So when the americans committed another war crime by bombing

>>9446356
Chomsky is a bum.

>>9446369
Get out. In case you can't read, Noam Chomsky rules the world, so show some respect.

>>9446356

The ultimate hypocrite. A self described anarchist with a an industry pumping out books and is invested in big pharma. Fuck this asshole.

>>9446482
Attack the argument not the person making it.

>>9446482
So should he give his money away to not be a hypocrite anymore?

>>9446502

Don't be an apologist, and it wouldn't be a problem if those things weren't a horrendous counter to his whole schtick.

>>9446356
The weak should fear the strong.

>>9446505

Exactly, don't benefit from a system you criticize. He's totally irrelevant anyway.

>>9446505
Don't hate the playa. Hate The Game.

>>9446502
Yeah, like with Nazi propaganda. You argue intensely and earnestly that Jews are not conspiring to control all forms of political discourse, and provide evidence and good arguments, and generally jump through all the hoops like a good untermensch.

Oh wait.

>>9446509
Should he not exist or work in a capitalist system or buy or sell stuff to not be a hypocrite too, where do you draw the line with him, you should email him to tell him where your line is.

>>9446520

Well he could give them away for free. He's not obligated to take part. You seem to be missing the point.

>>9446547
He gives lectures and answers emails for free. Most of what he writes can be found in free internet articles, lots of them on his own website.

>>9446356
>who rules the world?
>it's not the jews
>by jew

>>9446356
http://www.hoover.org/research/noam-chomsky-closet-capitalist

The guy is a piece of shit. Classic case of "do as I say not as I do."

>>9446561
>Chomsky’s marketing efforts shortly after September 11 give new meaning to the term war profiteer. In the days after the tragedy, he raised his speaking fee from $9,000 to $12,000 because he was suddenly in greater demand.

>>9446561
>Instead, he threw the money into blue chips and invested in the TIAA-CREF stock fund. A look at the stock fund portfolio quickly reveals that it invests in all sorts of businesses that Chomsky says he finds abhorrent: oil companies, military contractors, pharmaceuticals, you name it.

>>9446590
>a Jew
>profits from war
Really makes you think

>>9446590
He also risked being lynched by cautioning against war hysteria after 9/11

File: zek.gif (27KB, 165x221px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 165x221px

'žek was always superior

>>9446356
Go listen to this

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-warcollege-26apr-idUSKBN17S2CB

North Korea has two completely different propaganda machines. One for export/foreign use (US is a bully and we are traumatized by the bombing of libya?) and one for domestic usage (America is full of cucks and they would never actually bomb us if the population of Seoul is on the table. Once they get nuclear weapons, they seek a grand bargain: give up bombs, US removes all troops from S. Korea. Then confederation, then unification under Northern hegemony.

>>9446369
Also this, his biggest cheerleaders say this book is trash

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/09/a-case-against-america/

File: iroquoiscentralparklake.jpg (1MB, 1878x1300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1878x1300px

>>9446502

>>9446664
>unification under Northern hegemony
You obviously have a weak grasp of geopolitics. I suggest reading an author named Noam Chomsky to remedy this.

>>9446699
did you listen to the podcast?

>Myers is a professor of international studies at Dongseo University in Busan, South Korea. He’s visited the north, speaks the language, and reads the literature and propaganda alike. He takes Pyongyang at its word when it says it wants to reunify the peninsula and he’s not hopeful for the future.

>>9446707
If N. Korea got a nuclear weapon, it couldn't use it to threaten the US into leaving the peninsula. Instead it would be a deterrent to a US invasion. And even if the US left the peninsula, why would the South submit to Northern domination? The South has a military and economy that dwarfs the North by many orders of magnitude.

>>9446754
You are not considering the (as always) pathetic dribbling yearning of the S. Korean left, who want the US out and detente with the north.

>>9446761
Detente with the North isn't the same as becoming a client state of the North. Besides, if that is what S. Korea wanted (it's not but if it were) that is their business.

>>9446672
That's a very pretty picture but I am the south asian kind.

>>9446506
That isn't what an apologist is...

I assume you have someone in your life who agrees with your Chomsky stance.

>>9446640
>risked being lynched
No. Stop hyperbolizing

>>9446509
>Don't benefit from the system you critique

You've never read any Chomsky.
You've never read Marx outside of Communist Manifesto....

In fact, where'd you get your opinion? You should read Chomsky and you'll probably find out. He's the polymath of our time. To attack all of his actions is to cast a net far too broad.

>>9446821
Did you actually live through9/11? People who publically called for restraint, people like Congresswoman Barbara Lee who voted against the aumf, were showered with death threats.

>>9446599
>>9446590
>Chomsky critics go this far to find a flaw in his work
Sad!

>>9446826

>He's the polymath of our time.

Stop mythologizing those with whom you agree.

>>9446599

This is hilarious.

Still, like a true Jew, he plays both sides.

>>9446832
it doesn't try to find a flaw in chomsky's work but it points out the hipocrisy of the one who writes it.
maybe this cannot demonstrate the flaws in chomsky's reasoning but he could have called for an actual anarcho-syndicalist movement instead of making theorical approaches to the question while benefitting from capitalism.

>>9446831
I listened to NPR that day. Someone called in calling for restraint, and a guest called them "a traitor to the motherland"

>>9446826
>polymath
Politics doesn't really count and linguistics is such a recent field that it's the only way to be a polymath.

>>9446914
>>9446914
He is also a fine philosopher.

File: feudalism.jpg (69KB, 720x608px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 720x608px

>>9446482
>>9446509
>>9446599

File: shniff.gif (295KB, 500x276px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 500x276px

>>9446936

>>9446843
I don't have to agree with him to recognize his importance. Stop projecting, figgy.

>>9446482
What are his links to big pharma?

>>9447928
I am not sure, but I would guess Chomsky has invested in mutual funds that include pharma companies in its portfolios.

>>9446356
Chomsky? You mean Noam Chomsky Who Rules the World?

>>9448478
well then that's not evidence.

>>9446482
>not supporting big pharma
so you support no pharma or medical devices - cool

>>9446826

Karl Marx - His mom said, "Jeez Karl I wish you'd stop talking about money and make some!"

>>9446826

lol...where'd you get YOUR opinion from?

>>9446867

BOOM this.

It's the equivalent of someone going to extreme lengths to criticize eating meat, the health benefits of not eating meat, villainizing those that do...then still investing in factory farming and enjoying burgers. Then hididng behind "critique the ideas not the person"

>>9448548

Chomsky also contradicts himself when speaking about issues of class struggle. He describes himself as a ”socialist” whose goal is a ”post-capitalist society,” calling capitalism ”a grotesque catastrophe” .. ”crafted to induce hopelessness resignation, and despair.” He speaks in terms of ”us” vs ”them” with ”them” being the top 10 percent of taxpayers, despite Chomsky being among the top 2 percent in the United States in net wealth, and the location of his primary residence being in an extremely affluent and exclusive wooded suburb of Lexington, Massachusetts.(15) He has also set up trust funds and assigned copyrights to others in his family to keep his wealth from being taxed despite being a strong proponent of estate taxes and income redistribution.

— Chomsky has been critical of private property rights as well, claiming them only to be a tool for the rich (contrary to the views of American statesman such as Jefferson, Hamilton, and Adams.) He also claims that intellectual property rights should only be thought of in negative terms such as ”protectionism”,(25) however his works are clearly labeled with warnings about copyright infringement, it is usually necessary to pay a fee to download information from his website, and he gives opportunities to ”sub-license” the material for a fee.(26)

— Despite Chomsky being strongly outspoken about corporations being ”private tyrannies,” he has invested in all sorts of businesses that he rails against including oil companies, military contractors and pharmaceuticals, rather than opting for other investment options such as money market funds or government bonds which do not have as high of a return.(29) When asked about his investment portfolio issues, he responded ”Should I live in a cabin in Montana?” suggesting that there is just no way around making unethical investments.

>>9449793
>He has also set up trust funds and assigned copyrights to others in his family to keep his wealth from being taxed despite being a strong proponent of estate taxes and income redistribution.


What a piece of shit.

>>9446356
Not celebrating uncle Noams day in your bus instead of the false christian god who puts you in chains.

