Noam Chomsky (LOL!)

[Deleted]

Huh? Just in this thread people linked a couple of videos to his interviews and discussed them.

It is so difficult to actually read a book? Do you really need to look at the pictures?

Let's try this another way. I saw an interview with that Milton Friedman once. Total prick.

Do you see the problem here?

[Spectral]

I don't believe you or any of the other detractors has read anything he has ever written. I do not think you would be capable of understanding it.

Anytime someone goes to the "you just wouldn't understand it because it's so deep, man" style arguments, they should be laughed out of the room.

[May90]

It is so difficult to actually read a book? Do you really need to look at the pictures?

Let's try this another way. I saw an interview with that Milton Friedman once. Total prick.

Do you see the problem here?

Why would I read a book from someone I don't consider making much sense on topic? That's like saying, "You can't claim that David Icke is wrong without having read his book". Milton Friedman is known for being one of the best in his field, and I would totally read a book on the field written by him. But I wouldn't take his cooking advice seriously...

[Spectral]

Chomsky is a distinguished scientist. Even if you do not support his ideology, you should, at least, respect him due to his scientific output.

I find it feasible to respect someone's work in one field while finding their ideology reprehensible and their conduct dishonest.

[Deleted]

I find it feasible to respect someone's work in one field while finding their ideology reprehensible and their conduct dishonest.

Sure but at least you have to read something of him talking about his political views before being critical of said political views. Im pointing at the post above yours.

[araine]

chomsky is a very knowledgeable person and highly respected since he holds common sense views on most issues

[Kuntantee]

I find it feasible to respect someone's work in one field while finding their ideology reprehensible and their conduct dishonest.

True. Either way, he's not a clown as implied in the OP.

[Independent voter]

I didn't like Chomsky much but he did tear into the French which is cool.

[alexw]

I find it feasible to respect someone's work in one field while finding their ideology reprehensible and their conduct dishonest.

Even on his politics you can split that into two parts, his own personal beliefs and his studies on the workings of the system. I remember watching "manufacturing consent" which was based on his book written some years ago. It details how public perceptions are molded and controlled by the elites and how they use that to control society, and it has proven oh so true.

[Dorothyjean]

Sanders is only considered an 'extremist' in the USA. Most of Sanders's proposals have existed in other industrial nations for decades but don't let the facts bother you.

Bernie Sanders is to the left Stalin and right of Hitler, sure thing.

"don't let the facts bother you" you mean like how most of those other industrial nations have a drastically smaller population with an external deficit that is so jaw droppingly small compared to the United States ... but ya, don't let the facts bother you.

Uh uh... wait... before you even think of replying, let's let the facts bother you some... like Denmark;

Denmark's Population: 5.7 Million
United States Population: 322 Million

Denmark's External Debt in US Dollars: 593 Billion
United States External Debt in US Dollars: 19 TRILLION... Nineteen... Ta-RILLION... T capital T... not a B... a T.

But ya, don't let the facts bother you.

[Endus]

"don't let the facts bother you" you mean like how most of those other industrial nations have a drastically smaller population with an external deficit that is so jaw droppingly small compared to the United States ... but ya, don't let the facts bother you.

Uh uh... wait... before you even think of replying, let's let the facts bother you some... like Denmark;

Denmark's Population: 5.7 Million
United States Population: 322 Million

Denmark's External Debt in US Dollars: 593 Billion
United States External Debt in US Dollars: 19 TRILLION... Nineteen... Ta-RILLION... T capital T... not a B... a T.

But ya, don't let the facts bother you.

Denmark's debt per capita, by your numbers; $104,035
The USA's debt per capita, by your numbers; $59,006

By the numbers you cited, the USA's debt is proportionally smaller than Denmark's.

[May90]

True. Either way, he's not a clown as implied in the OP.

Well, no, not a clown, of course... But his level of argumentation is strangely low. It is quite common for people incredibly good at something to be incredibly bad at something else. You know, like Bobby Fischer was one of the best Chess players in the world (heck, he was probably the best at some point in time - champion and all), and Chess is a very intellectual activity - but he was well known for being an absolute fool in everything else, and how his life went after he retired from Chess is one more indication of that. Journalists, and people in general, like asking popular people various things: if they respect someone, they want to hear their opinions on the matters bothering them - and those opinions often turn out to be ridiculous.

The difference is, people generally try not to talk too much about things they aren't good at. I don't know anything about hockey, and I won't be sitting there with a serious face expression, trying to "analyze" a game or something. I'm not brilliant at politics either, so, while here on forums I like to discuss it, I won't be giving interviews on politics. This guy, however, thinks that his achievements in Linguistics somehow entitle him to be an authority in politics. No, they do not.

I generally don't have any problem with ANY political views. What I have problem with is ludicrous argumentation. No matter what point you are defending, you are supposed to do it by logical means, not by seeing conspiracies everywhere.

- - - Updated - - -

Denmark's debt per capita, by your numbers; $104,035
The USA's debt per capita, by your numbers; $59,006

By the numbers you cited, the USA's debt is proportionally smaller than Denmark's.

