-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
What are your opinions on Noam Chomsky?
- Thread starter Iloelemen
- Start date
I certainly don't speak for everyone on the forum but I would imagine Chomksy's past comments about making peace with Russia and seeking to deter antagonistic against them are aspects of his personal politics that people here might find questionable. Especially following the 2016 election and all the blowback from it.
Anyone calling him conservative are being willfully ignorant at worst and hyperbolic at best.
Anyone calling him conservative are being willfully ignorant at worst and hyperbolic at best.
Huh? There have been 2 other Noam threads on this site ever. I'd wager most people here know little to nothing about him.
His framing of historical events and particularly his positions on the US being, for the most part, an evil and terrorist state still hold water. His views on day to day and current events can become muddy and weird. Dude is like 90+ years old, though, no need for him to be out there still fighting people that have no interest in having a real conversation.
I don't think it's here per se, but on the wider internet he's somehow become vilified as not left enough by some
He is a true leftist that speak hard thuths that some liberals here aren't ready to hear yet. Of course he will be disliked in era.
I don't like all his opinions btw (especially regarding the antifa movement).
I don't like all his opinions btw (especially regarding the antifa movement).
Chomsky is great, however he does have some political naivety when it comes to foreign politics (was pro-PSUV on Venezuela until it was way too late), but even there his track record is better than almost anyone else.
Being honest though he really isn't even that far left as people say he is.
Being honest though he really isn't even that far left as people say he is.
Couldn't have said it any better.
He's a composed but brilliant mind, who also dares to question convinient "truths" and gets a lot of flack for it.
It will be a huge loss for the world once he's no longer among us - which given is age becomes more likely by the day, sadly
He holds an internally consistent view of antifa even if I disagree with it. He is all about the politics of power and how considering how things will be spun as the decisions are being made. He has a solid position when he says that the mostly conservative media and politicians will use the potential of violence from the left as a means of courting centrist voters. I understand where he is coming from, but I think that attacking fascists and making them afraid to be out in the open more than compensates the negatives.
His age shouldn't dictate his ability to continue to stand his ground. This is what he's lived for during his lifetime, it seems fit that he's willing to not backdown quietly.
He's not part of the political mainstream and not bought off. So it makes him one of the few people worth listening to in america whether you agree with him or not.
He is also critical of Israel, which has resulted in him being accused of being an anti-Semite despite being Jewish himself.
I understand that. Its a matter of energy though. Its a much tougher ask for a 90 year old to put himself out there and write and have discussions that it is even for a 70 year old. Your body breaks down and is not the same. His mind still seems to be all there, though, which is great.
Some late arrivals to the anti-imperialist tradition try to stick Cambodian apologia on him for a few remarks he made taking a cautious stance during the initial civil conflict on the basis that the US was actively involved about spreading misinformation about nationalist movements in the far east.
He later admitted his error and labeled them the most monstrous regime since the Third Reich so I'm not really sure about where the issue stems from other then a narrow reading.
He later admitted his error and labeled them the most monstrous regime since the Third Reich so I'm not really sure about where the issue stems from other then a narrow reading.
Obama has a lot of skeletons in his closet.
Being one of the better US presidents is a very low bar.
He has a general history of trying to blame all awful things on being predominantly a Western created issue and I think generally takes agency away from truly awful acts committed outside of his view. It doesn't mean he's not partially write but I find some of his answers oversimplified versions that want to start and stop blame in the West when there are plenty of issues to go around.
He is a man with a hammer and everything looks like a nail to him. And that hammer is American imperialism.
when has he criticized american imperialism for something that wasnt american imperialism
Nothing inherently unusual about that. That viewpoint is broadly in line with mainstream US neorealist theory.
What is his position on antifa? I think Chomsky is generally really good. No one is perfect but I think he's been a great political thinker for decades.
He's an anti-imperialist, with all that entails. I do think he's a bit stubborn in the instances where the anti-American rhetoric of his is not adequate enough to explain an event. Dude should probably step back a little bit.
He's pretty on point when it comes to the US and how it conducts itself domestically and internationally.
The US sees itself as above the rules.
The US sees itself as above the rules.
Noam Chomsky has criticised the anti-fascist movement and argues its tactics are a gift to the far right and US state repression.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-donald-trump-white-nationalist-a8044526.html
I'm gonna need some examples. The reality is mainstream american discourse does everything to sanitize american involvement in things from the the rise of the third Reich, the beginning of the cold war and the post detente acts of soviet "aggression". Chomsky is far more precise over a wider field and period then most of contemporaries.
I like Noam Chomsky a lot, but that being said, I don't agree with everything he says. He is a very smart dude that points out many inconvenient truths regarding the Western World's power structures.
That being said, I think his political stances, while admirable in theory, can not be executed in practice. They are Anarcho-syndicalism / Libertarian Socialism. I am more of an advocate for something that is proven to work and work very well at that: the Nordic Model, which is a form of Social Democracy.
That being said, I think his political stances, while admirable in theory, can not be executed in practice. They are Anarcho-syndicalism / Libertarian Socialism. I am more of an advocate for something that is proven to work and work very well at that: the Nordic Model, which is a form of Social Democracy.
Poor man's Howard Zinn.
Kidding but from the little I read of both, they seemed to me to be coming from a similar viewpoint but Zinn just seemed more compassionate/human if that makes sense. Maybe though Chomsky is just more blunt about the situation of the world.
Kidding but from the little I read of both, they seemed to me to be coming from a similar viewpoint but Zinn just seemed more compassionate/human if that makes sense. Maybe though Chomsky is just more blunt about the situation of the world.
He's a great intellectual who's made great contributions. He's been particularly spot on denouncing western imperialism and commercial media cartels. Even though he's cultivated some pretty bad blind spots when it came to some authoritarian regimes, the world is a better place with him in it.
A good political theorist. His earlier linguisitics are properly interesting as well, although I'm less qualified comment on that area