>>9449793
do conservatives believe this stuff makes sense? 'if you dont support trump go and live in iran?'

File: lexington-ma-large-addition-01-800x538.jpg (208KB, 800x538px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 800x538px

>>9452599

Well why doesn't he go live in Montana? If le capitalism is so evil why does he live in fucking Lexington lmao?

There's no denying he's a huge hypocrite but those are so common on the left that maybe it isn't such a meaningful criticism after all.

p.s. Trump was the working man's candidate and Hillary was the candidate of Wall Street.

>>9449793
>Lexington, Massachusetts

Its nothing special. Just another majority white town.

>>9452659

>sixth wealthiest city in the US
>nothing special

Pick one.

>>9452632
>There's no denying he's a huge hypocrite but those are so common on the left that maybe it isn't such a meaningful criticism after all.
It really, really isn't. Champagne Socialism was the original state of Socialism, Marx's significant contribution to the political theory was to shift the focus to the proletariat. At least, to superficially give them a voice.
Remember the American Democratic Party was built on the backs of aristocratic plantation owners who believed their treatment of the Negro was tantamount to special privilege.

>>9452659
>Just a majority white town

That's pretty special, and growing more so every day.

>>9452712
>blacks bitch about young whites gentrifying their town
>old whites bitch about blacks urbanizing theirs
Hurrr

>>9452712
One group has cause to complain and the other does not.

>>9452599
>'if you dont support trump go and live in iran?'

This is obviously extreme, and i wouldn't expect something like that from Chomsky either (like him living in a cabin in montana like he says). I wouldn't begrudge any anti-capitalist interacting with the system and making a living, but there is obviously a points where it just becomes a farce. Like him raising his speaking fees, or his investments when there are other options. He's not making a living, he's making a fat load of profit. It's hypocritical as fuck.

>>9452733
My point was that the change is cyclical, though I agree with you

>>9452728
In one scenario, crime goes up. In the other, crime goes down.

>>9452728

It's almost as if people are happiest with de facto segregation.

Whether Chomsky is a hypocrite or not doesn't undermine the validity of his ideas. I'm not particularly invested in his work, but I'd prefer to see it being debated - instead of his character.

>>9449793
>”Should I live in a cabin in Montana?

some of the richest investors in the world live in cabins in Montana

>>9452728
> one town gets expensive, business returns in the form of art galleries, start up coworking space, coffee shops; needles and vials disapear from streets
> one town loses its tax base and the caretakers of its public property; bikes are stolen

whose library would you rather visit in 5 years

Noam Chomsky™© is my favourite intellectual!

>>9453818
I agree. Some people are more important as researchers than activists. Chomsky isn't Bakunin or Kropotkin, living in exile and giving the Okranka the slip. He is from a Jewish working class family, but he never joined the other working class Jewish men who fought in the Spanish Civil War. So what? Chomsky never picked up a gun for the cause of anarchism, but he introduces and defends those who did. Most activists and radicals and everyday people with a conscience have had their assumptions and vocabulary shaped by Chomsky. Ask people who took the step from being a liberal to becoming a radical, and every other person will name Chomsky as a defining influence. That's what is behind all this character assassination.

File: 1368953491982.jpg (76KB, 1199x1200px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1199x1200px

>>9453910

Look pal, when leftists expend metric shittons of printer's ink defaming the characters of their enemies on the right, you don't get to act all principled and complain when the right turns around and does the exact same thing to you.

Chomsky is a rich guy who lives in a rich neighborhood for rich white people. He's not a radical, he's a tenured professor who probably drives a volvo sedan and drinks organic coffee.

>Ask people who took the step from being a liberal to becoming a radical, and every other person will name Chomsky as a defining influence.

qui vult decipi, decipiatur

>>9446482
How is he a hypocrite?
Does anarchism forbid you writing books?
Or do you object to him making money from those books?
Anarchism is about workers controlling the means of production, about applying democracy to the workplace and society
How does profiting from your work conflict with this?
Now as for shares, is that something he has pursued or part of is colleges retirement plan?
And furthrr, does anarchism prevent people from investing? Would I be forbidden from investing money into a workers co-op?

>>9446509
How do you know what he does with his money?
He doesn't toot his own horn
But I know for a fact that in the 1970s he paid for several East Timorese get out of the Indonesian occupation and took them found various newspaper offices trying to drum up media attention

Why do you have this more radical than thou affectation?

>>9446547
Sould a workers co-operative factory give away the products they have made?

>>9446585
Where does he say not to pursue your interests?
The anarchism he is talking about is all about people not being compelled by financial requirements, to be able to freely inquire and create, to have democratic control over the means of production
For the workers to benefit from the sweat of their labor, not merely being tools of management

>>9446599
>retirement fund sought to maximise profits for its customers
Shocking

>>9446821
Opposing bombing any brown people that fit the bill was an extreme position to take in the days after 9/11

>chomsky is a hypocrite because he violates my standards

That's not how it works bro

File: image.jpg (24KB, 200x267px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 200x267px

If you’re a serious revolutionary, then you are not looking for an autocratic revolution, but a popular one which will move towards freedom and democracy. That can take place only if a mass of the population is implementing it, carrying it out, and solving problems. They’re not going to undertake that commitment, understandably, unless they have discovered for themselves that there are limits to reform.

A sensible revolutionary will try to push reform to the limits, for two good reasons. First, because the reforms can be valuable in themselves. People should have an eight-hour day rather than a twelve-hour day. And in general, we should want to act in accord with decent ethical values.

Secondly, on strategic grounds, you have to show that there are limits to reform. Perhaps sometimes the system will accommodate to needed reforms. If so, well and good. But if it won’t, then new questions arise. Perhaps that is a moment when resistance is a necessary step to overcome the barriers to justified changes. Perhaps the time has come to resort to coercive measures in defense of rights and justice, a form of self-defense. Unless the general population recognizes such measures to be a form of self-defense, they’re not going to take part in them, at least they shouldn’t.

If you get to a point where the existing institutions will not bend to the popular will, you have to eliminate the institutions.

>>9448478
>my evidence is that I guess

That's not how evidence works

>>9454122
>>9454124

I love watching leftists squirm like a slug in salt when one of their idols gets tarnished.

>>9446831
Oh fucking waah. Anonymous death threats are asymptotically, approaching 100%, never an actual issue. I've received more death threats from posting on 4chan than most people ever will, where's my big goddamn party to declare me a brave hero?
If your position is not worth defending in the face of adversity, fucking abandon it.

>>9449793
>chomsky isn't quitting his job and giving away his earnings and living in a shack in Montana so he is a hypocrite to criticise capitalism
No
>unsourced claims, or a two or three word quote
Lolno

File: 1493666511843.jpg (39KB, 480x320px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 480x320px

>>9446356
I agree that America shouldn't be in the Korean peninsula but Chomsky is a hack.

>>9454129

Can you give me an example of one (1) actual lynching of someone expressing anti-war sentiments?

>>9452599
That's how they think
Its really bizarre when someone says something they don't like - you know, free speech - and the response is go try and say that in X

What does that mean?

You wouldn't be able to be critical of the government elsewhere so you shouldn't be here?

>>9452632
How is he a hypocrite?
You have to contradict and violate YOUR OWN standards and values to be a hypocrite
Not someone else's
He has never said to go and reject work and the benefits and rewards of your work and to exit from society

>>9453898
>having successfully constructed and then demolished a Chomsky strawman
>consisting of accusations of hypocrisy for not adhering to standards I demand of him
>without ever once addressing what he says
>I can now dismiss him
Good luck with that

Incidentally Harlan Ellison actually has copyrighted his name
And all his works are copyrighted to the Kilimanjaro Corporation rather than himself to reduce taxes

>>9454142

It's common knowledge that he lives in Lexington, the sixth wealthiest city in the US. Why doesn't he move somewhere more affordable and donate the extra money to poor little refugees or something like that? If he expects rich Americans to give up their wealth, why doesn't he do the same? It's a case of textbook hypocrisy.

Compare Chomsky to Eric Hoffer, who never even quit his day job until he was literally too old to be a longshoreman anymore.

>>9446482
Yeah seriously he basically bombed the Koreans himself. What a pompous ass.

