For those who have heard from Chick-cow-ski, or me, or others, on Chomsky but haven't had a chance to hear from Chomsky himself. One hour in-depth with Amy Goodman Three hours In-depth with BookTV
I'd rather dowse myself with gasoline light a match and.. oh, wait a second... Mel, encouraging 4 hours of interview isnt the best way make your point. And I thought your page long posts were bad. Got a cliffnote version? (yeah, yeah, I know. "only simple minds and sheeple would ask for...)..
Unless my "point" is for folks who don't yet know anything about Chomsky to take some time to hear from the man himself, and get beyond surface BS not unlike that which one finds on BS. The link will be here, it's not going anywhere; they can watch/listen at their leisure, can they not? Sheesh.
4 hours of Noam Chomsky? Reminds me of the old 'Why did the chicken cross the road?" joke... Question: Why did the chicken cross the road? Noam Chomsky: The chicken didn't exactly cross the road. As of 1994, something like 99.8% of all US chickens reaching maturity that year had spent 82% of their lives in confinement. The living conditions in most chicken coops break every international law ever written, and some, particularly the ones for chickens bound for slaughter, border on inhumane. My point is, they had no chance to cross the road (unless you count the ride to the supermarket). Even if one or two have crossed roads for whatever reason, most never get a chance. Of course, this is not what we are told. Instead, we see chickens happily dancing around on Sesame Street and Foster Farms commercials where chickens are not only crossing roads, but driving trucks (incidentally, Foster Farms is owned by the same people who own the Foster Freeze chain, a subsidiary of the dairy industry). Anyway, ... (Chomsky continues for 32 pages. For the full text of his answer, contact Odonian Press)
How many disciples of Stalin and Mao does Chomsky have to idolize before you lefties accept that he's no less contemptible than a neo-nazi? The fact that you lefties can't seem to denounce the whitewashers of communist tyrannies (like Chomsky) make me suspect that you don't really lament their passing.
Mel: offers information for folks to critically engage and make up their own mind BushCorp. adherents: immediately reiterate their propaganda or, worse, rail against taking the time to know/engage. What will come next is the "reasonable" BushCorp. adherent who, having seen the absurdity of the current posting approach of the neocons here, will try to offer a more nuanced approach that seems more reasonable, but will essentially submit the same thing: do not acquire knowledge of Chomsky for any level of ciritcal engagement, and operate from a realtively ignorant position. Let all "neutrals" notice this, a dynamic that presents itself regularly here, and in the wider world. There's only one reason why anyone would rail against you having more information with which to critically examine a person or topic than you do, and you know that reason already.
Hey, listen to Chomsky. Just do it. In a rare burst of agreement, I agree with Mel here. Nothing will bring clarity to the issue faster than hearing from the man directly. If the interviewer is willing to ask the hard questions, instead of doing a Larry King imitation, it will be very revealing and informative.
I've tried in the past but only to lose intrest so quickly in his work. Even the most left-wing of people don't like his work since it's mostly sizzle and no steak. One would have to feel bad about the number of trees that had to be be cut down to print his garbage.
So just save us the time and post you have no freaking clue what your'e yammering about. Ooohh, yams..
Try talking to university students and professors. Chomsky isn't considered in recommended reading because he isn't of a political nature. Professors will have a hard time accepting Chomsky as a reference in any paper. Even those who would share Chomsky's views are cautious knowing of his background. Funny comming from a guy who wastes space with two posts instead of one on the same subject. Chomsky isn't a man of politics. He's a linguist and puts that all into the books he writes. He's as difficult to understand as Moore, Klein, Coulter, Hannity, and Rush. Oh how there is a lack of good political books on the shelf.
Sometimes Chomsky throws the baby out with the bath water. More often than not he gives the baby a good clean rinsing, and tucks him into bed safely. Four hours of interviews may not be the best way to get to know him. But anyone who thinks it's stupid to get to know him - and to get to know him well - is helping to dig their own grave...and that of their neighbor's as well. Peace.