Indeed:

http://mecometer.com/topic/external-debt-per-capita/

Denmark is ranked as #15 by External Debt per Capita, having the value of $105,837, while the US is ranked as #23, with the value of $49,961 - close to your results. The ranking is a bit messed up though, since data on different countries is for different years.

[Kuntantee]

But his level of argumentation is strangely low.

I simply disagree. I find his arguments quite good, actually.

[alexw]

"don't let the facts bother you" you mean like how most of those other industrial nations have a drastically smaller population with an external deficit that is so jaw droppingly small compared to the United States ... but ya, don't let the facts bother you.

Uh uh... wait... before you even think of replying, let's let the facts bother you some... like Denmark;

Denmark's Population: 5.7 Million
United States Population: 322 Million

Denmark's External Debt in US Dollars: 593 Billion
United States External Debt in US Dollars: 19 TRILLION... Nineteen... Ta-RILLION... T capital T... not a B... a T.

But ya, don't let the facts bother you.

I am puzzled by what relevancy these numbers have to anything? Are you trying to make the absurd argument that the USA cannot afford x,y,z? If so I'd love to know how taxing exactly xxxx more and spending exactly xxxx more changes anything.

[Forogil]

Why would I read a book from someone I don't consider making much sense on topic? That's like saying, "You can't claim that David Icke is wrong without having read his book". Milton Friedman is known for being one of the best in his field, and I would totally read a book on the field written by him. But I wouldn't take his cooking advice seriously...

Interesting, assumedly you were familiar with the fact that the Friedman's regularly ordered take-outs instead of cooking themselves?

[Deleted]

Anytime someone goes to the "you just wouldn't understand it because it's so deep, man" style arguments, they should be laughed out of the room.

I asked you to read something he wrote before sharing your opinion on it.

This is why no one really listens to right-wingers in the US any more. They think reading a book makes you an intellectual.

- - - Updated - - -

I generally don't have any problem with ANY political views. What I have problem with is ludicrous argumentation. No matter what point you are defending, you are supposed to do it by logical means, not by seeing conspiracies everywhere.

.

Conspiracy theories in the popular sense of the term are something Chomsky specifically rejects, he was scathing about the truther movement for example.

You really are confirming the fact that you simply don't know what you are talking about.

[May90]

I asked you to read something he wrote before sharing your opinion on it.

This is why no one really listens to right-wingers in the US any more. They think reading a book makes you an intellectual.

The hell does one's spot on the political spectrum have to do with this?

Conspiracy theories are something Chomsky specifically rejects, he was scathing about the truther movement for example.

You really are confirming the fact that you simply don't know what you are talking about.

So he says, and then he specifically talks about conspiracies in the real world, making distinction between conspiracy theories and "real conspiracies" - which is nothing more than vocabulary exercise, really. And he, as a linguist, knows it, using it to his advantage. So not only are his arguments illogical, he even knows that they are illogical, and still pushes them - meaning that, among other things, he is also intellectually dishonest.

"You simply don't know" is not an argument at all, and underlining this phrase doesn't change that.

[Deleted]

So he says, and then he specifically talks about conspiracies in the real world, making distinction between conspiracy theories and "real conspiracies" - which is nothing more than vocabulary exercise, really. And he, as a linguist, knows it, using it to his advantage. So not only are his arguments illogical, he even knows that they are illogical, and still pushes them - meaning that, among other things, he is also intellectually dishonest.

It was you blurring the issue by implying that he believes in populist tinfoil hat conspiracy theories. He doesn't. You either didn't know that or you were being deliberately deceptive.

There are real conspiracies, where multiple individuals do work together to do evil. This is obvious. No one who is sane believes otherwise. Chomsky writes about them when he has a substantive body of evidence proving they exist and not otherwise, like everyone else does. That's how critical analysis works.

[Vyxn]

Yes, Bernie Sanders wants to turn America into North Korea, you got it. Free public college tuition, universal healthcare and paid family leave are staples of the DPRK, didn't you know?



.

it is a step in that direction
all socialism is is communism light, communism not fully committed they are the branched of the same tyrannical tree

- - - Updated - - -

He's not a socialist. He's a democratic socialist. He's not on board with full on socialism, he just want a few more aspects of socialism mixed in with our current system.

they are one in the same all he did was through democratic in front of socialism to make it sound more palatable
if you break it down what it means is elected socialism so explain what is difference between elected socialism and unelected socialism other then the obvious of one being elected and the other not

[Deleted]

they are one in the same all he did was through democratic in front of socialism to make it sound more palatable
if you break it down what it means is elected socialism so explain what is difference between elected socialism and unelected socialism other then the obvious of one being elected and the other not

I really have difficulty believing an adult who is capable of typing can really write something this asinine.

As Sanders has said he believes in democratic socialism in the Scandanavian mould. If you really don't know the difference between North Korea and Sweden you shouldn't be allowed to vote on general principle.