>>9453910
>but he never joined the other working class Jewish men who fought in the Spanish Civil War.
Chomskys dob: 1928
Spanish Civil War: 1936-1939
>Chomsky first turned his back on working class Jews when at the age of 8 years old he failed to join the Spanish Civil War
Really makes you think

>>9454149

>leftists
>believing in free speech

Now I've heard it all. You're arguing against a strawman, by the way. Nobody says he should go live in Iran, people are simply stating that if he is against capitalism, he shouldn't live in an upper class neighborhood and invest in military contractors' stock. I know, what a shocking argument!

>>9454107
>Look pal, when leftists expend metric shittons of printer's ink defaming the characters of their enemies on the right, you don't get to act all principled and complain when the right turns around and does the exact same thing to you.
You haven't attacked anything
You made up a strawman
>Chomsky doesn't adhere to these arbitrarily demanded standards
And 'demolished' it
And never once addressed the content of what he has to say
You've won first prize in a retard race

>>9446509
Nah, there is merit in using oppressive systems against themselves. These systems aren't all-encompassing oppression anyway, they have foundations that differ to this application, i.e. American liberty.

>>9446513
That was fast.

>>9454140
>asking critical questions
>you're squirming! Look at the squirmer squirm!
Do you notice that you didn't answer one of my questions?
Instead you changed the subject

>>9454141
Chomsky has had to have police protection and his mail checked because of death threats from zionists when talks have been given on the Israeli occupation of Palestine
He was also on the unabombers death list

Someone shitposting on 4chan isn't the same as real mail and phone calls

File: 1454309755525.png (40KB, 825x635px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 825x635px

>>9454167

It's not arbitrary though, it's literally basic morality. Chomsky doesn't get to invent this magical moral standard that only applies to himself, he's judged like all men are judged.

>>9454175

You weren't responding to my posts, those were someone else's. We're anonymous, remember? You sound mad by the way.

>>9454156
>Why doesn't he move somewhere more affordable and donate the extra money to poor little refugees or something like that?

What has he said that says this is the course of action that must be taken, which would make him a hypocrite for not doing what he has said?

>If he expects rich Americans to give up their wealth
Lolwut no that's not what he says

>It's a case of textbook hypocrisy.

You don't actually know what that word means, do you?

>>9454141
>I've received more death threats from posting on 4chan than most people ever will
Wut? Who the fuck are you? I want to get to send death threats to you too.

>>9454179
>No hypocrisy is justified

When?

>>9454183

I just assumed that leftists believed in sharing wealth. I was wrong I guess. Maybe it's perfectly normal for leftists to live in fancy WASP neighborhoods. On the right though, we have a word for these kinds of people, we call them "Champagne Socialists." It has a nice ring to it eh? I know Chomsky is more of an anarchist, but I'm too much of a traditionalists to make up a new idiom like "Champagne Anarchist."

>>9454130
Your very post reveals one of the most trenchant problems in politics in general today: neither side shares standards with another, which makes all political language bogus. A poor appalachian white will have a very different view of who the elites are than some new-york white.

>>9454164
>he is against capitalism so he shouldn't live in a nice neighbourhood
Why?
Will there be no nice neighbourhoods in an anarchist society?
Isn't anarchism about people being able to live in nice places because economic disparity no longer forces them to work long hours for little pay?

Also Chomsky is well known for his total commitment to free speech, his reputation took a big blow in the 80s for the Faurrissn Affair: defending a holocaust deniers right to free speech in France
So not only don't you know what Chomsky says and instead rely on the skewed work of others, not only don't you know the word hypocrite means, but you also don't know the first thing about Chomsky at all

>>9454179
It is arbitrary
You have set a standard
And judged Chomsky as failing it and this a hypocrite
You're not judging him by what he has said and done

>>9454181
>it wasn't me it was someone else!
Cool story bro

>>9454192
>I just assumed that leftists believed in sharing wealth
>I don't know I, just assuming
>and because he doesn't live up to my assumptions
>I just assumed he was a hypocrite for failing to meet my assumptions
And this is why you fail
>if you do well and live comfortably and believe everyone should have this opportunity you're a champagne socialist
Really?

>>9454193
>Your very post reveals one of the most trenchant problems in politics in general today: neither side shares standards with another, which makes all political language bogus.

And that is why I keep asking where has chomsky said X which his actions contradict which would make him a hypocrite
You know, judging him by beliefs he does not adhere to

File: 1404419441571.jpg (106KB, 554x439px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 554x439px

>>9454194

>Will there be no nice neighbourhoods in an anarchist society?

Wouldn't it be more efficient and egalitarian for people to live in a barracks? Where are you going to house all those third world immigrants who will come pouring in once you've dismantled the border fences and disbanded the police?

There's no point in arguing with the rest of your post because you've decided that there's nothing hypocritical about Chomsky's behavior, and will not be disabused of this notion. I mean if that's what you believe then fine, everyone's entitled to his opinion but it's fruitless to argue about it anymore. You can interpret this as an admission of defeat if you want, I just don't care about it anymore. I feel like we've been yelling at each other for hours.

Wow, Reddit's really going hard with the Chomsky hate ITT

Lets get down to brass tacts:

* where has Chomsky said you should not live in the suburbs?

* where has Chomksy said you should not benefit from your work?

* where has Chomsky said your retirement fund shouldn't buy shares?

* why do you ad hom instead of addressing what he says like an edgy 13 year old?

>>9454213

Reddit really likes Chomsky though. He's like the one political philosopher that every college kid has heard of. He even gets namedropped in Goodwill Hunting.

>>9454213
He's one of the most Reddit philosophers ever. Don't kid yourself.

>>9454212
>Wouldn't it be more efficient and egalitarian for people to live in a barracks?
Hurr durr
>Where are you going to house all those third world immigrants who will come pouring in once you've dismantled the border fences and disbanded the police?
Maybe if we stopped bombing them and ruining their societies they be able to live decent lives there?
Also, isn't economic liberalisation all about the free movement of labor?

>There's no point in arguing with the rest of your post because you've decided that there's nothing hypocritical about Chomsky's behavior
I haven't decided it, you haven't presented any evidence. I don't think you know what the word even means. Where does he say one thing and then do the opposite?

>>9446509
Said the idealist.

>>9454163
I also mentioned Chomsky never gave the tsar's Okranka the slip with Bakunin and Kropotkin. My point was that Chomsky lived a far more stable life than the most celebrated anarchists who risked life and limb for their beliefs, but that doesn't diminish Chomsky's contribution to the history of anarchism and political radicalism.

>>9454225
not the guy you've been engaging, but you're a dishonest cunt mate

>Hurr durr
fair enough, his point you were addressing there was sophistic faggotry anyway
>Maybe if we stopped bombing them and ruining their societies they be able to live decent lives there?
you're dodging his question about cohabitating with cultures that are arguably morally incompatible with us and will most certainly cause some friction before they/we assimilate to a certain extent.
Your point about bombing and decent lives, maybe, unlikely though, due to more proximal tensions - regardless of who you think is responsible for them. Are you taking it even further then Chosmky and going full pacifist?
>Also, isn't economic liberalisation all about the free movement of labor?
You're dodging his question about the dangers of mindlessly dismantling borders again. But to answer yours, yes, ultimately. Not an idea for the foreseeable future, but it's a nice ethos.

>>9446520
i shall send him a regular letter - the internet is evil incarnate

>>9454216
>>>/reddit/

>>9454255
>but you're a dishonest cunt mate
People have been throwing the accusation of hypocrite all around here
Slowly by asking again and and again and pressing for answers we have found they have no basis for their claims, only their beliefs and assumptions about what they think he believes
So who is the one who is dishonest?
>you're dodging his question
I'm not dodging. I'm getting to the heart of why they are fleeing
>morally incompatible
We bomb them, support friendly dictators, impose neoliberal economic reforms that devastate their economies forcing them to flee
And they are the ones that are morally incompatible?
>Are you taking it even further then Chosmky and going full pacifist?
Are we under attack from someone?
Are we defending ourselves by flooding Mexico with heavily subsidised corn which forces the campesinos to either walk off the land and go to factories in the city or head north for work?
(Or stay on the land and grow weed or poppies)

>>9454213
>>9454213
They're likely paid hacks. Character assassination on Chomsky is a cottage industry.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2016/12/thousand-ways-to-misrepresent-noam-chomsky

>>9454262
>I can't answer so ill just shitpost

>>9454244

I'm not even memeing but it would be cool to live in that time and be part of the Black Hundreds. You literally can't make up a cooler name than that.

