• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Topic: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    ...................

  2. #2

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Chomky woke me up to what was happening around me, here in Australia in 1975 i was to busy just enjoying the sun, had no idea of what was happening in East Timor, his visit here on behalf of the East Timorese showed me what a truely ethical intellectual was about i will never forget it

    his writings with Edward Herman on Media anaylsis also are extremely important,

    as for Foreign Policy he opened the door for me to investigate the events i took for granted the American dream was just that, A Dream

  3. #3

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    The problem with Chomsky isn't so much that he's dishonest - although he often is that - but that he omits inconvenient and important information and context. That and the fact that his suggested alternatives are inherently flawed and self-contradictory.
    For instance, he claims to be an “anarchist” against the centralization of power. And yet he advocates the expansion of government control over massive segments of every day life. How a supposedly intellectual person can reconcile this kind of DoubleThink is beyond me. But he is anything but intellectual.

  4. #4

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Chomsky's achilles heel is that he tends to formulate a hypothesis and then set about to prove the hypothesis without regard to possible alternatives. Selective reasoning is a dangerous thing.

    For example, he criticised Clinton for supporting NAFTA, erroneously concluding that Clinton did so as a sellout to business. There were several reasons why Clinton supported NAFTA, primarily quid pro quo arrangements with republicans and democrats that supported NAFTA, an olive brach to the latino community, etc. For Chomsky to focus on the business aspect without regard to Clinton's other motivations is intellectually dishonest.

  5. #5

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Quote Originally Posted by Brady right
    The problem with Chomsky isn't so much that he's dishonest - although he often is that - but that he omits inconvenient and important information and context.
    talk is cheap Brady, can you provide examples that demonstrate your assertions and examples that reflect his more than 40 years of writing



    Quote Originally Posted by Brady right
    That and the fact that his suggested alternatives are inherently flawed and self-contradictory.
    For instance, he claims to be an “anarchist” against the centralization of power. And yet he advocates the expansion of government control over massive segments of every day life.
    again you will need to elaborate on this with many examples to prove your assertions


    Quote Originally Posted by Brady right
    How a supposedly intellectual person can reconcile this kind of DoubleThink is beyond me. But he is anything but intellectual.
    well if he isnt an intellectual, he's even a better actor than Ronald Reagan

  6. #6

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Quote Originally Posted by wes37
    Chomsky's achilles heel is that he tends to formulate a hypothesis and then set about to prove the hypothesis without regard to possible alternatives. Selective reasoning is a dangerous thing.
    can you prove this assertion conclusively by bring a substantial amount of examples from more of his 40 years of writing

    Are you sure you not being selective in order to discredit him?


    Quote Originally Posted by wes37
    For example, he criticised Clinton for supporting NAFTA, erroneously concluding that Clinton did so as a sellout to business. There were several reasons why Clinton supported NAFTA, primarily quid pro quo arrangements with republicans and democrats that supported NAFTA, an olive brach to the latino community, etc. For Chomsky to focus on the business aspect without regard to Clinton's other motivations is intellectually dishonest.
    Wes your the one thats being intellectually dishonest, first off i dont know about the example you quote, but i do know when someone is going out of their way to discredit somone.
    First off if you really cared about intellectual honesty you would back up your assertions with many examples that prove conclusively that Noam Chomsky is dishonest, examples that reflect his entire output over a very long time,
    selective random quotes of his usually out of context proves nothing

  7. #7

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Although I’m not going to attempt to have a dialog with you, charles, since it is obviously futile as you refuse to acknowledge what people have said and believe you know better what people are thinking than they themselves, for the benefit of on-lookers, I will give account for what I have said about Chomsky.

