[PREV - QUESTION_FOR_CHOMSKY] [TOP]
CHOMSKY_DONT_ROCK
October 9, 2007
One of the remarkable things about
Chomsky is that he's inspired a lot
of hatred among the right, but the
only smears they've been able to
come up with are rather minor, and One of the
fall apart rather quickly given any funniest I've
attention whatsoever. stumbled across:
Chomsky likes Pol Pot! "Chomsky is
emotionally Evidence: he
Well no: he argued that comparable cold!" doesn't get
crimes among US allies have been rock n' roll!
ignored. And early on, I think he But then, if
argued Pol Pot's atrocities were he wasn't
exaggerated (how anyone was "cold" they'd
supposed to know otherwise back call him (And if you'd
then isn't clear). "shrill", like to see
and accuse Chomsky being
There don't appear to be him of warm, try reading
any Chomsky quotes from ranting. him writing in
any period of time where praise of
Chomsky expressed sympathy Bertrand
for the Khmer Rogue. Russell.)
If there were, the right
would presumably have
turned them up by now.
Chomsky likes
Faurisson! (He likes who?
Like I was saying:
Well no, he these are really
defended small beans.)
Faurisson's
right to (Apr 2, 2013)
free speech,
despite not I see that Delong claims that
agreeing with Chomsky *also* defended Faurisson
him. That's called as a moderate, which is perhaps
"integrity", a case where Chomsky nods.
you know?
Still another:
(Mar 27/Sep 02, 2013)
Chomsky was wrong
about the Kosovo War. I have to confess I don't
really know what Chomsky
was saying around then.
And I still don't think I I'll get back to you
understand the Kosovo War. when I understand the
Balkans. Maybe next
weekend.
But if Chomsky is anathema
for reading Kosovo wrong,
can we also fire everyone
who got Iraq wrong?
That would be a good trade.
Now, consider how *long* Chomsky has
been politically active, and think
about the various unfortunate
obsessions the left has been afflicted
with over the years.
Was Chomsky an apologist
for Stalin or Mao?
Did Chomsky call for violent
revolution during the
Vietnam war era?
Did Chomsky become obsessed
with impenetrable, ungrounded
post-modern critical theory?
The answer to all is "no".
For a "radical extremist"
Chomsky has been very Which is not to say Chomsky has
consistently level-headed. never said anything stupid... I
got a bad impression of him from
a sound byte in defense of Bill
Clinton (from memory):
"All business is corrupt,
and by the standards of
business the corruption
involved in Whitewater
is quite small."
This struck me as an offensively stupid
characterization of business. In what
sense, for example, could Apple Computer
be declared "corrupt"?
It also struck me as
an absurd mischaracter- Of course,
ization of the events that was
surrounding Whitewater, back before
which included a money Uncle Stevie
laundering scheme where played games
Hillary pretended to be with back-
prescient about cattle dating stock
futures. options.
And there *is*
the tale about
him ripping
off the Woz
for several
hundred in the
early days.
Still, none of
those blemishes
are up at the
level of the
Clintons at play
in Arkansas.
The facts Chomsky
raises never seem
to be challenged.
Neither are his
main political
assumptions:
o We should be cognizant
of the failings of our Does Chomsky neglect
own country. to ever focus on the
positive aspects?
o "Consistent foreign
policy" is more important Perhaps, but why should he?
than Realpolitik. Jingos are common, critics
rare... why shouldn't he
focus on criticism?
To me, this just means that
Chomsky is not the only
voice you should hear.
(June 9, 2009) Certainly, rigorous
critical thinking doesn't
A possible critique of Chomsky: exhaust the spectrum.
He doesn't get that the idea of
America can still be inspiring, even
if the actuality has consistently
disappointed.
The vision thing, you know?
--------
[NEXT - DOUBLE_THINK]