UnderGround Forums
 

SBGI >> Noam Chomsky


5/16/06 1:43 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
zen writer
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 16-May-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 1119
 
Matt Out of curiousity have you spent much time listening to Chomsky CD's or reading his books? If so, any opinion on him?
5/16/06 2:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Matt Thornton
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 16-May-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 3006
I saw manufacturing consent the documentary, which I enjoyed very much. I also thought the book by the same name was fantastic. Other then that I have not read much of his work. I did see him in a debate with Alan Dershowitz and I thought he was well spoken there.
5/17/06 5:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
robc
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 17-May-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 20
I know you didn't ask for other opinions, but what the hell: Chomsky's criticism of mass media, out of control consumerism and the dangers of anchorless corporate growth have some validity but he has made a name for himself first and foremost as an America hater and as such appeals to a very lively, active constituancy, both here and abroad. The more outrageous his statements, the more his popularity grows. I saw his debate with Dershowitz and thought he came out on the short end, though he was articulate as always. Zen writer, what do you think of him?
5/21/06 11:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
zen writer
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 21-May-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 1121
This would be the subject of a ten page essay if I had the time. There are somethings Chomsky says that I agree with, there are some things Chomsky says that I disagree with. I don't think Chomsky even has constituents since his belief system is based on anarchist-socialism/syndicalism which has been dead in the USA since the First World War. Politics are relative. There are various different groups of people living in the USA who have various different histories and needs so there will be a ton of different perceptions of what is 'right.' Not correct. 'Right.' If someone is flat broke and they see a millionaire and someone says 'You want a socialist gonernment?' The broke fellow will say yes and glady accept the redistribution of the rich guy's money. Now, if the formerly broke guy develops a patent on some widget that will probably do ten million dollars in sales and someone asks him, "You want to scrap this socialist system?" He's going to say yes to avoid losing any money he would make selling the widgets. Whenever I watch politics on TV I ask myself "Why do I watch this when there is a Quincy rerun on the other channel?" I recently saw an embarrassing episode of Hannity and Colmes where they had a bunch of right wingers and left wingers arguing the difference between Rush Limbaugh's drug case and whatshisname Kennedy's drug related car accident. I found it laughable that each side had a perfectly good reason why their guy was misunderstood while the other guy was a rat. The difference, of course, was the circumstances between the respected cases. Are there people in the world dumb enough to believe if the situations between Limbaugh and Kennedy were reversed and EXACTLY the same, the right wingers would say 'Rush was wrong' and the left wingers would say 'Kennedy was wrong' and argue with each other over the circumstance? I've read enough history and political books and watched countless thousands of hours of news and archival footage and have come to the following conclusion: It's all a big goof.
5/22/06 11:14 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
New2MMA
16 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 19-Jun-06 12:10 PM
Member Since: 04/13/2003
Posts: 515
5/22/06 12:51 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Indrek R.
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 22-May-06
Member Since: 07/04/2002
Posts: 1126
Then again - what does the label "america hater" mean??
5/22/06 3:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
JasonKeaton
3 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 22-May-06
Member Since: 03/12/2002
Posts: 1089
I though Chomsky made a name for himslef first and foremost as a linguist and his work with language structure being inherent to humans? I think his work there is brilliant Do I agree with all his political views? No I do not believe in a socialist/communist/anarchal system since in a large population is has never been produced( You can't really count France after the french revolution. That is what all these guys point to but it was very temporary) and was used as a replacement for religion.
5/23/06 12:49 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
rudi redfox
19 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 23-May-06
Member Since: 01/26/2006
Posts: 54
whether you agree with his opinions or not he made useful commentaries about a number of issues before other people eg. east timor and has kept going when many of his contemporys burnt out..
5/26/06 3:37 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
mandalalisten
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-May-06
Member Since: 01/27/2003
Posts: 508
You should pay attention to his research skillz and learn from his Ways. Dave Copeland
6/16/06 5:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dakuan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 16-Jun-06
Member Since: 02/07/2005
Posts: 16
Its very easy to dismiss Chomsky as a America hater or a anarchist socialist. However, this is to ignore that he is one of the view people to do objective studies on the ownership of media and media content. As well as an analysis of such things as the history of terrorism. It's easy to label chomsky but it is hard to refute his arguments they are well documented and extensivelty referenced from reputable sources. He is a noble prize winner in linguisitics and applies the same acadamic rigor to his political ideas as to his academic work. It's easy to label Chomsky as left wing and yet much of his work is concerned with the west living up to its notions of democracy and avoiding fascism.
6/16/06 7:21 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Matt Thornton
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 16-Jun-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 3033
Dakuan, I agree completely with you. I just watched an interview he gave on tv last week and his points were lucid and well thought out.
7/4/06 8:29 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
zen writer
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 04-Jul-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 1133
