GTAVercetti 0 #1 April 28, 2005 This should make for interesting conversation: http://www.reason.com/0504/cr.mb.deconstructing.shtmlWhy yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #2 April 28, 2005 QuoteThis should make for interesting conversation: http://www.reason.com/0504/cr.mb.deconstructing.shtml Nothing new here. Only another explaination for the Goose-Stepping on the Left by the mind-numbed Chomskyites. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #3 April 28, 2005 Certainly, but I thought it brought all the points together into something more cohesive. Reason magazine tends to do that sort of thing very well.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #4 April 28, 2005 >Only another explaination for the Goose-Stepping on the Left by the >mind-numbed Chomskyites. Perfect! From the article: "They and the other contributors do not hesitate to call him a liar and self-promoter, a man of “devious ambiguity” and “fevered imaginings.” The frustration they feel at Chomsky’s fame and influence suffuses the prose and sometimes blunts the argument." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #5 April 28, 2005 Quote>Only another explaination for the Goose-Stepping on the Left by the >mind-numbed Chomskyites. Perfect! From the article: "They and the other contributors do not hesitate to call him a liar and self-promoter, a man of “devious ambiguity” and “fevered imaginings.” The frustration they feel at Chomsky’s fame and influence suffuses the prose and sometimes blunts the argument." Yep, good debate tactic. Trash your critics criticism of you before they say anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #6 April 28, 2005 QuoteQuote>Only another explaination for the Goose-Stepping on the Left by the >mind-numbed Chomskyites. Perfect! From the article: "They and the other contributors do not hesitate to call him a liar and self-promoter, a man of “devious ambiguity” and “fevered imaginings.” The frustration they feel at Chomsky’s fame and influence suffuses the prose and sometimes blunts the argument." Yep, good debate tactic. Trash your critics criticism of you before they say anything. I think you may have missed billvon's point. But this is all getting very meta.Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #7 April 28, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote>Only another explaination for the Goose-Stepping on the Left by the >mind-numbed Chomskyites. Perfect! From the article: "They and the other contributors do not hesitate to call him a liar and self-promoter, a man of “devious ambiguity” and “fevered imaginings.” The frustration they feel at Chomsky’s fame and influence suffuses the prose and sometimes blunts the argument." Yep, good debate tactic. Trash your critics criticism of you before they say anything. I think you may have missed billvon's point. Not at all. I understood perfectly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #8 April 28, 2005 I do find Chomsky to be pretty annoying. He's another one of those types of people who doesn't see himself out working the sugar cane fields if his vision for society came to bear. Odds are he'd see himself living much as he does now - among the cultural and socioeconomic elites. He reminds me of Krusty the Klown with his bit on being anti-establishment. Sure, he used the establishment to get him where he is, and without the establshment couldn't be where he is or doing what he's doing. Mainly, I don't think he's got too much of a glimpse of real life and living. The authors have different tales. Radical Son by David Horowitz is an amazing tale of a 60's ultra-radical who figured out that his fellow revolutionaries were nothign more than capitalist thugs out to make money and get power in any way possible. (I'm different - I've moved substantially leftward from where I was 5 years ago). Chomsky has interesting ideas. For example, his vision for society is one of anarchy with no personal property. I find those ideas about as compatible as manned space flight without a pressurized enviroment. Sure, it could be done, but the man or woman would be destroyed in the process. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dropoutdave 0 #9 April 28, 2005 Quotebut the man or woman would be destroyed in the process So really not much different to the way we are heading now then? The human race is but a virus with shoes. ------------------------------------------------------ May Contain Nut traces...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #10 April 28, 2005 QuoteNot at all. I understood perfectly. Saying so doesn't make it true. "Sticking feathers up your butt does NOT make you a chicken." -- Tyler Durden First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #11 April 28, 2005 QuoteQuoteNot at all. I understood perfectly. Saying so doesn't make it true. Thinking you are a victim doesn't mean you are, either. "Sticking feathers up your butt does NOT make you a chicken." -- Tyler Durden Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lindsey 0 #12 April 28, 2005 He's another one of those types of people who doesn't see himself out working the sugar cane fields if his vision for society came to bear. Somehow I don't think he really wants his vision for society to come about as much as he enjoys the intellectual game.....because if it did, he'd be screwed! Socialism *sounds* like a good idea, but when has it panned out? Why didn't true communism ever result from its socialist precursor? People like to get ahead. I think this article just demonstrates that Chomsky, like most people whose ideas are a bit extreme, make every effort to defend their own preachings while ignoring information that does not support them. Peace~ linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #13 April 28, 2005 QuoteWhy didn't true communism ever result from its socialist precursor? because nobody ever tried it HIS way. If he were in charge (which would violate his ideals, by the way) it would be done right... