Noam Chomsky: Paris attacks show hypocrisy of West's outrage

[WrestlinganJudo]

Just more tribal bullshit from both sides.

Our Western tribe is awesome, and their Muslim Tribe cannot coexist and must be destroyed.

The Western Tribe is infidels and does not worship Allah, they must be destroyed.

Same argument from both sides, same argument that is the basis of every conflict ever. Must destroy the "other"because they are different .

Every conflict ever is a very long reach.

 

[WrestlinganJudo]

Well no, but are you talking about what radicals will do, or what turns people radical?

As for radicalism, I actually think the driving force for most of it is the internet and its ability to help crazy movements get the money and lost souls they need. The huge amount of attention and coverage they garner by attacking the biggest countries on the block, feeds that.

The battle of Tours was obviously a result of the internet. Damned internet.

 

[WrestlinganJudo]

ostensible = appearing to be true, but not necessarily so

This quote befuddles me. You used ostensible correctly if you were to conclude that a powerful motive for the war was actually Western profit, but since you do not mention that I must conclude that your wildly naive assertion (that we invaded Iraq to bring freedom to the people and safety to America) is what you are actually putting forth as a characterization of the war.

But there is no profit.

 

[JosephDredd]

But there is no profit.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat? The war equipment sales alone in Iraq have resulted in vast fortunes being paid to private contractors.

Edit: I'm stunned by this. What are you basing this on? On the surface this is the most clueless thing I've ever heard. You must have some reason for saying this.

 

[INTERL0PER]

But there is no profit.

Common misconception.

The people of America, in terms of the general population, have not profited at all. In fact, they've paid out the ass for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But don't get it confused, certain companies have made absolute fuck tons of money.

Every bullet fired, every bomb dropped, every gun, tank, jet that's built... all of that is profit for someone.

 

[burningspear]

I know one guy who has profited, big time.... and he was once a socialist

 

[Possum Jenkins]

I hope Chomsky continues to write like this for the simple reason that he will find himself completely discredited if he fails to somehow grasp that, yes, indeed, the fanatics who carried out this attack are downright evil, and indeed "the bad guys."

He's been writing like this for 50 years and still isn't discredited.

Obviously the supporters of state and economic power and violence have discredited him from the beginning, but I'd say that's a really a feather in his cap. Decent people have correctly honored him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky#Academic_achievements.2C_awards.2C_and_honors

 

[IDL]

Common misconception.

The people of America, in terms of the general population, have not profited at all. In fact, they've paid out the ass for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But don't get it confused, certain companies have made absolute fuck tons of money.

Every bullet fired, every bomb dropped, every gun, tank, jet that's built... all of that is profit for someone.

Yeah war isn't waged to profit the peasants. It's more a wealth transfer into the hands of the oligarchy.

 

[Madmick]

He's been writing like this for 50 years and still isn't discredited.

Obviously the supporters of state and economic power and violence have discredited him from the beginning, but I'd say that's a really a feather in his cap. Decent people have correctly honored him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky#Academic_achievements.2C_awards.2C_and_honors

Yes, the heft of credibility that anarchism has carried as a serious political viability outside university walls the past half century always manages to slip my mind.

 

[OldGoat]

Lol.

Under that pretense, just about every invasion in history is justified. Every invading army attacks for supposed defensive measures. Hell, an invasion or attack on the US would be justified. Pearl Harbor would be MORE than justified because there was plenty of evidence that the US was amassing ships and planes for an attack on Japan.

So Japan, believing that there was a real threat to its nation, attacked a US naval base (not a city or civilian population) located in a US colony (not a US territory). If "Western values" say this is ok, we should have no problems with Pearl Harbor.

Face it, the Iraq invasion is textbook terrorism. Just about all other US military ventures are also textbook terrorism.

If you win it's justified.

 

[SammyPops]

Muslims have a PHD in hypocrisy so I really couldn't care less if hypocrisy exists in this debate on the side of the West.

Bottom line: Islam is to free, civilized countries what cancer is to healthy flesh.

the hate is strong

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Yes, the heft of credibility that anarchism has carried as a serious political viability outside university walls the past half century always manages to slip my mind.

Except we're not talking about anarchism as a serious political viability, are we? We're talking about Chomsky's personal accomplishments and honors.

If you win it's justified.

Finally some honesty.

I really hope you encourage your ideological buddies to do the same.

 

[OldGoat]

Except we're not talking about anarchism as a serious political viability, are we? We're talking about Chomsky's personal accomplishments and honors.




Finally some honesty.

I really hope you encourage your ideological buddies to do the same.

I've recognized and admitted might makes right consistently. I also advocate that advocating the concept of natural rights is beneficial to society and the individual.

 

[Lee978]

I've recognized and admitted might makes right consistently. I also advocate that advocating the concept of natural rights is beneficial to society and the individual.

