Noam Chomsky: Trump is a Distraction

[helltoupee]

I admire your stamina in pursuing debate #83249874145 with a libertarian over how the legal system of an an-cap state would look like. I can't do that anymore: it's fun if you can get down to really specific aspects of economy. Had a good one with Greoric over Norway's SWF: eventually it got granular enough that he just stopped responding, but the journey there was fun.

Yes. I have been over this same exact thing with Greoric and a few others. As with most things in the War Room now, I feel like I'm making the same arguments over and over again, and am starting to burn out. Sometimes I let my self control slip a little though.

Arguing with Greoric is exactly as you describe. Don't get me wrong, he's obviously a bright guy, but he becomes a little irritating when he refuses to engage in any of the logistics of how An-cap would effectively work. I do agree with him on certain things, however, which makes our conversations half way interesting. Regardless of whether or not I agree with someone, if I respect them, I have no problem acknowledging that there are legitimate points to be had on all sides.

 

[helltoupee]

Again look at how they've brainwashed you. "If the state doesn't enforce law, there will be no enforcement "....that is again what you think, because your masters have brainwashed you into subjection. They made you believe you need them to survive.

No. A voluntary society does not mean a lawless society, and it does not mean that there is no law enforcement. It simply means there is no *monopoly* on the enforcement of law.

People voluntarily contract to be governed by the enforcement service that they choose. So there is not a monopoly of enforcement, but a decentralized system of enforcement.

That's great but let's use our critical thinking skills and put this into practice. Will all enforcement services be equal? If not, what is to prevent a larger, better funded, trained, and equipped enforcement service from strong arming yours, or anyone else's? I could literally walk into your home and take everything you own. And there would be nothing you could do about it, as long as I had a big enough stick, ie enforcement service imposing my right to pillage (my enforcement service, my rules).

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

What isn't a distraction these days? What's even funnier is that people here actually believe it's social media and platforms like Sherdog that are poisoning people's minds.

As you’re posting here

 

[mixcontactsport]

As you’re posting here

I'm not changing anyone's opinion on anything. You'd be an idiot to think I am.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

I'm not changing anyone's opinion on anything. You'd be an idiot to think I am.

Maybe you post some really good info on stuff.

 

[mixcontactsport]

Maybe you post some really good info on stuff.

WAT!
I couldn't change anyone's mind even if I wanted to, trust me when I say this. Sherdog is a very, very small platform, filled with fight fans, and not to be confused with boxing fans; they at least have some class. I might as well be talking to a brick wall here.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

WAT!
I couldn't change anyone's mind even if I wanted to, trust me when I say this. Sherdog is a very, very small platform, filled with fight fans, and not to be confused with boxing fans; they at least have some class. I might as well be talking to a brick wall here.

Just trying to give you a pep talk

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

That's great but let's use our critical thinking skills and put this into practice. Will all enforcement services be equal? If not, what is to prevent a larger, better funded, trained, and equipped enforcement service from strong arming yours, or anyone else's? I could literally walk into your home and take everything you own. And there would be nothing you could do about it, as long as I had a big enough stick, ie enforcement service imposing my right to pillage (my enforcement service, my rules).

What you've described is what the American government does now.

So...why would you have a problem with it?

 

[HunterAcosta]

Trump isn't serving the elites. That's what Hillary was meant to do. That's why all the media and academia hate him. You know who works for the controlling elite? Chomsky. When was the last time he proposed the ending of the Fed? Global Warming isn't an 'issue' except for the controlling elite who want to use it as a pretext for One World Government. Trump is the enemy of Chomsky's elite because he's not on their team.

That’s absolute bullshit . There is no corporate billionaire on this planet earth who doesn’t serve the elites . And Kushner has talked daddy in law to doing what exactly ? Sucking Israel’s dick like all the elites do. He is no rebel . Give me a break . If that were even a quarter true , they would have Kennedyd his ass Lee Harvey style .

 

[Trotsky]

Trump is not a distraction.

I'm perfectly capable of waking up in the morning and going about my business without worry about what the POTUS is up to.

The rest of you? No offense but I don't give a shit.