>>9454269
Yes. People are all paid to dislike your retarded Jew philosopher.

>>9454269
Statists hate their orthodoxy being challenged

>>9454244
He lived through COINTELPRO and the Condor Program

>>9454268

I think we can all agree that free trade and economic liberalism was a mistake. There is more than one breed of conservative you know, we're not all neoliberals.

>>9454272
>you will never organize the oil workers of Baku to defend themselves against the black hundreds with Stalin and time traveling Chomsky.
Feels bad on many levels

>>9454280
He also was nearly jailed for helping to leak the Pentagon Papers. He was also on Nixon's enemies list but doesn't even give a shit. Like a boss.

>>9446356
>Why do they hate you americans
who cares what small dick gooks think

>>9454274
Yes. Yes they are as a matter of fact.

>>9454283
You're fine with everything else though, the exploitation and invasions and installing dictators
Just not limited forms of opening up trade
In fact you're not really too concerned about your own products getting into other countries economies that are forced open
But you need to put on a proper front

>>9454268
>We bomb them, support friendly dictators, impose neoliberal economic reforms that devastate their economies forcing them to flee
>And they are the ones that are morally incompatible?
You're dodging the cohabitability question again. As far your 'them&us' question goes, it doesn't matter. It's a question of compatibility.

I personally believe they share all our faults and this has been exemplified in their history; not the same could be said about our virtues - This is a personal opinion so please address the main issue (compatibility) and don't obscure the problem even further
>Are we under attack from someone?
>Are we defending ourselves by flooding Mexico with heavily subsidised corn which forces the campesinos to either walk off the land and go to factories in the city or head north for work?

Again, dodging my question. I asked if you were a pacifist.

Are you going to pretend you know so little about ethics as to spectate upon genocides? I have never suggested that our interventionist policy was carried out with that and only that in view; I would go as far as saying that the consequences of our interventions were foreseeable in most cases and we should be held responsible by the international community.

Are you so morally bankrupt as to passively observe murder? Consistent trampling of free speech? There are other ways to intervene against these attrocities, but if you claim to know so little about human virtue as to stand still, you are either dishonest, or a moral relativist. Either way, you upset me famalam.

>>9454274
CIA watches Chomsky. CIA and FBI no doubt developed anti-Chomsky memes. It would actually be a dereliction of duty for them not to.
https://shadowproof.com/2013/08/15/cia-admits-to-spying-on-noam-chomsky/

>>9454298

I believe in the Westphalian system, which were it still followed would have precluded most of those exploitations. You don't really know me or what I believe in desu so don't jump to conclusions.

>>9453818

A man's character is indivisible from his work. There is no "death of the author."

>>9454302
>This is a personal opinion so please address the main issue (compatibility) and don't obscure the problem even further

Not him but it isn't the main issue and he has addressed it by looking at the causes for jumping borders in the first place. Incompatibility isn't an issue if there is no cohabitation. If people are entering the country because they want the egalitarianism and efficiency of living in barracks, in what ways could they be incompatible? It will never stop being a poor, irrelevant argument about anarchist living to a poor, irrelevant argument about Chomsky.

File: a_b_vollmann___ken-miller.jpg (119KB, 400x582px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 400x582px

>>9454304

They watched a lot of people. They watched William Vollmann for fuck's sake, they're very thorough. The biggest travesty of the CIA domestic spying fiasco is that we'll never have the Martin Luther King porn tapes, that would have been something else.

>>9454312
What a misunderstanding of death of the author but it has no relevance to the informal fallacy of ad hominem in any case.

>>9454332
>Martin Luther King porn tapes
What else do we have on this

>>9454335

What a misunderstanding of the informal fallacy of ad hominem.

File: king letter.png (744KB, 513x626px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 513x626px

>>9454336

>On March 8, 1971, an activist group called the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI burglarized a local office of the FBI in Media, Pennsylvania and stole classified documents. Part of those documents revealed a secret FBI operation called COINTELPRO. Those documents were later sent to newspapers and members of the United States Congress.

>During the Church Committee hearings and investigations in 1975, a copy of the "suicide letter" was discovered in the work files of William C. Sullivan, deputy FBI director. Once the surveillance tapes of King were publicly revealed, Bernard Lee and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) sought to have tapes gained by wiretaps destroyed in a lawsuit.[2] Their request was denied by United States District Court for the District of Columbia judge John Lewis Smith Jr.[2] He ordered all tapes sealed until the year 2027 and placed into the National Archives and Records Administration.[2]

Something juicy enough to bury until 2027. He is rumored to have cheated on his wife numerous times, at one point exclaiming "I'm not a Negro tonight!"

>>9454331
Okay anon. I'm sorry we can't seem to have a meaningful conversation.

>>9454337
Cute but it doesn't make your initial statement any more relevant. I assume that was the point of posting in the first place

>>9454335

>Barthes' essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the intentions and biographical context of an author in an interpretation of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated.

Seems applicable tbqh

>>9454353
What?

>>9454256
He responds pretty quickly to emails
https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/5eq0vo/share_your_emails_with_chosmky_here/?st=j27ck7xl&sh=008028c6

>>9454349
This will ruin MLK day.

>>9454312
Look, Chomsky could have made a king's ransom many times over if he had just worked for Wall St. or the Pentagon. As others have said, he lived through COINTELPRO (and he is still active in post-9/11, Patriot Act America); he was on Nixon's enemies list; he was on the unibomber's mailing list; he nearly went to jail over the Pentagon Papers (don't forget, had he been convicted of espionage, he could have been given a life sentence or even executed). He could have been blacklisted academically. And on and on. Maybe he never trekked with Che into Bolivia, but the fact that he is still around radicalizing people despite the fact he is obviously wearing adult diapers is a small miracle in itself. He has Rick Sanchez-like plot armor.

>>9454356
We aren't really interpreting a text, we're outright rejecting a text (his arguments) because of his 'intentions and biographical context' (his actions) because of an apparent hypocrisy. It is true though that attacking his character is not attacking his argument. The same argument is made by people not in his position. It is abstract.

>>9454365
>He has Rick Sanchez-like plot armor.

you really should kill self

>>9454302
>You're dodging the cohabitability question again
No I am not. You denounce them as morally incompatible when it is our immorality and monstrous behavior that forces them to flee to our countries
>As far your 'them&us'
You call them morally incompatible - and I am the one engaging in them&us?
>it doesn't matter
Our responsibility for them fleeing doesn't matter?
You force them to flee and then condemn them for fleeing and it doesn't matter
>Again, dodging my question. I asked if you were a pacifist.
And I asked if we are under attack
I seems we can add dodge to hypocrite on the list of words you people don't know the meaning of

>spectate upon genocides?
Like the many we have carried out?
>Are you so morally bankrupt as to passively observe murder?
What murders?
When did murder enter into this?
Our murders in pursuit of 'a more favourable investment climate'?
>free speech
Free speech only came up when someone laughably accused Chomsky of not supporting it - when any look at his support of holocaust deniers right to free speech would put the lie to this absurdity

It seems you're just pulling out random incoherent accusations from some rhetorical checklist

>There are other ways to intervene against these attrocities
Yes we could stop arming and funding and supporting our friendly dictators

Where did this statement come from? Is it part of the earlier checklist?

>>9454332
There was no film of him
FBI myth to try to get him to suicide

>>9454336
The FBI used to send King anonymous letters telling him to commit suicide before his so called affairs were revealed
Some of these letters were read aloud during the Church Committee
From this it was somehow extrapolated that maybe they had photos or film of him

>>9454376
Good to have you today, Martin!

>>9454349
The Citizens Commission revealed the spying on activists but it didn't reveal cointelpro
Only one document released mentioned cointelpro

Follow up investigations and FOI requests sparked by the media investigating the story revealed COINTELPRO

The claims of him cheating are propaganda to discredit him

>>9454371
I honestly can't see any value in addressing you anymore, regardless of how much good faith I thought I had.