Aren't these two concepts mutually exclusive? If might makes right "consistently" then do rights ever matter?

 

[Madmick]

Except we're not talking about anarchism as a serious political viability, are we? We're talking about Chomsky's personal accomplishments and honors.

No, his penchant for anarchist political gobbledyg**k is the precise framework of context here. Chomsky doesn't even seem to care that it was western Muslims exacting the terror, nor does he care about the specifics insofar that it was satirical journalists that were being terrorized-- hardly the bourgeoisie projecting the arm of state/economic power. Of course, none of that matters when you can dismiss it as a symptom of your greater theory which isn't rooted in any sort of meaningful basis. He knows his audience, and he's preaching to that choir. This time he went too far, though, and he's going to alienate what few of the mainstream come to first learn of him through these comments, and those who perhaps shared some sympathies for his political nonsense before.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

No, his penchant for anarchist political gobbledyg**k is the precise framework of context here. Chomsky doesn't even seem to care that it was western Muslims exacting the terror, nor does he care about the specifics insofar that it was satirical journalists that were being terrorized-- hardly the bourgeoisie projecting the arm of state/economic power. Of course, none of that matters when you can dismiss it as a symptom of your greater theory which isn't rooted in any sort of meaningful basis. He knows his audience, and he's preaching to that choir. This time he went too far, though, and he's going to alienate what few of the mainstream come to first learn of him through these comments, and those who perhaps shared some sympathies for his political nonsense before.

This time he went too far? Lol. You're obviously not familiar with him.

The guy published his book "9/11" in November 2001. In it, he roasted American imperialism and said that as bad as 9/11, it didn't begin to compare to the terror the US enacts throughout the world. If you'll remember, this was a time when Dubya was flying at 90% approval and anything other than "Support our troops" was pretty close to treason.

That book was a NY Times bestseller. With zero mainstream press. That certainly didn't isolate him.

He's also famous for saying that every US president since Eisenhower would be hanged if the Nuremberg principles were applied to them:



Didn't alienate anyone with that one, either. Hell, some of his articles appear on CNN and The Huffington Post now.

Face it, the guy is a truth-teller of the greatest magnitude. Fortunately, there are enough rational, honest and decent people in the world for whom principles are more important than state worshiping. He'll have an audience as long as those people exist.

 

[Madmick]

This time he went too far? Lol. You're obviously not familiar with him.

The guy published his book "9/11" in November 2001. In it, he roasted American imperialism and said that as bad as 9/11, it didn't begin to compare to the terror the US enacts throughout the world. If you'll remember, this was a time when Dubya was flying at 90% approval and anything other than "Support our troops" was pretty close to treason.

That book was a NY Times bestseller. With zero mainstream press. That certainly didn't isolate him.

He's also famous for saying that every US president since Eisenhower would be hanged if the Nuremberg principles were applied to them:



Didn't alienate anyone with that one, either. Hell, some of his articles appear on CNN and The Huffington Post now.

Face it, the guy is a truth-teller of the greatest magnitude. Fortunately, there are enough rational, honest and decent people in the world for whom principles are more important than state worshiping. He'll have an audience as long as those people exist.

I presume when you say "rational, honest, decent people" who loves to read his books you're referring to guys like this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/23/books/23chomsky.html

Ah, from the same bestseller list that boasts names like Michael Savage. So relevant. The next time I'm in a checkout line at the supermarket I'll make a point to strike up a conversation with the person behind me by asking, "Hey, do you think Chomsky's opinion that the media is little more than a pulpit for perpetuating the axes of institutional power is correct?" I'm sure I won't be greeted by a blank stare. Even college students stop caring the minute they put the test down.

No, Chomsky went too far this time: much, much too far. We're not talking about the financial center of the West, here. We're not even talking about the rich, spoiled brats of Saudi oligarchs. We're talking about a bunch of satirists and cartoonists getting gunned down in cold blood by their fellow citizens; one of whom who had no historical attachment to Islam or the suffering of "state-sponsored terrorism" abroad by the West at all.

Unfortunately, there will always be spineless, disaffected, powerless pseudo-intellectuals who cling to cult champions of anti-authoritarian propaganda like this (as it requires its own audience for solvent sustainability). You know...the type who always gravitate towards the most outrageous minority opinions out of-- I speculate-- some strange narcissistic need to feel exceptional when there is nothing else exceptional about them; the type who endlessly soapbox about the unmitigated evils of "state worshiping" and those who willfully contribute to such states while never doing anything meaningful to counter it, but, on the contrary, continue this pontification while actually participating in the power structures of such states themselves! (i.e. paying taxes, voting, etc.) One wonders if there could be any more pitiful a creature so hopelessly unaware of their opaque (but evidential) self-loathing.