That's not the point, friend. The point is that news about Trump's antics and general incompetence is saturating the news while his administration and party administer policies that are bad for the country and that its citizens, even largely his own party's supporters, do not like.

 

[Trotsky]

Trump isn't serving the elites. That's what Hillary was meant to do. That's why all the media and academia hate him. You know who works for the controlling elite? Chomsky. When was the last time he proposed the ending of the Fed? Global Warming isn't an 'issue' except for the controlling elite who want to use it as a pretext for One World Government. Trump is the enemy of Chomsky's elite because he's not on their team.

@Jack V Savage @Fawlty @Quipling @HomerThompson @PolishHeadlock @Limbo Pete

This is literally the most idiotic and delusional post I've ever read on this site. Holy shit. At least the fact that it's from someone with a month-old account gives me hope that it's trolling.

 

[Fawlty]

@Jack V Savage @Fawlty @Quipling @HomerThompson @PolishHeadlock @Limbo Pete

This is literally the most idiotic and delusional post I've ever read on this site. Holy shit. At least the fact that it's from someone with a month-old account gives me hope that it's trolling.

Yeah that guy needs to go. Probably won't take long. Can't recall a post I've seen that has ever been more wrong.

 

[WTF2008]

That's not the point, friend. The point is that news about Trump's antics and general incompetence is saturating the news while his administration and party administer policies that are bad for the country and that its citizens, even largely his own party's supporters, do not like.

I love stuff like this.
It's kind of the opposite.
The news keeps talking shit about Trump while everything keeps getting better.

The silent majority is why Democrats are gonna lose again.

You can't support Trump without getting kicked out of restaurants, attacked on the street.

You're just strengthening everyones resolve.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

If the only values that existed were those that pertained to individuals, you would still be living in a cave.

Homo Sapiens greatest strength as a species, over all other animals, is their ability to organize.

This is silly.
Ants are more organised than us.
And, our ability to organise is what's enabled the absolute worst of what we've done as a species: organised crime, organised religion, exploitative governments, war, genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc, etc, etc.
So, "social value" should generally be tempered with a healthy respect for the value of the individual - whose personal wants generally motivate and shape organisation into something more than simply keeping the wheels turning.

While it has played no small part in elevating us to a level above the rest of the animal kingdom, an ability to organise would not have brought us to where we are without our having enough imagination to fuel a perpetual dissatisfaction with whatever the status quo happens to be, combined with a healthy dose of personal avarice.
Greed has probably done more for us as a species than "an ability to organise".

 

[TheGreatA]

This is silly.
Ants are more organised than us.
And, our ability to organise is what's enabled the absolute worst of what we've done as a species: organised crime, organised religion, exploitative governments, war, genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc, etc, etc.
So, "social value" should generally be tempered with a healthy respect for the value of the individual - whose personal wants generally motivate and shape organisation into something more than simply keeping the wheels turning.

While it has played no small part in elevating us to a level above the rest of the animal kingdom, an ability to organise would not have brought us to where we are without our having enough imagination to fuel a perpetual dissatisfaction with whatever the status quo happens to be, combined with a healthy dose of personal avarice.
Greed has probably done more for us as a species than "an ability to organise".

I'd say it's our individual capabilities (which, if not more enhanced, are certainly more diverse than those possessed by most animals), along with our ability to enhance them by (occasionally, but not always) working together cohesively, that's gotten us to where we are.

We don't necessarily have any innate "collective" capabilities like the ants have, a literal hive-mind working together for one goal, one mind, one purpose. We cannot read each others' minds or derive other people's purposes, and can at best, make educated guesses as to what they may be. Our collective accomplishments consist of a variety of individuals working for a variety of different purposes, sometimes directly competing against one another. And through this competition of individuals, our collective often benefits, sometimes suffers, but more so of the former than the latter.

The fact that we consist of individuals rather than a collective of like-minded "units", is probably more so the reason why we have evolved beyond the "ant's nest" or the "cave". Because no matter what system is built, no matter how comfortable existence may be made to seem, the human factor remains, with all of its variables.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

I'd say it's our individual capabilities (which, if not more enhanced, are certainly more diverse than those possessed by most animals), along with our ability to enhance them by (occasionally, but not always) working together cohesively, that's gotten us to where we are.