So, open the borders indiscriminately, no right to intervene regardless of the gravity of the issue. I love Chomsky, but his followers man... If your beliefs are as strong as you claim them to be, I'd actually be forced to call you an enemy in real life.

>>9454383
>The claims of him cheating are propaganda to discredit him

The FBI just couldn't attack his argument so they went after the man. Seems familiar.

>>9454365
>He could have been blacklisted academically
That's why his wife Carol went back to school to finish her diploma and went into teaching

>>9454384
>I honestly can't see any value in addressing you anymore, regardless of how much good faith I thought I had
I have answered your questions what's the problem? Do they not suit your assumptions?

>So, open the borders indiscriminately
So, refuse to acknowledge why they are coming or do anything about it
>no right to intervene regardless of the gravity of the issue.
Only the imperial state demands this
This claim of humanitarian intervention is an excuse to justify continued militarism
>people who disagree with and present uncomfortable facts about my own assumptions are my enemy
Okay

>>9454369
Just think about it. Chomsky pissed off everyone you aren't supposed to piss off. He didn't need that shit. He should have been jailed, assassinated or blacklisted. The fact that people look down on him for not being a martyr obscures the fact that by all odds, he should have been one.

>>9454403
sounds like controlled opposition to me, throw ancoms a bone, they leave you alone

I've always been curious about the lack of interest in Noam Chomsky around here. I figured it was because Chomsky was considered kinda cliche hipster college freshman stuff, but I had been curious as to why he's often brought up with serious disdain.
Now I know it's majorly the antisemitic retards whom have been leaking in from /pol/.

>>9454304
It was revealed back in 2015 that the FBI has been spying on and infiltrating the Church groups that protest out the front of the School of the Americas at Fort Bragg NC
Back in the 1980s a lot of people claimed the Central American Solidarity groups and movement was coming under COINTELPRO-ish attention

>>9454403
They don't assassinate the wealthy educated people
Just Black Panther organisers in the ghettos of Chicago

>>9454405
Unconvincing attempt to fit Chomsky with a snitch jacket is unconvincing.

>>9454405
>controlled opposition
>calls corporations pure tyrannies and legal fictions, and for the state to be dismantled and replaced with something people are in control of

That's not how it works, a controlled opposition is when by about 2006 or 2007 people start to say that the Iraq War has become too costly, too many (of our soldiers) have died (no mention of the locals), that we need to be more careful in the future when we exercise our natural right to attack any country at will
(Okay maybe a bit hyperbolic with that last part)

>>9454420

commodify the resistance, buy shirts, buy books for the CAUSE, be a part of it, dedicate yourself to it, love it, become the institution

>>9454422
Said chomsky never

>>9454399
>I have answered your questions what's the problem? Do they not suit your assumptions?

All you did was dodge. You have not answered any of the questions I asked.

Are you for indiscriminate open borders?
Do you think opening the borders would present an issue of cultural compatibility that might result in unrest?
Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?

>>9454408
Totally unconstitutional, but not surprising. The FBI watches every organization, not not just political ones. That means houses of worship and universities. My dad is a member of a small gardener's association, where the members are all dying off slowly, and the FBI tried to infiltrate it. I asked someone who was in a Homeland Security training course why they would waste their time with such an obviously innocuous organization, and he said because terrorist plots are always hatched in small groups, so you had to keep an eye on them all. That's less than a fig leaf of an excuse (and totally unconstitutional as well) but hey, who is going to stop them, right? This is the kind of shit Chomsky has been dealing with since the 60s.

>>9454429
Acts chomsky always

>>9454431
>All you did was dodge. You have not answered any of the questions I asked.
I did you didn't like the answers as I explored the underlying assumptions
>Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?
All carried out by our friendly dictators with money and guns and training we provide
The claimed humanitarian interventions are anything but and occur for baser material motives

>>9454413
Yeah.

But still, if Chomsky were a young academic today, he would be blacklisted. That's what happened to David Graeber, who also openly identifies as an anarchist. Graeber once even said that he was basically chased out of the country. He didn't elaborate, but it's clear that given just how precarious work in universities is, speaking your mind is a bad career choice.

>>9454440
Hahaha, you're one petulant pettifogger, aren't you.

I haven't asked a single question about the causes. You still haven't answered any of those question. I'll try again.

Are you for indiscriminate open borders?
Do you think opening the borders would present an issue of cultural compatibility that might result in unrest?
Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?

>>9454442
Finklestein

>>9454442
This is where Graeber says he was chased out of the country. I wish he would elaborate. It's pretty clear he was blacklisted, but was there more? Was he being legally harassed? Was his family being targeted by the Feds? In any case, it's an ominous sign when you begin sending the best and brightest into exile. Regimes that engage in that kind of behavior are in deep crisis. I just hope when the US is losing its war against North Korea, Kim Jong Un arranges to send Graeber into the US on a sealed train in order to make trouble. It would serve us right.

>>9454448
>I haven't asked a single question about the causes
And that is why I raise them
>Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?
All acts carried out by us or our friendly dictators to ensure 'a more favourable investment climate'

>>9454448
>you're no fun you don't accede to my underlying presumptions that we are good and right and morally superior and everything we do is for a just cause and everyone else is a poopy head trying to undermine us

>>9454472
dear god, I'm not oblivious to the causes, you just can't seem to grasp that there isn't a false dichotomy in acknowledging the west's contribution and still being able to answer those questions. so you refuse to answer. that's fine.

>>9454478
I never said that you petulant strawmanning pettifogger.

>>9454484
>you just can't seem to grasp that there isn't a false dichotomy in acknowledging the west's contribution and still being able to answer those questions
And there's an edgelordiness to supposedly acknowledging it and then continuing with those same policies and insisting on the right to military force for totally bogus made up reasons of humanitarian interventions that are just a dodge - sorry for stealing your word - for maintaining high peace time military spending and threatening military intervention when market access is threatened or desired or when a president needs s boost in the opinion polls

>>9454487
You should have would be more honest

>>9454467
Right. And the government tried to get Zinn fired from Boston University. There is also the case of Steven Salaita, who was fired over his vocal opposition to the Israeli bombing of Gaza. There is also the case of Steve Keen, who was forced out of his position after humiliating Paul Krugman in an online debate. Keen wasn't even in America; he was working in Australia at the time, which gives you a sense of how strong the incentive is to conform in the academy:it is an international blight. These are the most infamous cases of academic repression. I shutter to think of lesser known examples.

>>9454469

Oh sorry, forgot the video.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gHyOKdMAa-0

>>9454496
>And there's an edgelordiness to supposedly acknowledging it and then continuing with those same policies and insisting on the right to military force for totally bogus made up reasons of humanitarian interventions that are just a dodge

no disagreement there. The West's interventions are inexcusable.

You still haven't answered my questions. I'll try again.

Are you for indiscriminate open borders?
Do you think opening the borders would present an issue of cultural compatibility that might result in unrest?
Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?

>>9454500
I bet you have all sorts of fun talking to yourself.

>>9454506
>Boston University
It would have been great working or studying there back in the day:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iXY6E7wCZZs

Alfred McCoy couldn't get any work after he published his famous book, had to get work at the Australian National University
Chomsky has claimed the guy who came up with the 'Investment Theory of Party Competition' was advised not to study past the New Deal or lose tenure

>>9454520
>You still haven't answered my questions. I'll try again.
Because the assumptions that underly them are without merit
>Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder
How can you have an intervention against what you are doing?
How can you have intervention against your own friendly dictators?
How can you have an intervention against one country when plenty of your allies are doing the same thing?
How can we take this question and argument seriously when it is so hypocritical and so obviously a put on to justify western intervention and military spending in the wake of the end of the Cold War?

File: 1353562831462.jpg (165KB, 719x720px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 719x720px

>>9454406

>Now I know it's majorly the antisemitic retards whom have been leaking in from /pol/.

Why? One person ITT made an anti-semitic comment, that's it. As much as I disagree with /pol/ I don't find it helpful to create /pol/ bogeymen where they don't exist. I mean, your hypothesis is obviously, blatantly wrong because when /pol/ doesn't like something they make threads about it every day. /pol/'s reaction to anything they find disturbing or angering is to talk about that thing as much as possible. We would be inundated with anti-Chomsky threads and that is just not happening.