 

[ButterStoch]

I presume when you say "rational, honest, decent people" who loves to read his books you're referring to guys like this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/23/books/23chomsky.html

Ah, from the same bestseller list that boasts names like Michael Savage. So relevant. The next time I'm in a checkout line at the supermarket I'll make a point to strike up a conversation with the person behind me by asking, "Hey, do you think Chomsky's opinion that the media is little more than a pulpit for perpetuating the axes of institutional power is correct?" I'm sure I won't be greeted by a blank stare. Even college students stop caring the minute they put the test down.

No, Chomsky went too far this time: much, much too far. We're not talking about the financial center of the West, here. We're not even talking about the rich, spoiled brats of Saudi oligarchs. We're talking about a bunch of satirists and cartoonists getting gunned down in cold blood by their fellow citizens; one of whom who had no historical attachment to Islam or the suffering of "state-sponsored terrorism" abroad by the West at all.

Unfortunately, there will always be spineless, disaffected, powerless pseudo-intellectuals who cling to cult champions of anti-authoritarian propaganda like this (as it requires its own audience for solvent sustainability). You know...the type who always gravitate towards the most outrageous minority opinions out of-- I speculate-- some strange narcissistic need to feel exceptional when there is nothing else exceptional about them; the type who endlessly soapbox about the unmitigated evils of "state worshiping" and those who willfully contribute to such states while never doing anything meaningful to counter it, but, on the contrary, continue this pontification while actually participating in the power structures of such states themselves! (i.e. paying taxes, voting, etc.) One wonders if there could be any more pitiful a creature so hopelessly unaware of their opaque (but evidential) self-loathing.

I feel this is a great post & nails the Chomsky demographic... well. He has been trotting out the same tired memes for nearly 50 years. Once they buy his Nazi premise "it all makes sense"...they see the light that...others...the unenlightened....the sheep cannot see. They took the right pill & went down the rabbit hole, while we sheeple are still dreaming. Still tools of the oppressive Western state whose consent is manufactured to oppress...to exploit...brown people, rebels & freedom fighters.

Your speculation into the mindset shows you have the ability to think in the shoes of those who are the "true believers". Osama Bin Laden was a fan of Chomsky & read his work. It fit neatly into his ideology.

After I read a list of 100 different quotes of Chomsky, almost all lies...his credibility was just...gone, not just ideological disagreement...but his utter lack of intellectual honesty. I dont mean getting something wrong, but knowingly telling lies to advance your point. He is the intellectual foundation of the modern Left.

 

[Zoti]

I presume when you say "rational, honest, decent people" who loves to read his books you're referring to guys like this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/23/books/23chomsky.html

Ah, from the same bestseller list that boasts names like Michael Savage. So relevant. The next time I'm in a checkout line at the supermarket I'll make a point to strike up a conversation with the person behind me by asking, "Hey, do you think Chomsky's opinion that the media is little more than a pulpit for perpetuating the axes of institutional power is correct?" I'm sure I won't be greeted by a blank stare. Even college students stop caring the minute they put the test down.

No, Chomsky went too far this time: much, much too far. We're not talking about the financial center of the West, here. We're not even talking about the rich, spoiled brats of Saudi oligarchs. We're talking about a bunch of satirists and cartoonists getting gunned down in cold blood by their fellow citizens; one of whom who had no historical attachment to Islam or the suffering of "state-sponsored terrorism" abroad by the West at all.

Unfortunately, there will always be spineless, disaffected, powerless pseudo-intellectuals who cling to cult champions of anti-authoritarian propaganda like this (as it requires its own audience for solvent sustainability). You know...the type who always gravitate towards the most outrageous minority opinions out of-- I speculate-- some strange narcissistic need to feel exceptional when there is nothing else exceptional about them; the type who endlessly soapbox about the unmitigated evils of "state worshiping" and those who willfully contribute to such states while never doing anything meaningful to counter it, but, on the contrary, continue this pontification while actually participating in the power structures of such states themselves! (i.e. paying taxes, voting, etc.) One wonders if there could be any more pitiful a creature so hopelessly unaware of their opaque (but evidential) self-loathing.

Sounds like a very accurate description of some members of this forum.

 

[jeffk]

Unfortunately, there will always be spineless, disaffected, powerless pseudo-intellectuals who cling to cult champions of anti-authoritarian propaganda like this (as it requires its own audience for solvent sustainability). You know...the type who always gravitate towards the most outrageous minority opinions out of-- I speculate-- some strange narcissistic need to feel exceptional when there is nothing else exceptional about them; the type who endlessly soapbox about the unmitigated evils of "state worshiping" and those who willfully contribute to such states while never doing anything meaningful to counter it, but, on the contrary, continue this pontification while actually participating in the power structures of such states themselves! (i.e. paying taxes, voting, etc.) One wonders if there could be any more pitiful a creature so hopelessly unaware of their opaque (but evidential) self-loathing.

liked this.

Sam Harris talks a little bit about Chomsky in his latest podcast

https://soundcloud.com/samharrisorg