Noam Chomsky

[AnF1500]

Opinions/thoughts on his works and/or ideas.

My view is probably fairly obvious since I made a thread about him, but I think he is easily one of the most important political activists of these times.

[Jason Tate]

One of my favorites. Very intelligent, usually backs up all his statements with sources and facts.

[AnF1500]

One of my favorites. Very intelligent, usually backs up all his statements with sources and facts.

That's refreshing to hear, though I am slightly suprised. A lot of his ideas, especially concerning the drug war seem to go against yours.


But then again you didn't claim to agree with him on any position, just that he delivered them well.

[Love As Arson]

I adore him. By far, one of the best intellectuals out there these days. Though, I disagree with his assessment of socialism, Leninism and the acts of the Bolsheviks after the Russian Revolution.


Incidentally, check out this interview:

http://isreview.org/issues/53/chomsky.shtml

[Jason Tate]

That's refreshing to hear, though I am slightly suprised. A lot of his ideas, especially concerning the drug war seem to go against yours.


But then again you didn't claim to agree with him on any position, just that he delivered them well.
Expand upon the drug thing ...

[AnF1500]

Expand upon the drug thing ...

The drug war and legalization. I vaugley remember arguing with you on a thread in here on the topic.

[Love As Arson]

An article on the drug war:

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/199804--.htm

[Jason Tate]

intellectually and linguistically brilliant. in terms of his ideologies and ideas - no way
No surprise coming from you.

[Love As Arson]

I love this quote:

It's the responsibility of those who exercise power to show that somehow it's legitimate. It's not the responsibility of anyone else to show that it's illegitimate. It's illegitimate by assumption, if it's a relation of authority among human beings which places some above others. That's illegitimate by assumption. Unless you can give a strong argument to show that it's right, you've lost.

[open mind]

i like what he has to say so it's no suprise he's pretty much ignored by the mainstream media as much as possible.

[Love As Arson]

I'd love to see him on the cable news programs to correct the factual inaccuracies that pervade them.

[open mind]

I'd love to see him on the cable news programs to correct the factual inaccuracies that pervade them.

that would be great but i think he'd end up just get yelled over and written off as a radical and then they'd call him a radical over and over and over and over until people who aren't informed to much believe it.
the mainstream media has proven that if you don't have the truth on your side you just need to say the lie often enough and loud enough for most people to believe it.

[AnF1500]

I'd love to see him on the cable news programs to correct the factual inaccuracies that pervade them.

I listened to an interview from a few years ago with a correspondant from a prominent television show and a radio station. The radio station asked why Chomsky had never been a guess and the man went on to say he didn't know nor was he personally farmiliar with him. He said he guessed that his producers had not invited him because he did not meet certain requirements- being able to express your idea between the start and commercial time. Your idea or story cannot take mroe to communicate then about 8 minutes. The person must be able to speak clearly and be easily understanded.

Chomsky went on to say how this clearly disallowed anyone with even slightly different, complex ideas to be on the show or any major show. Only men with ideas that are unoriginal and simple are used.

[TxRepresent]

If I'm not mistaken my friend made a thread about this on my account a couple of years back. Might want to check the search function.

[x togepi x]

I like him okay. He's a cool guy though. if you email him with questions, he'll actually respond pretty quickly. I've emailed him about random shit and gotten responses.

[AP_Punk]

I listened to an interview from a few years ago with a correspondant from a prominent television show and a radio station. The radio station asked why Chomsky had never been a guess and the man went on to say he didn't know nor was he personally farmiliar with him. He said he guessed that his producers had not invited him because he did not meet certain requirements- being able to express your idea between the start and commercial time. Your idea or story cannot take mroe to communicate then about 8 minutes. The person must be able to speak clearly and be easily understanded.

Chomsky went on to say how this clearly disallowed anyone with even slightly different, complex ideas to be on the show or any major show. Only men with ideas that are unoriginal and simple are used.

Chomsky is an awesome, brilliant man.

I heard from somewhere (I think it was that Outfoxed documentary)that if Chomsky ever was going to be debated on a mainstream political talk show, they would have to have, like, 10 conservatives to debate him because of how much he knows.

[x togepi x]

i'm pretty sure the first time i emailed him all i really asked was "what's up?" and he proceded to tell me about the book he was writing. it was pretty sweet. i later asked him about a quote and he replied to that too.

[Jason Tate]

i'm pretty sure the first time i emailed him all i really asked was "what's up?" and he proceded to tell me about the book he was writing. it was pretty sweet. i later asked him about a quote and he replied to that too.
Crazy shit.

[Love As Arson]

I e-mailed him about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, what we may do about it, and whether or not a one-state solution was the alternative, since the two-state solution seems to be dead and he responded with this:

A one state solution makes no sense at all in a society with two quite distinct cultural/national groups. A binational state, of the kind that exists elsewhere, would make sense. And it could be attained, but only by one method that anyone has seriously suggested: in stages, with a two-state settlement first. That first step is quite feasible. In fact it is in your hands and mine. The only obstacle to it now is the US government, which continues in splended isolation (with Israel) to reject the international consensus. I stress "government" because a large majority of the US population supports it.

Calls for a one-state settlement are very popular now in the mainstream (NY Times, NY REview, etc.), because they are, plainly, a gift to the hard right. They are completely unfeasible now, and therefore make it possible for the hard right to wail about how everyone is trying to destroy Israel so we must take all we can in self-defense, etc.

Israel is not a center of interest for the US population. This is one of many examples of a huge gap between public opinion and policy, that is, of the failure of US political institutions. But the way to remedy that is also in our hands.

I love this guy.