>>9454534
wew
>How can you have an intervention against what you are doing?
By ceasing to do it and preventing others from doing it
>How can you have intervention against your own friendly dictators?
by ceasing to have a friendly relationship with them
>How can you have an intervention against one country when plenty of your allies are doing the same thing?
see above. I don't want any saudi friends either.
>How can we take this question and argument seriously when it is so hypocritical and so obviously a put on to justify western intervention and military spending in the wake of the end of the Cold War?
It's not a put on anon. I was asking YOU these questions. If I were addressing a presidential candidate I would certainly phrase them differently as to not give him rhetorical armour that justifies his ulterior motives.

I'll try again:
Are you for indiscriminate open borders?
Do you think opening the borders would present an issue of cultural compatibility that might result in unrest?
Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?

>>9454526
It is scary that at the very moment when we are living through a deep, global crisis, when we need debate and vigorous inquiry the most, the elites are really dropping the hammer on anyone who won't pretend that everything is fine. If we don't make it through this civilizational crisis, a big part of the reason will be because academic freedom has effectively been destroyed.

>>9454547
>we did it in the past but now we won't
The doctrine of change invoked every few years, hmm
>It's not a put on anon
The double standards and hypocrisy and denial and lying about events suggest it is

>I don't like your answers, so here are my questions again
What did he mean by that?

>>9454539
You make a fair point. Still, I count about five blantantly anti-Semitic posts and several more with pretty obvious implications. It's just that that kind of talk here used to be far more outrageous.

>>9454563
>>we did it in the past but now we won't
I didn't say that. We're still doing it.

You are an ideologue and that's fine. You have an agenda and it's only natural that you'd be defensive and not take my good faith for granted. Shame on me for entertaining you though. All the best anon.

>>9454547
not all kinds of free speech are equally worthy. Take Rwanda, for example, where the government comes down hard on journalists and political parties that try to incite ethnic unrest - a prudent policy, and the country's coming along reasonably well.

>>9454547
Halting intervention is the exact opposite of intervention.

>>9454569
>if disagree with my assumptions and premise you are an ideologue and have an agenda
Lol
>defensive
Just asking questions and explaining what you mean
>good faith
As seen with your condemnation of the victims of the wests humanitarian interventions

Gandhi was once asked what he thought of western civilisation, supposedly his answer was "it would be a nice idea"
The same can be said of the concept of humanitarian interventions

>>9454574
Except Rwanda might not have happened the way it is popularly portrayed and it has become a political tool to justify interventions on humanitarian grounds

>>9454591
This sort of humanitarian imperialism is exactly the problem, though.

>>9454587
jesus anon, why do you keep misrepresenting my views. why simply not answer my questions and go:

>Are you for indiscriminate open borders?
yes
>Do you think opening the borders would present an issue of cultural compatibility that might result in unrest?
I don't care
>Are you against interventionism of any kind in the face of genocide, or oppression of free speech through murder?
yes-at least on our part

You would have made your stance clearer from the start.

>>9454591
Rwanda "economy" is based off raiding the Congo's mineral wealth and selling it to Western corporations. Of course, only a few people really benefit from such an economy. Kagame's vicious repression against dissidents is more about keeping the gravy train from going off the rails, not about keeping ethnic tensions in check.

>>9454611
How can we discuss illegal immigrants and border controls when so many of them are coming because of our policies?
A lot of the Mexicans coming aren't Mexicans, they're from further south. Guatamala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua. They're coming because of Raygun did to the region in the 1980s.

How can we discuss interventions when we are to blame for so much of what you describe and it could be ended without intervening simply cutting off the guns and money

You exhibit the blinkered disconnection from reality of the liberal interventionist

>>9454632
>How can we discuss illegal immigrants and border controls when so many of them are coming because of our policies?
A lot of the Mexicans coming aren't Mexicans, they're from further south. Guatamala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua. They're coming because of Raygun did to the region in the 1980s.

That is true, although I don't see why it would prevent us from discussing it. Assessing the implications of open borders and acknowledging compatibility issues that could devolve in unrest should render a sensible border policy. We're not doing that. Turning a blind eye to incompatibilities is not the answer.

So I take it, since you think we can't even discuss it, we should then open our borders?

>How can we discuss interventions when we are to blame for so much of what you describe and it could be ended without intervening simply cutting off the guns and money
By acknowledging that we are not the only actors invested in proxy wars. I don't claim to have a solution, but I won't claim to know so little about human suffering as to become a strict non-interventionist.

>>9454611
Not the poster you're responding to, but I'm going to try to respond with Chomsky in mind.
1) Chomsky is certainly in favor of Palestine gaining statehood and maintaining secure borders against Israeli settlements. But he's also for the US and other western powers taking in refugees from regions they have systematically oppressed for generations.
2) Possibly. Culture clashes are not as violent when they are not coupled with economic disparity. I'm Irish. The Irish had serious problems in the US in the 1850's. Of course a lot of the problems were a result of the bigotry of the times, but it was mainly the destabilizing effect of the pouring in of millions of people escaping famine (majorly caused by imperial Britain). Nothing to do with moral incompatibility, everything to do with money.
3) Chomsky has stated that he would have supported the Allied invasion of France during WW2 to expel foreign aggressors even before knowledge of death-camps was made public.
Authority is not an innate right, and act of authority must be justified properly.

>>9454662
Thank you anon.
1) In full agreement with you here.
2) I'm not talking about the Irish being morally incompatible with Americans. I'm sure you can conjure worthier incompatibilities.
3)in full agreement with your and Chomsky's take on interventionism. I'm also aware he's not a pacifist.

I was merely trying to connect with that other anon and see how he would calibre action around these questions, or he would prefer for the west to cease all interventionism and open its borders regardless of cultural and social implications. I failed to get an answer from him. But thank you.

>>9454690
The point is that "moral compatibility" has nothing to do with it. People don't leave their homes and enter a foreign culture of strangers unless it is an opportunity to escape danger and suffering. Allowing these people into the "western civilization club" can be done safely over time I would imagine, cultures can coexist under law and equality, but when those people are in mass escaping dangers that Western countries are partly to blame for, then Western countries have an obligation to make room for them and even provide for them with the ill-gotten gains. This is the point the anon you are talking to is making and it's Chomsky's point exactly. He's avoiding the shabby straw men you're flinging each post because they're based of off objections which make zero sense. Like how you keep asking if he's a pacifist when he said the US should stop bombing countries which posed no security threat. You even acted like this stance diverged from Chomsky's, like it's enabling genocide. I can almost garauntee to you that the anon is not opposed to combating genocide with international support, but that's not how it goes, that's the manufactured part.

File: really.jpg (8KB, 250x238px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x238px

>>9454741

>when those people are in mass escaping dangers that Western countries are partly to blame for, then Western countries have an obligation to make room for them and even provide for them with the ill-gotten gains.

>>9454741
he should've stated that then. He paranoid one, assuming sophistry and ill-intentions in my part and ultimately resorting to strawmanning, not me.

And I have no issue with opening our borders to refugees. There should be controls in place for that though. I was referring to some economic migrants who clearly have a different set of values - but you could argue that economic migrants are our victims as well. That may be so, I would still control for Islamists for instance.

>Like how you keep asking if he's a pacifist when he said the US should stop bombing countries which posed no security threat.
I have made no reference to the past, or the motivations of our current foreign affairs. I simply asked if he's against interventionism of any kind on our part.

>>9454760
Do you need a history lesson?

>>9454765
This is you, no?
>>9454255
I also wouldn't directly respond to someone whom wants to conflate disavowing bombing people we have no right bombing with pacifism, as if I was the naive one.

>>9454520
Not him but in the circumstance where anarchism succeeds it is also likely that there is no real cause for a mass influx of 'culturally incompatible' foreigners, because the kind of material wealth the West currently enjoys is at the expense of other countries, which is the sole cause for any unrest. Without that kind of exploitation, there is less cause for racist apologism of neo-colonialism (and thus less likely for such a society to be seen as racist -- imagine if the West hadn't interfered in the Middle East), less disruption of neighbouring countries that results in migration, less material wealth as an incentive to move, less cultural imperialism so the only answer to life's problems is moving to the 'land of opportunity'

>>9454825
>>9454825

No, I just know better than hold an entire nation accountable for the actions of its government.

