What is Digg?260 Comments
- qwertymeister, on 01/25/2008, -10/+41Chomsky is always an interesting read/view, whether one agrees or not
- lucidguru, on 01/25/2008, -3/+30I'm glad Chomsky realizes that war with Pakistan is just as much of a threat as war with Iran. Nuclear war would not be fun at all.
- arugulord, on 01/25/2008, -8/+33Good work, overwhelmingly bang-on and to the point. That Chomsky is almost completely censored from US corporate media goes without saying. That Chomsky is the most quoted academic from the US, goes without saying even more. The astonishing attempts to bury and troll Chomsky on Digg and other sites shows the utter hysteria surrounding what happens to someone like Chomsky who actually dares to voice a cognizant dissenting opinion of what corporatist elites try and inculcate people into thinking.
- JigoroKano, on 01/25/2008, -5/+30"When the Russians complained about American interference in Afghanistan, we’d laugh. But when we talk about Iranian interference in Iraq, going back to viable political candidates, every single one of them says that this is outrageous – meaning, the Iranians don’t understand that we_own_the_world."
- robinthehood, on 01/25/2008, -9/+22To anyone who derides Chomsky because his field of profession is Linguistics... Anyone can be a scholar of history. It means reading books and cutting through the *****. A 18 year old can have a good understanding of political history if they're so inclined.
- raskali, on 01/25/2008, -7/+19Wow, Chomsky really hits a nerve with the crazy right-wingers.
- commernie, on 01/25/2008, -8/+19Don't feed the trolls.
- inactive, on 01/25/2008, -14/+25Sure, we pay attention to intellectual powerhouses like you. After the way you countered Chomsky's argument that the USA think it owns the world so deftly, how could we not?
- MrErr, on 01/25/2008, -4/+15Excellent article. He has a good grasp of history too. What I do not understand is why he is getting dugg down and why there are many negative comments.
- 507projex, on 01/25/2008, -4/+15Whether you love or hate Chomsky, at least he opens discussion on aspects of foreign policy issues that others ignore or dismiss.
- joshbradley, on 01/25/2008, -6/+16I beg all of you to read Chomsky's work before attempting to discredit him.
Chomsky is a foreign policy expert. - yodaj007, on 01/25/2008, -16/+26He's one of the most important and out-spoken intellectuals of our time.
- belzoradon, on 01/25/2008, -9/+18actually his first name isn't Noam at all but Avram
- JigoroKano, on 01/25/2008, -3/+12"Any candidate now, maybe anyone except Giuliani, will moderate somewhat the policies."
- Vodka2389, on 01/25/2008, -5/+13Noam Chomsky is a genius.
- TheFinaleofSeem, on 01/25/2008, -4/+12Yeah, and we'll have it by saying that we need to have ones on forums! That'll show the ruling elite!
- yodaj007, on 01/25/2008, -6/+14We're saying it's completely irrelevant.
- mmmmmbiscuits, on 01/25/2008, -3/+10QUICK! Ask your Mom if you can have $20 and borrow the minivan for a revolution.
- JigoroKano, on 01/25/2008, -4/+9Blind Nationalism.
- heuranit, on 01/26/2008, -3/+8The fact that he speaks out and denounces certain perspectives of the US policy doesn't mean that he is anti-American. I think assuming that is quite off and not even the point. If being American implies attacking other countries, being abusive towards them and still occupying them without any kind of consideration...then I understand that he might not quite like that. Neither do most of the rest of the countries in the world.
- heuranit, on 01/26/2008, -3/+7Calling him a linguist is simplistic. His life has been devoted to Mathematics and Science too and he is one of the most important intellectuals of the century. One gains credibility when one shows that what one states has a solid ground behind it. He gave a completely new and revolutionary insight in linguistics as it had never been analyzed before and that gave him credibility as a scientist. He gained that credibility because he did something that made the world change in some way and that can always be applied in other fields.
- neocognitism, on 01/25/2008, -3/+7Buried for being wrong and lame on a breathtaking number of levels
- spawnfree, on 01/25/2008, -3/+7no im sure he has a small penis and that should make us laugh and not listen to what he has to say.
oh but that kind of angle only works on tards. Tards dont read old Chompy. - jaybol, on 01/25/2008, -9/+13yeah it would be nice if we could just go back to ignoring all of those pesky problems that other people have...with all of our ***** to watch on the DVR and all...i mean seriously noam can you just start watching MTV Sweet Sixteen with suzywang and stop talking and talking and talking about those countries that she can't pronounce?
- oldhick, on 01/25/2008, -8/+12I agree to an extent. I like to read his thoughts and I welcome his intellectual prowess being used to address world policy. However, you are absolutely correct in is lack of expertise in the field. He is a school lecturer who has never run a business or specifically an international business. He has never served in a public office or as a diplomat. He is a self admitted anarchist. So his particular views on politics are interesting to me, but not necessarily relevant. I will continue to Digg Chomsky articles.
- inactive, on 01/25/2008, -1/+5"There is no such thing as anarchy because once you get TWO people sharing their "anarchistic" views....IT ISN'T ***** ANARCHY!"
Uh...people can agree on ideas (including ideas about anarchy) without sacrificing a "robust conception of individual autonomy" [Wolff] that supersedes formal government authority. - trickster878, on 01/25/2008, -6/+10Chomsky is just has entitled, if not more, to speak on political issues as any journalist is. These interviews are done with Chomsky because he has years and years of knowledge at his back and he can articulate the views better than most even at their peak could. Chomsky has been around the block and these days, that makes him pretty valuable to us all. Half the current US govt. doesn't know what it's talking about, so your argument is pretty week. Listen to what he has to say and read some of his books and the praise for those books before you say he has no credibility.