We don't necessarily have any innate "collective" capabilities like the ants have, a literal hive-mind working together for one goal, one mind, one purpose. We cannot read each others' minds or derive other people's purposes, and can at best, make educated guesses as to what they may be. Our collective accomplishments consist of a variety of individuals working for a variety of different purposes, sometimes directly competing against one another. And through this competition of individuals, our collective often benefits, sometimes suffers, but more so of the former than the latter.

The fact that we consist of individuals rather than a collective, is probably more so the reason why we have evolved beyond the "ant's nest" or the "cave". Because no matter what system is built, no matter how comfortable existance may be made to seem, the human factor remains, with all of its variables.

We seem to be in agreement more than we're not.
I possibly assign more value to the motivations of the individual than you do, whereas you chalk more up to the capabilities of the exceptional individuals (socially supported or otherwise) that have historically driven human progress.

Necessity being the mother of invention, I think that our imagination (that is, being able to imagine something "better" than the status quo) and our inability to find satisfaction (the human factor) is more significant a factor in driving our advancement than simply our having the ability to advance.

Either way, the individual more than the community sits at the center of our respective models for human progress.

 

[TheGreatA]

We seem to be in agreement more than we're not.
I possibly assign more value to the motivations of the individual than you do, whereas you chalk more up to the capabilities of the exceptional individuals (socially supported or otherwise) that have historically driven human progress.

Necessity being the mother of invention, I think that our imagination (that is, being able to imagine something "better" than the status quo) and our inability to find satisfaction (the human factor) is more significant a factor in driving our advancement than simply our having the ability to advance.

Either way, the individual more than the community sits at the center of our respective models for human progress.

Well, I don't think anything of this sort is set in stone. It's part motivations, part capabilities, and partly even the collective. In the end, each play a role in enabling the others. The subject could be speculated upon endlessly. I don't necessarily even disagree with the original poster, as organizational and social skills are definitely a large part of why humans have been able to develop civilizations, and thus, concentrate resources and efforts. But to put primary focus on the human ability to coordinate, might be missing the point quite a bit. It's a huge factor but not necessarily the key factor which separates humans from any other species.

I think it's generally best to acknowledge that our "collective" shouldn't be treated in such simple terms as a collective of insects or animals. In many cases our collective results are the conglomeration of individual efforts, not all of which are necessarily even driven by the same objectives. If our efforts to progress were driven by a collective hive mind, we would not have taken into account many of the possibilities that have enabled our current existence, some of which are the results of friction rather than cohesiveness.

For example, Europe could've simply called it a day in medieval times, and seen themselves best fit to be governed by theocracy and monarchy, a state of existence that had continued for close to a thousand years. It was the act of rebellious individuals that led to the establishment of countries like the United States. That's why, in America in particular, the emphasis is greatly on the acts of individuals over the collective, though this sometimes leaves the Americans blind to the part that the "collective" plays in shaping their lives.

Likewise, many Asians are left blind to the effect of individual actions in shaping society, as their (modern) philosophy is grounded on focusing on the strengths of the collective, over that of the individual's.

 

[Gandhi]

Yeah that guy needs to go. Probably won't take long. Can't recall a post I've seen that has ever been more wrong.

There are like 5 accounts all arguing for libertarian dumbanomics, debating if Trump is the savior or just another tool of the lizard people, and it’s all the fault of the Fed. This guy is just barely noticeable in the crowed.....

 

[AlexDB9]

@Jack V Savage @Fawlty @Quipling @HomerThompson @PolishHeadlock @Limbo Pete

This is literally the most idiotic and delusional post I've ever read on this site. Holy shit. At least the fact that it's from someone with a month-old account gives me hope that it's trolling.

This is one hell of a triggered bat signal

 

[Hognoxious]

@Jack V Savage @Fawlty @Quipling @HomerThompson @PolishHeadlock @Limbo Pete

This is literally the most idiotic and delusional post I've ever read on this site. Holy shit. At least the fact that it's from someone with a month-old account gives me hope that it's trolling.

You are so smart, that you failed to debunk anything that I said, while tagging every like minded Marxist you could think of. So brave and intellectual of you.