    Chomsky has repeatedly painted tyrannical regimes like that in Vietnam as being just. Read his accounts of his visits there, he talks about it as though these guys were the heroes. He ignores their atrocities and their tactics to impose their rule over the South. Likewise, it is difficult to find any references by Chomsky to atrocities committed by “Leftist” regimes. The Pol Pot / Khmer Rouge example:
    http://jim.com/canon.htm

    He also leaves out crucial context in many of his characterizations. For instance, during and in the context of the Vietnam war, Chomsky stated, “the United States has become the most aggressive power in the world, the greatest threat to peace, to national self-determination, and to international cooperation.” Now this is completely false. At the time, the Soviet Union, by any objective standard, was far worse than the US. He also neglected to take into account the fact that US involvement in the Vietnam war was, in furtherance of Chomsky’s beloved “international cooperation” at the behest of the UN and SEATO (Southeast Asian Treaty Organization). Chomsky’s evaluations and characterizations also conveniently leave out the not-so-minor detail that the Northern Communists were invading the South. If someone who knows nothing of the Vietnam conflict read Chomsky, they would probably come away with the vague impression that Vietnam had reach consensus in favor of Communism and that the US was unilaterally invading peaceful, innocent, Vietnam and imposing Capitalism on them against their will.

    Now I remember not long ago asking someone to provide me with evidence that Chomsky has fairly criticized Leftist regimes for their atrocities the same way he does the US. And I also recall that nobody could provide me with such evidence. So having given account for my statements about Chomsky, the ball is now in the other court as I would like someone to show me examples of Chomsky being fair and honest in his criticism of leftist regimes as well, because they deserve plenty of criticism. The fact is, Chomsky doesn’t do this. He only criticizes the “right”. The Left can slaughter, murder, rape, and pillage all they want, and Chomsky will say little if anything.

  8. #8

    Angry Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Quote Originally Posted by Brady Wright
    Although I’m not going to attempt to have a dialog with you, charles, since it is obviously futile as you refuse to acknowledge what people have said and believe you know better what people are thinking than they themselves, for the benefit of on-lookers, I will give account for what I have said about Chomsky.

    Chomsky has repeatedly painted tyrannical regimes like that in Vietnam as being just. Read his accounts of his visits there, he talks about it as though these guys were the heroes. He ignores their atrocities and their tactics to impose their rule over the South. Likewise, it is difficult to find any references by Chomsky to atrocities committed by “Leftist” regimes. The Pol Pot / Khmer Rouge example:
    http://jim.com/canon.htm

    He also leaves out crucial context in many of his characterizations. For instance, during and in the context of the Vietnam war, Chomsky stated, “the United States has become the most aggressive power in the world, the greatest threat to peace, to national self-determination, and to international cooperation.” Now this is completely false. At the time, the Soviet Union, by any objective standard, was far worse than the US. He also neglected to take into account the fact that US involvement in the Vietnam war was, in furtherance of Chomsky’s beloved “international cooperation” at the behest of the UN and SEATO (Southeast Asian Treaty Organization). Chomsky’s evaluations and characterizations also conveniently leave out the not-so-minor detail that the Northern Communists were invading the South. If someone who knows nothing of the Vietnam conflict read Chomsky, they would probably come away with the vague impression that Vietnam had reach consensus in favor of Communism and that the US was unilaterally invading peaceful, innocent, Vietnam and imposing Capitalism on them against their will.

    Now I remember not long ago asking someone to provide me with evidence that Chomsky has fairly criticized Leftist regimes for their atrocities the same way he does the US. And I also recall that nobody could provide me with such evidence. So having given account for my statements about Chomsky, the ball is now in the other court as I would like someone to show me examples of Chomsky being fair and honest in his criticism of leftist regimes as well, because they deserve plenty of criticism. The fact is, Chomsky doesn’t do this. He only criticizes the “right”. The Left can slaughter, murder, rape, and pillage all they want, and Chomsky will say little if anything.
    Brady you are a fool, how do i answer you if you will not attempt to have a dialogue with me
    Brady nothing you say or wright has credibility with me because i understand what motivates you all to well and it is blind hatred of the left, and know full well Chomski's status i asked you to provide a balanced account of his more than 40years of writing not a selection of out of context misrepresentations to justify your hatred of the left and Chomsky

  9. #9

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    Does anyone else see the complete irony in all this?

  10. #10

    Re: Noam Chomsky - cutting to the chase

    <raises hand and smiles>

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •