Squirrel!!! – Do you agree with Noam Chomsky?

Homepage Forums Politics Squirrel!!! – Do you agree with Noam Chomsky?

This topic contains 10 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by  mikelansing 6 years ago.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
  • #7508


    An interesting perspective that definitely is…..bone chilling


    Please read and then do you agree or disagree?


    tom sarbeck

    Agree, Bellen. Your vision is better than mine; I didn’t see Ryan et al but do now..



    If I’d have had enough money, I’d have been bribing Fox News to say whatever I wanted the president to believe.  I’d be astonished if nobody has made this effort.  We are all on a bus headed somewhere we don’t want to go, but we cannot get off until the next stop.  That’s November when the American people get to change the face of congress if they so desire.

    Do they so desire?  We will see in November.



    Of course Chomsky’s right. It’s a magician’s trick of distraction. The conservative reich is realizing their every wet dream while the media freak out over Dolt 45.



    Chomsky,  in asserting democratic and republican elites are using Trump as a distraction while they destroy America is not saying anything.  It is vapid rhetoric.  Each party will use whatever is available to further its agenda. That is axiomatic.

    On the other hand Chomsky’s attempt to minimize the significance of  Trump’s contact with Russians is an issue we ought to hold in abeyance.  It is however worthy of investigation.  Trump is not acting in any way other than to further his interests insofar as anybody can tell so to impute a nefarious or treasonous motivation is plausible.  This view is bolstered by circumstantial evidence.  What other “dimplomatic” overtures or advances has he made?  Lets allow it to play out.


    In the meanwhile everyone stays in the swamp run by a stable genius who will “sign anything we out in front of him” (Mitch McConnell)



    First, chomsky is not a philosopher. He is a linguist who dabbles in political theory and very basic philosophical discourse. I agree with his general world view, and I sympathise with him. He lives in the only developed first world Country that is extremely hostile towards social spending, universal health care, financial regulation and criticism of the current foreign policy. With this in mind, I certainly admire his very strong voice and unwavering engagement with all sides of all debates.

    Having said that, his actual methodologies, use of sources, soundness of arguments, screening out fallacies, robust testing of his own ideas and responsible use of claims and evidence is often seriously lacking. That’s why much of academia agrees with his general view and yet ask their students not to use Chomsky as a source. In my philosophy institute Chomsky was only considered an acceptable source in the philosophy of linguistics (which is his specialization) and NOT for his political and philosophical day dreaming. An example of truly terrible scholarship is on his criticism of Israel in Palestine. I agree with his general idea but am flabbergasted by his extremely irresponsible use of evidence, bordering on fabrication if not outright fibbing.

    As for his comments on Deep State, instinctively what he is saying makes some sense. Republicans have been developing a very radical neo-conservative agenda involving brutal slashing of social programs (what few there are), buckets of money for the insanely rick (tax decreases), clamping down on environmental protection and important financial regulations,  the right of the religious to discriminate etc. And it is somewhat true that as Trump is being a despicable shit bag, the republicans are drafting some heavy legislation…but that is the job of legislators. Their job is to pass legislation, regardless of what stupidity the president is getting into. So while yes, he is right that the republicans are pressing new legislation that will make the miserable of American even more miserable and the happy even more happy, there is no special behind the scenes evil plan. No “Trump distraction” scheme, no nefarious agenda to quietly destroy America. They are simply doing their job, regardless of whether you think it is horrible or not. This is, once again an example of Chomsky making sense in the larger picture but then going totally nuts over his interpretation and throwing out claims he cannot possibly present evidence for, let alone prove or defend. I recommend listening to what he says as he is well on top of the pulse of  progressive American academia and activism…just don’t take him too seriously in his analysis.



    I agree with Davis about Chomsky.  I have not read his stuff extensively but what i have is seriously lacking in its analysis.


    Daniel W.

    @davis, nicely thought out and composed response.

    Im very liberal, I think, and fearful about the current US and world political paradigm shifts.  But I cant handle the politically correct and academic left in the US.  I don’t know where that leaves me.

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 1 month ago by  Daniel W..
    • This reply was modified 6 years, 1 month ago by  Daniel W..

    David Boots

    @davis, nicely thought out and composed response. Im very liberal, I think, and fearful about the current US and world political paradigm shifts. But I cant handle the politically correct and academic left in the US. I don’t know where that leaves me.

    I call that being liberal but not to the point of stupidity.



    ‘Perhaps Chomsky’s first intuitions constitute his best work. The fascination that Chomskyan formalization has exerted on linguists during the last two decades is largely due to the topological constructions to which it led: there one handles trees and symbols while distinguishing ambiguities….it is probable that they will only engulf themselves, following the orthodox Chomskyans, in a linguistics that is more distant than ever from a micropolitical pragmatics. It would be better to return to Chomsky’s starting point, but  by considering his that his first models of abstract machines remained too marginalized from the signifying articulations of language.


    The grammaticality that he sought to grasp, far from having to alienate itself in a “semantic logic”, could on the contrary be understood as one of the modalities of the (abstract power [italics]) set into play by the most decoded capitalistic flows (asemantic and asignifying diagrammatic flows).’

    (Guattari F, The Machinic Unconscious: Essays in Schizoanalysis, p. 30 Escaping from Language)


    The “Pocahontas” connection is also the Paul Ryan connection precisely for the Indigenes at Toccoa, Georgia, also a xian stronghold.


    R.G. LeTourneau, Toccoa, Georgia



    Ryan’s daddy links to LeTourneau. The Caterpillar backpacks, T-shirts, work-boots, etc. we saw worn by Middle Easterners just prior to 9-11 (Indiana) is the ‘dangerous’ Chomsky is referring to, though deceptively further, the journal Islamochristiana was begun by the Catholic mafia in 1975.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.