Collective responsibility/guilt/etc is something we've left behind.

>>9454838
Isn't that kind of the whole point of representative democracy?

>>9454848

No.

>>9454850
Still convinced it is, sorry.

>>9454848
Yeah in theory.
You made a great point.
You can't have democracy with inequality.
Obviously democracy must go.

>>9449457
But people suck at actually critiquing his ideas and only bring this stuff up because it's really all they have against him. That says way more.

Chmskyites, how should the west calibre its response regarding the situation in Syria? spare me with the details of how the west has contributed to the crisis, I am well aware of its guilt

What would have been an appropriate response to Saddam? spare me the history lesson, I know Western governments are responsible for him.

>>9454895
Follow the fucking golden rule Jesus

>>9454656
>That is true, although I don't see why it would prevent us from discussing it.
Because all you want to do is beat your chest like a nationalistic gorilla and cry about dey terk ur jerbs and drone on about morally incompatible like you're some sort of scientific eugenicist
Without looking in the mirror
>Turning a blind eye to incompatibilities is not the answer.
But as this shows turning a blind eye to responsibility is okay

>by acknowledging we are not the actors invested in the proxy wars
Well you are
The 'other actors' is the locals who kinda don't like our friendly dictator or proxy army
>I don't claim to have a solution,
Yeah ya do, you wanna intervene and feel a nice moral glow for opening up new markets

>>9454765
>assuming sophistry and ill-intentions
Why would anyone assume that in someone who insists on sweeping aside western culpability and instead blame 'morally incompatibility' and other coded racist terms

>>9454910
oh dear, none of what you contributed is true, nor does it represent my views.

>>9454919
He's describing your behavior to you which includes a lack of self awareness.

>>9454918
>someone who insists on sweeping aside western culpability
I'm not insisting on that, on the contrary I am acknowledging it.
> blame 'morally incompatibility' and other coded racist terms
I'm not invoking that as the cause for the unrest in those regions, nor am I claiming that there is an inherent incompatibility/inferiority of those people in relation to us.

can you stop please.

>>9454895
>Chmskyites, how should the west calibre its response regarding the situation in Syria
If you want to stop terrorism the first thing you ought to do is stop committing terrorism
Our missile strikes are terrorism
Our aid to various 'moderate' insurgents is terrorism
>What would have been an appropriate response to Saddam
End the sanctions, let the Iraqi people take care of it
The point of the sanctions was to prevent the population from taking such acts
To force them to rely on the regime to live
To try to encourage the generals to overthrow him "so that Washington could have the best of both words in Iraq: an iron fisted junta without Saddam at the head of it"

>>9454921
>I am acknowledging it and then I blame the victim and insist military interventions are right and proper

>>9446761

You're completely ignorant about Korean politics, dude. Stop embarrassing yourself.

t. Studied IR at one of Seouls top Universities

>>9454925
instead of economic motives should we bomb brown people for moral ones?

>>9454938
Would be really interested in a quick rundown if you have the time.

>>9454920
I am well aware of how the West's contributions led to these crises.

The fact that it does not lead me to open my borders to Islamists for instance does not make me irresponsible. Are you suggesting I punish myself, or that I'm wrong to to welcome Islamism?

Are you suggesting that I know so little about suffering as to turn a blind eye to domestic genocidal maniacs in those areas and other foreign actors involved in proxy wars?

>>9454929
>I blame the victim and insist military interventions are right and proper
I don't. All I'm saying is that there are instances that call for military action. I have not suggested that how the west is conducting them now is in any way excusable.

>>9454925
>If you want to stop terrorism the first thing you ought to do is stop committing terrorism. Our missile strikes are terrorism. Our aid to various 'moderate' insurgents is terrorism.
So let Assad, rebel groups of all colours, Russian, Iran and Saudi do their thing and embrace moral relativism, claiming I can't pronounce myself on what is in the best interest of the people. Okay, gotcha. I just wanted to see what your point was.
>Your Saddam point
there is no evidence to suggest that those actions would have been sufficient. In retrospect chemical attacks don't seem urgent to you. Again, not condoning the architecture of US intervention at the time, just wanted to see your take on it. Thank you.

>>9454953
Saddam held control of the country by holding control of the food. The sanctions empowered him. We don't have a time machine to prove it but it seems to be common sense.

>>9454963
I didn't say I was in favour of sanctions. I just don't see how merely abrogating them would have prevented genocidal bursts like the Halabja incident.

You seem to remain silent on Syria.

>>9454970
Yeah I don't know. I just think that if a foreign country is going to intervene it should only be out of a moral duty and not out of self-interest. If that is sacrificed then don't be surprised when others do the same. I don't know why you expect me to have a solution for Syria just because you said "what about Syria?".

>>9455014
I wholeheartedly agree with you.

not sure if you're the same Anon I originally addressed the Syria question, but I did so, out of his sheer refusal to expand on his non-interventionist stance. I thought Syria was a good case study for me to understand his view, since there are so many actors involved..

>>9454963
Yeah. The same goes for Iran and N. Korea: when you make it so that there are only a few lifelines keeping a nation's economy alive, of course the elites will seize these levers of power.

>>9446356
>MUUUHH BEACEFUL POC
Ridiculous. America is a tumour upon the world, but not for killing some people.

Without fail, no one ever successfully criticizes Chomsky's ideas or arguments. The only thing they can ever say against any of his arguments or reasoning is that he himself is a hypocrite, like that somehow reduces or invalidates the legitimacy of Chomsky's positions or arguments.

The man who invented the idea of the Big Bang was a creationist. No one bats an eyelash at that because, "SCIENCE IS COOL, FUCK RELIGION YEAH!" but if an obvious capitalist-profiteer tells you why capitalism is fucked up, suddenly we have an issue.

>>9446937
>If you hate feudalism so much then why are you eating those turnips?

Hehe

>>9446502
It's very much an extension of himself, if he wanted people to just get his message he'd publish without a name or being such a fucking limelight cuck.

>>9453885
Believe it or not bud, young whites moving into a town does not remove drug problems. In fact, it would actually create a new market.

>>9454179
There is no "basic morality." Morality os relevant.

>>9454212
Im getting real sick of these right wingers and their Jap toons.

>>9454302
Im not sure about people who are as worried about "cohabitation" like you, but I live in a diverse conmuntity of Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics. And you know what? The neighboorhood is not fucking burning. I think your problem with "cohabitation" is really thinly veiled xenophobia.

>>9446356
nice stars

can i have them?

File: 5143230_orig.gif (25KB, 650x542px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 650x542px

>>9458177

>my personal anecdotes are more important than objective evidence

((((((((((((Noam CHompsky))))))))))))

Vietnam should have been bomb back to stone age too.

File: Racism is selected for.png (164KB, 1148x659px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1148x659px

>>9458177
>thinly veiled xenophobia
>xenophobia is wrong
no it isn't. Tribal fitness is essential for survival. People need the members of their tribe to pressure them to succeed, or else they slip into apathy.

Read Putnam's Bowling Alone and E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the 21st Century.

Diversity leads to everyone being socially isolated and unhappy, because no one trusts each other, not even members of the same tribe/race.

>>9458432
>immigrants are the problem not capitalists living off interest on inherited wealth

File: iq by country.png (28KB, 1357x800px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1357x800px

>>9460075
kek.
>It's native capitalists fault that foreign immigrants are uneducated in their own countries
>b- because they're capitalist pigs!!
>th- they all inherited their wealth!
>This makes it impossible for foreigners to generate their own wealth or educate themselves.

Kek.
What's it like to be so spooked?

Did capitalism cause pic-related as well?

>>9460166
>/pol/edditor has his hot non-memetic info graphs at hand to keep cuccs in check

ev'rytiem I do hope's falseflaggin'

File: 1486409794057.png (179KB, 720x582px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 720x582px

>>9460249
>posting images on an imageboard
>Can't handle the objective facts of reality
>I'll resort to calling him a reddittor, that will surely win the argument

top laff, buttblasted commie

>>9458025
t. didn't read the thread

So when the Americans nuked Japan why they allies?

Chomsky is garbage. He pretends the world is one dimensional based on everyone's hate for America.