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AdD 1 #14 April 30, 2005 Quote He's another one of those types of people who doesn't see himself out working the sugar cane fields if his vision for society came to bear. Odds are he'd see himself living much as he does now - among the cultural and socioeconomic elites. I do think you may have missed most of the point Chomsky makes by dismissing him as a communist or whatever. The implications of whatever his views on a just society may be are insignificant compared to his contribution to allowing us to understand the nature of Western civilization when its reletivistic moral assumptions are stripped away. I found his work on the manipulation of language and media were an indispensible resource in the process of de-brainwashing myself from the narrowminded view of the world force-fed us by mainstream culture. I would be happy to debate any particular point of his work on these matters in length with anyone who has the opposite opinion. When I read this article I was surprised to find that there was virtually no discussion of the content of Chomsky's arguements, but instead it focussed mostly on criticising his person. This doesn't exactly fly on the scholarly level. In many ways 9-11 was exactly what he says, a response to American foreign policy. Using the isolated example of Iraq, do Americans politicians expect that after hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children die due to economic sanctions (not to mention bombing) that no one would be angry? Why exactly did the air force have to bomb all those water treatment plants and put the country back in the dark ages? Madeline Albright was asked if she though 500,000 Iraqi civilian lives were an acceptable cost for these sanctions and she said that it was. It's not really a surprise that when Bin Laden calls America the Great Satan some people buy in, after all imagine how many Americans would be blowing the shit out of the Middle East any way they could if these were their children dying. Writing the 9-11 off as an attack based on religious extremism alone is just plain stupid, as much as Bush would like to make people believe that M.E. foreign policy and terrorist attacks are unrelated, this is simply bullshit. I also think that Chomsky is on the money when he charges the US with using terrorism itself. There is an excellent book on this called "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim" which traces the development of US terrorism sponsorship through the late Cold War to the 90's, citing many instances where funds were given directly to groups which used terror as a weapon, from the Contras to groups in Angola. Just because you don't hear about this stuff on the news doesn't mean it didn't happen.Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #15 April 30, 2005 I'm not disputing his listing of the symptoms. This article did lack plenty on discussion of Chomsky's arguments. However, I listed above my understanding of his main ideals - anarchy and no private property. Indeed, what is his point in ripping America? Does he have an ultimate goal in stripping away the relativistic moral assumptions of the US and Western Civ? Considering that he uses these arguments relative to the goodness of communists withough "stripping away" the relativistic moral assumptions of North Vietnam's polity, it shows a lack of genuity on his part, doesn't it? Put simply - he'll strip away the foundations in dealing with America. That's fine. But should he not also strip away those same assumptions and foundation to whom he compares America? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SpeedRacer 1 #16 May 2, 2005 QuoteI think this article just demonstrates that Chomsky, like most people whose ideas are a bit extreme, make every effort to defend their own preachings while ignoring information that does not support them. guess he'd fit in on this forum then. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lindsey 0 #17 May 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteI think this article just demonstrates that Chomsky, like most people whose ideas are a bit extreme, make every effort to defend their own preachings while ignoring information that does not support them. guess he'd fit in on this forum then. Umm...I was trying to be subtle... ==8-0 linz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AdD 1 #18 May 6, 2005 QuoteIndeed, what is his point in ripping America? Does he have an ultimate goal in stripping away the relativistic moral assumptions of the US and Western Civ? Considering that he uses these arguments relative to the goodness of communists withough "stripping away" the relativistic moral assumptions of North Vietnam's polity, it shows a lack of genuity on his part, doesn't it? Put simply - he'll strip away the foundations in dealing with America. That's fine. But should he not also strip away those same assumptions and foundation to whom he compares America? Again, Chomsky has made it clear that his criticism of America is not an endorsement of opposing groups, this is simply the area he has chosen to focus his writing on. He doesn't let other regimes off the hook. As to his goal, like all true scholars it is pursuit of truth. Why should we continue to conceive of ourselves in ways which are blatantly untrue, when the result is harm to ourselves and mainly harm to others at our hands? Terrorist movements are not prevented by security, they are stopped when you remove the source of popular support, which in the case of so called Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is US foreign policy, not cultural differences.Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
lawrocket 3 #8 April 28, 2005 I do find Chomsky to be pretty annoying. He's another one of those types of people who doesn't see himself out working the sugar cane fields if his vision for society came to bear. Odds are he'd see himself living much as he does now - among the cultural and socioeconomic elites. He reminds me of Krusty the Klown with his bit on being anti-establishment. Sure, he used the establishment to get him where he is, and without the establshment couldn't be where he is or doing what he's doing. Mainly, I don't think he's got too much of a glimpse of real life and living. The authors have different tales. Radical Son by David Horowitz is an amazing tale of a 60's ultra-radical who figured out that his fellow revolutionaries were nothign more than capitalist thugs out to make money and get power in any way possible. (I'm different - I've moved substantially leftward from where I was 5 years ago). Chomsky has interesting ideas. For example, his vision for society is one of anarchy with no personal property. I find those ideas about as compatible as manned space flight without a pressurized enviroment. Sure, it could be done, but the man or woman would be destroyed in the process. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dropoutdave 0 #9 April 28, 2005 Quotebut the man or woman would be destroyed in the process So really not much different to the way we are heading now then? The human race is but a virus with shoes. ------------------------------------------------------ May Contain Nut traces...