tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post4150347302937361422..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Noam Chomsky - What's All the Fuss About?Larry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-22042768367096437012007-06-14T16:05:00.000-04:002007-06-14T16:05:00.000-04:00he is exaclty a demagouge.he's using his high skil...he is exaclty a demagouge.<BR/>he's using his high skills to throw hundred bits of information in one minute and thus impress people into believing his views.<BR/><BR/>sometime it seems like his whole perception of the world is "white man bad, others good".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-52778263935054093462007-01-10T08:29:00.000-05:002007-01-10T08:29:00.000-05:00"I think that Chomsky is a bit of a demagogue."
H..."I think that Chomsky is a bit of a demagogue."<br /><br />Hmm, no idea how one could describe him with that noun. He uses the exact <br />opposite of prejudices and false claims when presenting his case. Perhaps you meant some other word.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-38604570048154574462006-11-22T10:50:00.000-05:002006-11-22T10:50:00.000-05:00I think that Chomsky is a bit of a demagogue. The ...I think that Chomsky is a bit of a demagogue. The biggest problem people have with him is that he is simply much more intelligent, articulate AND able to integrate information coherently than they are. He bruises the ego a bit.Peter Bucklandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06660306787777777265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-9022358339777401302006-11-21T15:09:00.000-05:002006-11-21T15:09:00.000-05:00The main problem I have with Chomsky is that he se...The main problem I have with Chomsky is that he seems to have a kneejerk reaction against Whites and Jews. I don't entirely disagree with him in his ideas that Western nations (by which I mean the US, Israel, and all the european nations to a lesser extent) do act unjustly, but it seems to be so deeply ingrained in him that I don't think he even looks at situations anymore and simply assumes that Western nations are in the wrong, and then creates some fictional, evil reason why they act that way. It reminds me of someone in the Black power movement - the way he goes off the deep end on these issues. He maintains that the US wants complete control of the world. (I disagree. The US is self-centered, but that doesn't mean it wants complete control. It's just scare tactics on Chomsky's part.) He also downplayed the actions of the Khmer Rouge, no doubt because the US was opposed to the Khmer Rouge, he felt that he had to rush to their defense. He says that the US foreign policy is aimed destroying non-capitalistic societies because it needs to eliminate "the threat of a good example" (i.e. if a communist, socialist, or islamic nation succeeds without a capitalistic economy, other's might follow suit). I think that is not only wrong, but it misunderstands and demonizes US foreign policy. (As I said earlier, I don't agree with US foreign policy, but neither to I invent reasons to make people misunderstand and hate it on the basis of imaginary motives.) Overall, it just seems like Chomsky manufactures reasons to hate the US, and goes about preaching his views to anyone who will listen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-19303974564401530692006-11-21T13:08:00.000-05:002006-11-21T13:08:00.000-05:00No offense to Mustafa Mond, but one of the reasons...No offense to Mustafa Mond, but one of the reasons is precisely because Chomsky is <i>not</i> a liberal. He is a "democratic socialist," and quite possibly the public intellectual closest to anarchism/libertarian socialism. His ideas on linguistics are also very controversial, including within the evolutionist community. Dennett spends a good chunk of <i>Darwin's Dangerous Idea</i> arguing that Chomsky is scared of Darwinism. I tend to agree with him as well, but in terms of political theory he occupies a position that's been tabboo in the United States for most of a century.Peter Collopyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07436295125267094617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-80973934722547987062006-11-21T12:28:00.000-05:002006-11-21T12:28:00.000-05:00I'd say Chomsky gets the treatment he does just be...I'd say Chomsky gets the treatment he does just because he's an outlier from a lot of the general media coverage (particularly US media coverage) on several hot button topics--particularly in his readiness to criticize Israel's foreign policy (and the US' perceived hand in the same). Consumers of the US mass media, especially, will find him startling for that reason alone.<br /><br />I'd also say, generally speaking, that very outlier status, along with the fact that his criticism is generally pretty perceptive, and the fact that there is just such a monoculture, is what makes him invaluable.<br /><br />I don't always agree with him. But he's <i>always</i> worth a hearing. That bleating hatred you're hearing is mostly, for my money, people a bit pissed about having certain assumptions gainsaid.<br /><br />He's also a lot less startling if you're used to hearing voices closer to his position. Which is generally the case if you read/watch/listen to a lot of non-US media. On the BBC or the CBC, he essentially blends into the general range of plurality you'll hear.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-17162792892522602972006-11-21T12:07:00.000-05:002006-11-21T12:07:00.000-05:00But Chomsky is a "liberal"! (gasp)But Chomsky is a "liberal"! (gasp)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com