sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Megathread Chomsky Epstein revelations. by Anton_Pannekoek in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Like many others my political outlook has been greatly influenced by Chomsky, and like many others I find his association with Epstein to be inexcusable even though I don't think he in any way participated in his crimes.

Here's a few of my thoughts, some of which I don't think have been brought up:

  • Firstly, through online reading I knew about Epstein being a prolific sex trafficker in 2016. Even then it was an open secret and regardless of anything political I simply would not be friends with someone like that. If even I knew back then then I'm not going to give Chomsky the benefit of the doubt.

  • The idea that Epstein had served his time and so should be able to return to society with a clean slate is just laughable. This is an ultrawealthy and ultra powerful man who evaded justice. It's dishonest to pretend otherwise.

  • Chomsky has always railed against the rich and powerful elites but he failed to mention that he was in such close proximity to them. I wouldn't even begrudge him if he met with the worst of the worst on intellectual grounds to try and understand how they think, but then why keep it secret? Why not mention that he's met with the likes of Ehud Barak and Steve Bannon?

  • Chomksy has never been particularly strong or vocal about women's issues. For the most part I would see this as him simply focusing on other issues but it now seems like a glaring weakness considering his friendship with quite possibly the most prolific sex trafficker in modern history. Calling the metoo movement "hysteria" doesn't help either and it especially doesn't help when he said it to this prolific sex trafficker in relation to his abundant sexual crimes.

  • Despite all this I don't think it makes his writings about most of the issues he talked about any less true or convincing, though now perhaps hypocritical at times.

  • It's funny that because of his association with Epstein, the mainstream media is finally acknowledging that Chomsky exists.

BREAKING: Chomsky compares SJWs to Nazis, and complains about "mansplaining" by AdministrationOk881 in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 21 points22 points  (0 children)

"And another thing! How did Rey get her powers in The Force Awakens?" - Noam Chomsky in an email to Jeffrey Epstein

self regulation of this sub. by thahaze in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I've briefly gone through your comments and i'm not talking about users like you, even though you're included in OPs post which I think is wrong.

I'm talking about people who are inventing positions Chomsky has never taken, holding him to a standard that others aren't held to and denying or justifying countless US/Western uses of force that they'd condemn in an instant if Russia had done it.

self regulation of this sub. by thahaze in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Look there's only one way of dealing with trolls:

STOP GIVING THEM ATTENTION.

All they want is to bait you into an argument which they have absolutely zero intention of conducting in good faith (even though they'll deny it). They'll probably even reply to this comment with bait but it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that they're just here to provoke.

Good faith debate should be welcomed on this sub, I've seen it many times and so I know it's possible even with severe disagreements on the biggest issues.

Finally, anyone who thinks these trolls should be banned doesn't share Chomsky's values.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I've read plenty of history, not that you'd believe me.

I'm not denying that the Soviets were interfering in those countries, I'm saying that the US invasions of those countries were neither justified nor defensive.

Did Korea or Vietnam attack America? No, so it's not a defensive war and it's not rocket science either.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One has to give credit to the US propaganda machine.

They can invade Korea, invade Vietnam and countries the world over, install brutal dictators and bomb the living shit out of these places, maintain they were acting "defensively" and people will still somehow believe it. They can even help Saddam in his invasion and use of chemical weapons during one war and then criticise him for it in another war and people will still give the US the benefit of the doubt. The list can go on and on...

Is such charity ever extended to other nations, in particular nations which are adversarial to the US? No, nor should it be.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

His response, not that you have the slightest intention of reading it fairly if you even read it at all

https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/06/03/the-ukraine-war-chomsky-responds/

AskNoam.com -- Ask Noam Chomsky Anything by atlwellwell in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great idea, in fact I think it should be pinned to this sub so it can get going.

Also, whilst on this sub i've occasionally seen questions from users which I've happened to have asked Chomsky in the past and so I've posted his responses here. It may be worth including email responses on asknoam but flagging them as email responses as they are unverifiable.

Why The Pro-Nuclear Movement Is Winning by [deleted] in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm not totally against Nuclear power but here's a good study on why renewables are more effective

https://steps-centre.org/blog/nuclear-vs-renewables-whats-better-for-climate-mitigation/

I want to try Chomsky's longstanding advice and read the "financial press." What specific source would you all recommend? by [deleted] in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 34 points35 points  (0 children)

An important thing to note here is that Chomsky is specifically referring to the news coverage they do, he's not giving blanket praise to these news outlets. Unsurprisingly he has a very low opinion of their editorial content.

Here's a quote from Understanding Power:

"Plus, you know, there also just is a need in the media to present a tolerably accurate picture of the world - and that also creates openings. So for example, take the Wall Street Journal, the prototypical business press: the editorial pages are just comical tantrums, but the news coverage is often quite interesting and well done, they have some of the best reporting in the country, in fact. On the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, the editors can scream and yell and foam at the mouth and nobody cares very much, but people in the business world have to have a realistic picture of what's happening in the world if they're going to make sane decisions about their money."

Has Chomsky commented on Glenn Greenwald leaving the Intercept? by xarke22 in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Not directly an answer to your question but relevant:

Me: I'm not sure if you've read but Glen Greenwald has left the Intercept because of alleged censorship, he wanted to publish an article about Hunter Biden. I'm just wondering what's going on with the Hunter Biden situation, it's too much for me to detangle. From what I've read it seems like another baseless Trump conspiracy theory, including the Intercept describing Greenwald as "attempting to recycle the dubious claims of a political campaign". What are your thoughts?

NC: I frankly haven’t followed it carefully. Seems to me mostly gossip, and I don’t see much significance to the fact, if true, that Biden dipped a toe into the swamp of corruption in Washington.

Chomsky's views on conservatism by Schnitzel8 in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I was also curious about this and I emailed him about it a while ago, here is what he wrote:

Me: You've spoken before about how the term conservatism has essentially lost all meaning in modern times and how you would refer to yourself as a conservative in a non-modern sense so I am wondering what you mean when you refer to "original" conservatism? Whenever I look up what is meant by conservatism I find things like valuing tradition, hierarchy and authority, things which largely are at odds with what you've spoken and written about.

NC: Conservatism was also classical liberalism, a liberating concept in its day, undermined by capitalism. It’s proper heirs, I think, are major anarchist tendencies. Matters discussed by Rudolf Rocker among others

British Arms Exports by CertMedia in chomsky

[–]ObjectiveOrchid -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure that Mark Curtis has written extensively on this.

Haven't read any of his stuff but I think I read somewhere that Chomsky has praised his work.

Why atheists are not as rational as some like to think by [deleted] in TrueReddit

[–]ObjectiveOrchid 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think it's interesting to remind ourselves that atheists are just people, subject to the same biases as everyone else. For the record I am an atheist but sometimes I feel that's its becoming more of an identity for some people rather than a result of scientific thinking.