To answer your question it's because they're brainwashed by a death cult

>>9460166
This, Germans and Jews came to America in mid to late 1800s and built libraries in their hoods. When have you seen a nigger build a library

File: image.jpg (14KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 320x180px

>>9460272
>objective facts of reality

it must hurt to be that spook'd

File: 1486599156275.jpg (21KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 403x403px

>tfw used to be anarcho syndicalist
>muh Catalonian Spain
>muh CNT
>Now I'm a fascist

That shifting of the Overton Window phenomenon hits pretty hard.

>>9446356

>they laughed at the asian villagers scurrying around trying not to drown.

Well it probably was amusing, it was a war not some tea party. Stop being such a moralfag.

>>9446664
>Myers

Stupid meme. Almost as bad as the anti-Chompski meme.

>>9454405
Controlled opposition figures are real, but Chomsky isn't one of them. Gloria Steinem falls into this category. Steinem had longstanding ties to the CIA. She diffused radical critiques of capitalism by telling women that being part of the capitalist system was empowering and liberating. She also shaped feminism into embracing an exclusionary ethos: men were the enemy, not larger systems of violence, coercion and exploitation. Another type of controlled opposition figure is Alex Jones. His audience is people who have real grievances against the neoliberal order, but he feeds them substantial critiques of the system with pure baby shit in order to confuse and misdirect his audience.

>>9460601
They were too busy with that whole slavery thing to build libraries, if I recall correctly. And being careful not to end up being lynched tends to preoccupy people, making it difficult to get excited about the next serialized installment of, "Daniel Derronda".

>>9462340
There are such things as war crimes, you know?. We hung Nazis and Imperial Japanese leaders for these kinds of things.

The topic of the Syrian Civil War and Syrian refugees came up. Here is Chomsky's thoughts on these topics.

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/4/26/chomsky_on_syria_we_must_help

>>9462654

>There are such things as war crimes, you know?

No I don't know. War only has one law: don't lose.

>>9462688
What about us? We're losing the War on Terror. There will eventually be a reckoning for our crimes.

>>9462631

Slavery ended before most European immigrants arrived. Only tiny percentage of blacks were ever lynched. Jews had to deal with much worse violence in Eastern Europe but they still managed to produce a literary culture.

>>9462705

Then stop pussyfooting around and fight, really fight. Find out if sand glows in the dark.

>>9462714
And I assume you have served in the armed services to contribute to this glorious struggle

>>9462710
You should know your own history if you are as educated as you claim. During the 1960s and 1970s, When Blacks tried to organize, educate themselves and create their own art and culture, J.Edgar Hoover dropped the hammer on them. Some were shot, some were jailed, all were silenced.

File: 1320094898851.jpg (70KB, 500x447px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 500x447px

>>9462730

Most soldiers never see action. In a modern army only a tiny elite of "effectives" comes to grip with the enemy. Even in the "glorious struggle" of the Second World War the majority of soldiers never made it to the front lines. I know it sounds weird to someone raised on hollywood movies and high school tier history classes but that's the way it was.

I assume that people who join the army want to kick ass and not sit around masturbating and cleaning their rifles. It's all voluntary these days, even women join now.

>>9462740

I'm not american you fucking idiot and blacks clearly weren't silenced very competently because one of them just occupied the white house for 8 years.

you can read books by DuBois
you can read books by Langston Hughes
you can read books by Douglass

None of these were ever banned. Where was the silencing you dipshit?

>>9462769
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

Go back to your containment board.

>>9462758
You're missing the point. The point is that the war on terror is so complex and covers so much terrain, that winning the war is impossible, even if you want to make the sand glow. The war on terror goes from Boko Haram in Nigeria, to Mali and Libya; to Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan. There are low to mid level Islamicist insurgencies in Bangaladesh, Indonesia, Tunisia, Egypt and the Philippines. Making things more complicated is the fact that our principal allies in the region, the Gulf monarchies, are the ideological and finance engine of much of the worldwide Jihadi movements, including al Qaeda and ISIS. If you have a strategy out of this mess, I'm all ears.

>>9462789

Then look to your borders. Make a metaphorical wall from Tel Aviv to Walvis Bay. You have the most powerful navy in the world. If you can't defeat it, contain it.

>>9462795

*wall along the coast

>>9462777
Thank you.
>>9462758
the election of a Black man was a major social achievement for a former slave holding society that is still haunted by its past. But Obama was not a radical civil rights leader. He was a Judas goat who made war cool and palatable domestically and internationally, and who pretended to be sincere about reforming our insane economic system while defending those on Wall St. who destroyed the global economy. In many ways, he was a step back for genuine grassroots movements. As Glenn .Ford rightly put it, Obama not only neutralize radicals (especially Black radicals), but he humiliated them.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c3-FFcCUMGk

>>9462803
Sounds like defeatist talk to me, Mr. Fight-Until-the-Sand-Glows.

>>9462790
Don't be naive. The FBI has infiltrated every aspect of civil society. The NSA records everything you say on the phone, your movements by tracking your cell phone, and all Internet activity. Yes, I am going to say thing without irony: if you think you can fundamentally change the balance of power without the Feds taking an interest, you should check your White privilege because most Blacks remember what happened to MLK and Malcolm X and Fred Hampton and MOVE in Philadelphia. If you think the police and the Feds will leave "uppity" Blacks alone, watch this story of the police dropping military grade explosives on an unarmed Black environmentalist community.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N-fQdGyPlSU

>>9462840
you can always just start murdering people with wreckless abandon

FBI interest would be slim to naught since youd end up dying

>>9462850
'Kay.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VdvqNnStY_Q

>>9462871
>implying declaring open season on policy makers wont change their tune

File: 1480151855520.png (105KB, 954x1157px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 954x1157px

Who let reddit in ITT?

Using the phrase "white privilege" unironically should be grounds for a ban.

>>9462871
hah, anon, certainly not denying the existence of racism, or excessive use of governmental force, but say I concede and say that the cultural issues in the black community stem purely from ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''white''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' oppression. say I agree with reparations and whatever form of Mea Culpa people dream of. How will this change that culture?

File: IMG_2148.jpg (176KB, 814x578px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 814x578px

>>9446509

>>9463141
Not only did I get to say, "White privilege" without irony, but I even got to say, "check your White privilege". I never thought in a million years I'd get to say that.

I also remember how impressed I was by this secret knowledge when I was in first year poli sci. This was the 90s too, when he was a real edgelord.

cuz why the fuck not

>>9454369

You need to get shwifty. That show is more /lit/ than you'll ever be.

File: 1493688510638.gif (922KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

922KB, 640x360px

>north invades, starting a war, massacres citizens by the tens of thousands if they had a bad opinion
>north denies peace talks
>decades later people cry about muh evil empire

The u.s. has never bombed somebody that didnt deserve it.

>>9465870
>korea invades itself

Interesting logic, America

>>9463141
Why? Its comedy relief and fresh newfags ripe for trolling. 4chan is mostly dead anyway, may as well get some mining in before in.

>>9454173
still valid

>>9465916
>hurr America existing in the south created unrest.

Please, if we didn't occupy south korea theyd have concentration camp menorials instead of skyscrapers.

>>9465916

So I guess Fransisco Franco was perfectly justified in invading Catalonia and massacring a dickload of communists.

File: afsdjkjl;kdfasl;jkfas.jpg (34KB, 948x711px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 948x711px

>>9463292

He works at MIT, a university literally funded by the people and institutions he claims to hate. He could work at a less prestigious university but noooooo he had to be a rockstar.

This is the problem with American """"""""""education""""""""""" it's full of professors who are more interested in being celebrities than actually moving their discipline forward.

>>9466023
Franco did nothing wrong.

>>9466035
basically chomsky's whole post-linguistics career has been him on an epic guilt trip for working for one of the major american military-industrial universities, it's not like he could've have gone to some dinky private liberal arts college that never took a penny in dod spending, but no he had to be a fucking rockstar

>>9466037

I tend to agree but I doubt he/she/it will.

>>9465650
It is funny how Chomsky was an edgelord in the 90s, yet today his thought is the basis of most leftist thought. At the same time, political, civil and economic rights have plummeted since the 90s. So radical thought is swimming around at the same time as our rights are being taken away. I wonder how it will all end.