The Eleventh Decade of Noam Chomsky

Gabriel Mathy

Gabriel Mathy is an Assistant Professor of Economics at American University

Related Post Roulette

9 Responses

  1. Brandon Berg says:

    However, the rise of decentralized social media has not been as beneficial as an anarchist like Chomsky might expect. Social media, freed from the control of government and media elites shaping media discourse, has fueled the rise of authoritarian nationalism and reactionary conspiracy theories like QAnon.

    Social media has also increased the popularity of the kind of left-wing conspiracy theories that Chomsky has been promoting for decades, so it hasn’t been an unmitigated loss for him.Report

  2. Philip H says:

    Good counter point to the prior article – which honestly I couldn’t figure out how to rebut. I am currently reading the pamphlet length essay collection put out in support of the Occupy Movement that features a number of Chomsky lectures and Q&A’s, and its striking how consistent he has been over the decades with his message. Love him, tolerate him or hate him, you have to respect that he’s spent his life pounding the same fist into the same table over and over.Report

  3. DensityDuck says:

    The only good thing about Noam Chomsky is that he gives us the ability to name a dog “Nom Chompsky”.Report

  4. Russell Michaels says:

    There are writings from the Soviet era that show Chomsky did not consistently criticize the Soviet Union. Which I gave you before you wrote this article, but I guess facts get in the way, huh?Report

    • Gabriel Mathy in reply to Russell Michaels says:

      Let’s see some of the document you provided (from the very neutral and not at all extreme-right “Anti-Chomsky Reader”)

      “in comparison to the conditions imposed by US tyranny and violence [in Vietnam], East Europe under Russian rule was practically a paradise.”1

      This refers to the postwar period, and it was obviously much less severe situation in Eastern Europe than the complete destruction of Vietnam. The author stated that 627,000 was the highest credible estimate of civilian deaths in Vietnam to mislead the reader, when any credible estimate of deaths runs in the millions.

      “Imagine the reaction if the Soviet police were to deal with refuseniks in any way comparable to the Israeli practices that briefly reached the television screens [during the first intifada].”19

      This is a completely reasonable statement by anyone that is not a Likudnik.

      ““[Regarding] China’s actions in Tibet… it is a bit too simple to say that ‘China did indeed take over a country that did not want to be taken over.’ This is by no means the general view of Western scholarship.”21”

      This is also correct- that’s not the consensus view of the situation, and there was also significant repression before Chinese control.

      “The Lie: It’s clear, I believe, that the emphasis on the use of terror and violence in China was considerably less than in the Soviet Union and that the success was considerably greater in achieving a just society.”24

      This also seems perfectly reasonable, Chomsky thought the Soviets were more brutal than the Chinese Communists.Report

      • Phillip Jones in reply to Gabriel Mathy says:

        None of the authors of the Anti-Chomsky reader are extreme right! Some are liberal or leftist as a matter of fact! Nothing Chomsky said is reasonable or correct, and it is obscene taht you would even consider defending his vile, despicable and dishonest comments!Thanks for showing that Chomskybots like yourself aren’t unaware of his depravity, you just don’t care! Chomsky also said that the Japanese saved millions of lives by kicking the British out of India, and that Jews were the most privileged and influential part of the population and that antisemitism was no longer a problem except for those who wanted total control and not 90 percent control! Finally he said the Trnopolje death camp in Bosnia was refugee camp and people could leave if they wanted! Your denial of Chomsky’s terror/tyranny sympathizing is as despicable as David Irving’s Holocaust denial!Report