fe5862 No.4105
No chomsky thread? I am dissapoint /anarcho/, very disappoint.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06-XcAiswY4 d5842e No.4109
File: 1414650839879.jpg (90.49 KB, 600x602, 300:301, 1011523_10151682993521275_….jpg)
6bfc2c No.4291
9909bd No.4306
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
My favorite Chomsky speech.
CLINTON BTFO
4eebca No.4330
File: 1415075431874.png (475.78 KB, 1220x703, 1220:703, Chomsky_what-was-leninism.png)
40a970 No.4360
ac53e5 No.4361
>>4360You're either /marx/ or one of the Stalin psycho fanatics from /leftypol/.
Either way, fuck off. This is not your hugbox.
6bfc2c No.4364
>>4360I hate a lot of things, but tankie lies and apologists are probably the worst. At least fascists don't usually deny the crimes of fascist leaders, i'll be it they openly praise them but atleast they don't lie about it.
6bfc2c No.4365
>>4360>>4364Not to mention the paper is written by a zionist cunt.
6bfc2c No.4366
>>4360They also make it look as if chomsky is some sort of Stalinist apologist, which he clearly isn't.
9909bd No.4415
>>4366Yea that's pretty much were all of those were. Also I've read and listened to A LOT of Chomsky and I don't think he even said half these things, at least not horribly out of context.
I couldn't really find a single one of Chomsky's "big lines" in there. I mean if you listen to a lot of his lectures he'll repeat himself sometimes.
9909bd No.4528
>>4503Just finished this, thanks Anon.
d18b89 No.4593
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOIM1_xOSroNoam chomsky is interviewed ali g.
Not serious at all, kinda funny though.
d18b89 No.4594
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAGtExCOudoNoam Chomsky On Anarchism - Interviewed by Barry Pateman
a9f3c5 No.5725
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Chomsky talks about the similarities of Capitalism and Bolshevism, and the Crisis of Democracy.
dcd34b No.5733
Is he even a anarchist?
Like, for real?
0c1136 No.5734
>>5733Yes, /pol/, he is an anarcho-syndicalist.
For real.
521f53 No.5736
>>5734Hey, I don't even frequent that shithole, please don't think I'm a nazi or something like that.
I'm talking 'bout his actual political vision.
I will quote Kevin Carson in this:
> Our survey also casts doubt on the position of "anarchist" social democrat Noam Chomsky, who is notorious for his distinction between "visions" and "goals." His long-term vision is a decentralized society of self-governing communities and workplaces, loosely federated together–the traditional anarchist vision. His immediate goal, however, is to streng- then the regulatory state in order to break up "private concentrations of power," before anarchism can be achieved. But if , as we have seen, capitalism is dependent on the state to guarantee it survival, it follows that it is sufficient to eliminate the statist props to capitalism. In a letter of 4 September 1867, Engels aptly summed up the difference between anarchists and state socialists: "They say 'abolish the state and capital will go to the devil.' We propose the reverse." Exactly.But I haven't studied Chomsky too much, so I hope /anarcho/ can enlighten me.
0c1136 No.5737
>>5736Sorry, it's just that recently /pol/ has taken to talking against Chomsky, because da joos.
I'm also certain we have at least one /pol/ regular.
Okay, first off, this Carson guy seems to know nothing about what he is talking about.
Secondly, Engels isn't strictly wrong but he is grossly oversimplifying it.
Anyway, don't believe everything you hear about Chomsky. He wants the state gone, but that also includes private power.
As far as I can tell, he basically knows we need social revolution but is hesitant to talk about it given his academic position. Besides he is old as fuck now, the time he could revolt is gone. Right now he basically wants the power to be more evenly distributed so it is easier to crush them later, as far as I can tell.
f40905 No.5738
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
d46101 No.5837
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
56d717 No.5839
>>5736Just typical leftist bullshit, capitalism only began when states enacted limited liability laws, patent laws, international trade agreements, corporate charters, bankruptcy laws, contract laws, forced paper money laws, militaries to enforce international trade
Of course they can't say they want a right wing version of hitler's government so they just say they only temporarily need power to give people want they want, just like the ussr and china or those temporary tax cut and immigration laws
This ass hole would throw you on a collective farm and steal rights you didn't even know you had because he's ass hurt the free market doesn't give psuedo intellectuals more money and respect, just a belgium Lenin.
Any anarchist 'hyphenate' is one of these red cock suckers, these anarchist-syndicalist-eco primativist-transgender queerkin people with their flag colors are all premium spook monglers. If you want no government, you are an anarchist, if you want government you are not one
ce41ed No.5842
56d717 No.5859
>>5842I said states prop up property rights stupid cunt, i'm not gonna read all this statist bull shit when you don't even bother to read my post
56d717 No.5904
>>5861>Pierre joseph>noam chomsky>Anarchist>Literally who>Prominent ee817a No.5915
What should I read from Chomsky? I've started Manufacturing Consent and it's interesting but not really about anarchism.
2b98c7 No.5921
>>5904>I am too much of an ignorant faggot to know what anarchism means>I also am far too much of an idiot to know about the major anarchist uprisings and societies built in modern history c65e8e No.5929
>>5915Haven't really read much of chomsky, i mostly listen to his speeches and talks and what not.
Ive heard good things about "On Anarchism".
a2ac42 No.5935
>>5929Definitely a great read if you are interested in Anarchism in any form.
9cf85b No.6782
The reason Zizek gets so asspained at the mention of Chomsky.
7c6f85 No.6804
>>5737>This Carson guyYou seriously don't know who Kevin Carson is?
8551e1 No.6849
>>4360>4Seen it before. Pick one at random and research the topic. You'll find it to either be a misquote or a complete falsification. If not, please post your results as I'd be fascinated to see them.
That anti-Chomsky reader book is equally as bad, but more horrifying since it's actually in real print.
Now my anarchism-senses tingle and force me every once in awhile to look at criticism of the man since I've come to adore him so much and that's always a good thing to do when that happens, but even after trying very hard I've found nothing that wasn't the most blatant rhetorical garbage and outright lies.
Frankly I would feel a little better about my own mental faculties if I COULD find some fuckups of his, but after nearly a decade of reading almost everything he's ever written, I can't find anything to persuade me that he isn't just a very careful scholar who holds himself to very high academic and ethical standards.
217102 No.6856
>>4594I could not be the only one who read Parry Bateman.
8551e1 No.6878
>>6856I read On Anarchism but I haven't read anything Pateman's written except the intro to that text
217102 No.6943
>>6878You hear that whooshing sound? That's the joke flying over your head. Whooshhh
60769f No.6980
See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist-it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn't built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super-exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist - just because it's anti-human. And race is in fact a human characteristic-there's no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all of the junk that's produced-that's their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance.
- Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power: The Indispensible Chomsky (2002) page 89
c65e8e No.7005
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
03ae21 No.7006
Is it true that Chomsky praised Nixon
c65e8e No.7015
>>7006Ive never heard of it, sounds unlikely.
75a784 No.7020
>>7015>admits ignorance, still has an opinion 75a784 No.7026
>>7023>knowing the general application and circumstances of such incident I would have to, a priori, discard its validity>goes full a prioriDo you even know what you're saying? Inferences are made either on a basis of past evidence or current evidence, if you don't have either to go off of then you aren't saying anything meaningful or worth listening to.
75a784 No.7031
>>7029That response was the equivalent of 'I know you are, but what am I?'
e8f770 No.7034
>>7031>kindergarten-grade retort 75a784 No.7036
>>7034This was also the equivalent of 'I know you are, but what am I?'
7593f6 No.7537
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
ac8d38 No.7804