at 14:17
His views are very lopsided in my opinion. 
There is nowhere to retreat - Moscow is ahead of us!
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392
  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2015 at 22:09
He remains an anti-Semite/anti-American, socialist, rabble rouser...nothing more.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.140 seconds.