He is an avowed Anarcho Syndicalist, not an Anarcho Socialist. There's a few pronounced differences between the two. He's not so much an America hater as much as a critic of globalization and pro-corporate foreign policy. The one thing that annoys me is all the pro-United Nations, International Law, World Court sentiments. The UN is total joke and has been worthless for decades Now, if it an America hater you want, check out Ward Churchill's books. Woooo-weee.
9/20/06 2:06 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
robc
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 20-Sep-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 21
I go out of the country for a few months and miss all the fun. Jason, you're right. Chomsky is known first as an extraordinary lingquist. However, like lots of pseudo political celebrities, his brilliance/fame in one area (linguistics) garners him unearned props for areas way outside his expertise. So I'll modify my assertion: he is known first for his work in linguistics and foremost as an America hater. And what do I mean by America hater? He's just another sour intellectual American who finds America and her allies (most notably Israel) the cause of every problem on the planet. He looks around the globe and thinks America is hiding under every rock of oppression. Interesting that he would hate America -- his home -- and Israel -- the home of his spriritual ancestors -- with equal vehemence. As I first posted, he appeals to a very lively, active constituancy, both here and abroad. The latest example? Hugo Chavez held Chomsky's new book while making his address at this weeks United Nations General Assembly. Here's a great shot for Noam to frame and hang: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214709,00.html I wonder if Noam finds it an honor to be reverred by Hugo. Probably. I suspect if Noam changed his name, Ahmadinejad would read him, too.
9/23/06 4:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dakuan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 23-Sep-06
Member Since: 02/07/2005
Posts: 23
Again, another simple argument based on name calling. Chomsky has been critisized and revered by people of many different camps. This is because he does objective academic analysis of media. Your comments sound at worst jingoist and at best ill formed. Yes, Chomsky has critisized the USA and Israel foreign policy which according to you are beyond reproach. But, he has equally critisized Cuba, the soviet union, and muslim extremism. What he is most critisized for is his basic moral framework which is that a means of judging morality in social issues be done in a universal manner. That is, our actions and the actions of our adversaries be judged by the same moral standards. The thing that Chomsky is hated and revered for is his objectivism and not some subjectivist anti american sentiment.
9/25/06 1:13 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
robc
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Sep-06
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 22
Dakuan, Jingoistic? I wouldn't go that far. I do start with the supposition that on balance the USA, when compared with most of the world, has been a force for good. Not perfect by a long shot, nor infallible, but the best on a very imperfect planet. I don't see Chomsky's critisizms even handed as do you. Maybe it's because he lives here and has more opportunity to focus his attention on our society and government. I think it's more intentional than that. Whatever. I've already exhausted my supply of Chomsky interest. There's only so much I can fit in my wee little jingoistic brain. You're a fan of Chomsky; I'm not. What a great country.
9/25/06 2:49 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
JasonKeaton
3 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Sep-06
Member Since: 03/12/2002
Posts: 1273
My interest with Chomsky stops at his theories on language although I would talk with him in person on any subject Jason
11/8/06 5:46 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
keseki
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 08-Nov-06
Member Since: 05/27/2003
Posts: 185
Chomsky revolutionized linguistics. The field of linguistics as an independent field of study (i.e., with university departments of linguistics) didn?t exist until Chomsky made his brand of transformational-Generative linguistics seem like the answer to the US military?s needs for quick, easy, cheap translations of Russian, Chinese, and other ?hard? languages. The idea was that when the universal transformational generative rules that underlied all human languages were discovered, then machines could be programmed to do the work. Obviously it hasn?t happened. Check out babblefish to see how far we got. Chomsky is the most cited living author, and among the top 10 most cited writers in the history of man, and certainly is the most influential linguistic theorist/polemicist (which has not been a good thing at all, mainly because his focus was on theory building, explanatory principles, intuition as to what is and isn?t ?grammatical? (but without ever clearly defining what ?grammatical? means), arbitrary and ever-shifting distinctions between performance and competence, and relying on made up sentences as examples, rather than actual written or spoken examples of language. Having had Chomsky forced down my throat as a grad student, I don?t like Chomsky. But I do agree with a lot of his political thinking. He doesn?t hate America. He doesn?t like some of the things America has done and is doing. If you have to approve of everything America has done and is doing to not be an America hater, then, well, there aren?t many Americans who can truthfully say that they aren?t America haters. Chomsky didn?t receive a Nobel Prize for linguistics because there is no such a thing as a Nobel Prize for linguistics. He didn?t win in any other of the six categories (literature, economics, physics, peace, chemistry, physiology & medicine). There is no Nobel Prize for philosophy or mathematics either, which is way Bertrand Russell received a Nobel Prize for literature in 1950. ?I respect all styles.?
11/13/06 5:15 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Jeff Wassom
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 13-Nov-06 05:18 PM
Member Since: 06/30/2004
Posts: 265
I thought Manufacturing Consent was excellent with lots of interesting ideas. Chomsky's research skills were presented in such a way that I was amazed. However, I've heard Chomsky get torn apart on 'Penn and Teller's Bullsh&%t Season 3,' for comparing free speech (or lack of it) on college campuses to the poster's one hangs in their private residence. I highly reccomend that DVD series, along with Season One and Two for anyone interested in cricital thinking. Lastly, I find ideas about how we can make things better now much more compelling than criticizing governmental policies and officials. I would be interested in hearing what Noam would do if he were a President, or Congressmen. Jeff

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.