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #10 April 28, 2005 QuoteNot at all. I understood perfectly. Saying so doesn't make it true. "Sticking feathers up your butt does NOT make you a chicken." -- Tyler Durden First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #11 April 28, 2005 QuoteQuoteNot at all. I understood perfectly. Saying so doesn't make it true. Thinking you are a victim doesn't mean you are, either. "Sticking feathers up your butt does NOT make you a chicken." -- Tyler Durden Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #12 April 28, 2005 He's another one of those types of people who doesn't see himself out working the sugar cane fields if his vision for society came to bear. Somehow I don't think he really wants his vision for society to come about as much as he enjoys the intellectual game.....because if it did, he'd be screwed! Socialism *sounds* like a good idea, but when has it panned out? Why didn't true communism ever result from its socialist precursor? People like to get ahead. I think this article just demonstrates that Chomsky, like most people whose ideas are a bit extreme, make every effort to defend their own preachings while ignoring information that does not support them. Peace~ linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #13 April 28, 2005 QuoteWhy didn't true communism ever result from its socialist precursor? because nobody ever tried it HIS way. If he were in charge (which would violate his ideals, by the way) it would be done right... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdD 1 #14 April 30, 2005 Quote He's another one of those types of people who doesn't see himself out working the sugar cane fields if his vision for society came to bear. Odds are he'd see himself living much as he does now - among the cultural and socioeconomic elites. I do think you may have missed most of the point Chomsky makes by dismissing him as a communist or whatever. The implications of whatever his views on a just society may be are insignificant compared to his contribution to allowing us to understand the nature of Western civilization when its reletivistic moral assumptions are stripped away. I found his work on the manipulation of language and media were an indispensible resource in the process of de-brainwashing myself from the narrowminded view of the world force-fed us by mainstream culture. I would be happy to debate any particular point of his work on these matters in length with anyone who has the opposite opinion. When I read this article I was surprised to find that there was virtually no discussion of the content of Chomsky's arguements, but instead it focussed mostly on criticising his person. This doesn't exactly fly on the scholarly level. In many ways 9-11 was exactly what he says, a response to American foreign policy. Using the isolated example of Iraq, do Americans politicians expect that after hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children die due to economic sanctions (not to mention bombing) that no one would be angry? Why exactly did the air force have to bomb all those water treatment plants and put the country back in the dark ages? Madeline Albright was asked if she though 500,000 Iraqi civilian lives were an acceptable cost for these sanctions and she said that it was. It's not really a surprise that when Bin Laden calls America the Great Satan some people buy in, after all imagine how many Americans would be blowing the shit out of the Middle East any way they could if these were their children dying. Writing the 9-11 off as an attack based on religious extremism alone is just plain stupid, as much as Bush would like to make people believe that M.E. foreign policy and terrorist attacks are unrelated, this is simply bullshit. I also think that Chomsky is on the money when he charges the US with using terrorism itself. There is an excellent book on this called "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim" which traces the development of US terrorism sponsorship through the late Cold War to the 90's, citing many instances where funds were given directly to groups which used terror as a weapon, from the Contras to groups in Angola. Just because you don't hear about this stuff on the news doesn't mean it didn't happen.Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #15 April 30, 2005 I'm not disputing his listing of the symptoms. This article did lack plenty on discussion of Chomsky's arguments. However, I listed above my understanding of his main ideals - anarchy and no private property. Indeed, what is his point in ripping America? Does he have an ultimate goal in stripping away the relativistic moral assumptions of the US and Western Civ? Considering that he uses these arguments relative to the goodness of communists withough "stripping away" the relativistic moral assumptions of North Vietnam's polity, it shows a lack of genuity on his part, doesn't it? Put simply - he'll strip away the foundations in dealing with America. That's fine. But should he not also strip away those same assumptions and foundation to whom he compares America? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #16 May 2, 2005 QuoteI think this article just demonstrates that Chomsky, like most people whose ideas are a bit extreme, make every effort to defend their own preachings while ignoring information that does not support them. guess he'd fit in on this forum then. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #17 May 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteI think this article just demonstrates that Chomsky, like most people whose ideas are a bit extreme, make every effort to defend their own preachings while ignoring information that does not support them. guess he'd fit in on this forum then. Umm...I was trying to be subtle... ==8-0 linz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdD 1 #18 May 6, 2005 QuoteIndeed, what is his point in ripping America? Does he have an ultimate goal in stripping away the relativistic moral assumptions of the US and Western Civ? Considering that he uses these arguments relative to the goodness of communists withough "stripping away" the relativistic moral assumptions of North Vietnam's polity, it shows a lack of genuity on his part, doesn't it? Put simply - he'll strip away the foundations in dealing with America. That's fine. But should he not also strip away those same assumptions and foundation to whom he compares America? Again, Chomsky has made it clear that his criticism of America is not an endorsement of opposing groups, this is simply the area he has chosen to focus his writing on. He doesn't let other regimes off the hook. As to his goal, like all true scholars it is pursuit of truth. Why should we continue to conceive of ourselves in ways which are blatantly untrue, when the result is harm to ourselves and mainly harm to others at our hands? Terrorist movements are not prevented by security, they are stopped when you remove the source of popular support, which in the case of so called Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is US foreign policy, not cultural differences.Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