- notque, on 01/25/2008, -4/+8Great use of a logical fallacy there.
- bullcutter, on 01/25/2008, -1/+4I already knew anybody can be a critic. Its especially unoriginal to be a critic of George Bush's policies in the middle east (people who actually _have_ spent their careers analyzing this region do a far better and more accurate job than Grampa Choms). So I don't understand what your point is. This is the best the Pro-Chomsky crowd can do?
- Jack9, on 01/26/2008, -4/+7Describing what ppl already know is just plain anti-american. That bastard.
- DRINKxREDxBULL, on 01/25/2008, -9/+12Come on. You should know that it is only acceptable to make "witty" transgender comments about Ann Coulter.
- Scyla, on 01/25/2008, -1/+4Im not a native speaker and while my granmar is not perfect, I think you could counter my arguments instead of attacking my granmar. I am not a native American speaker and probably speak mroe languages than the four above posters combined.
Chomsky is an admirer of Chavez and Castro. Ever heard of Google?
Bush is an idiot, the American media sucks.. but Noam Chomsky is also an idiot and you are idiots for supporting him. - boutmuet, on 01/26/2008, -3/+6I always wondered how a linguist gained so much credibility.
- Stevanoski, on 01/26/2008, -3/+6Typical comment from a Chickendove. Didn't you read today that the democrats have conceded defeat in waving the white flag?
- Jack9, on 01/25/2008, -4/+7Not sure what your point is, other than you dont understand the nature of UN policies and obviously don't care.
- ggfobster, on 01/25/2008, -2/+5yay for neocommunism
- vinbot, on 01/25/2008, -3/+6Because this is the internets! Where retards can at long last share their opinions with the masses!
- hambend, on 01/25/2008, -5/+8Sigh... I had to scroll this far down the page to get at anything approaching intelligent discussion. Just bury and move on, k?
- robinthehood, on 01/25/2008, -4/+7Ok. Go by that. What experience did Aristotle have outside of punditry and criticisms? How about Jean-Jaques Rousseau? How about Karl Marx? They were all commenting on society as they saw it from their own experiences. One could argue that only political theorists like Thucydides and Machiavelli were the only ones basing their beliefs on actual personal experience.
IMHO, you either can see things without that veil of media or you can't. True politics really don't have a left or right. They may not even have a right or wrong (who knows long term). But anyone can research history, politics, etc on their own right and be an expert.
Just because you have a doctorate in something does not make you an expert. It just means you have more training. - oldhick, on 01/25/2008, -1/+4Yes I did know that. If I implied otherwise sorry. I never claimed he was a socialite or senators son...
- JigoroKano, on 01/25/2008, -4/+7It's not that America actually owns the world, but that America acts and reacts on the global stage as if we (America) believe we own the world, i.e. as though we are afforded special rights to operate in a manner that we would not allow others to. He gave an example to go along with that which I quoted above.
- neocognitism, on 01/25/2008, -4/+7Actually, your list itself is a group of misrepresentations of Chomsky's words.
And then you had to blow it completely by saying that moronic bit about half his sentences being lies and misrepresentations. We're not speaking in childish hyperbole here. - bullcutter, on 01/28/2008, -0/+2again, this is the best the Pro-Chomsky crowd can do?
what a bunch of whiney idiots.
i certainly doubt they are capable of intellectually digesting Chomsky, which means they can't defend his points, which means they shouldn't even be here in the first place. - Mesmorize, on 01/25/2008, -9/+11His logic is contradictory. Iran is allowed to exercise power in its "region" and this is totally acceptable to Chomsky. However, arguably the world has changed. The only thing that defines a country's "region" is the extent of its military power and diplomatic influence. The world is so global that one could argue there are no definite bounds or regions. Certainly not for military operations.
So if the entire world is one region who is allowed to exercise power? Only third world countries? Chomsky set the precedent that Israel is not allowed to exercise power, so first world countries must be out.
So should we draw from Chomsky's logic that only third world countries are allowed to exercise power at all? I see no "regions" anymore except the entire globe. - inactive, on 01/26/2008, -0/+2 He is indeed...I don't know why you are being dugg down.
- heuranit, on 01/26/2008, -0/+2that might be why people use 'credibility' ad libitum ;)
- mempko, on 01/26/2008, -0/+2Chomsky gave a thumbs up to Mike Gravel however. Chomsky does not agree with Ron Paul's capitalist libertarianism.
- oldhick, on 01/25/2008, -3/+5True, we must be very careful who we listen to. But more to the point, I like Chomsky. Whenever I find an article or interview with him I read it. But nearly all of the time he is simply criticizing policy. Rarely if ever does he recommend a solution and a method for implementing it. Even in this article he says he doesn't have the answers.
He labels his beliefs as anarchistic (if thats a word?), I did not label them as that. But knowing he feels that way gives you incredible insight into his take on all issues. Its not good or bad or right or wrong, its just not my personal take. Again, I like Chomsky. But he doesn't know everything about everything! - neocognitism, on 01/25/2008, -5/+7Gawd, do you have that quote about Stalin on a list to draw from?
And please, don't talk about my country like we're the maligned parties with no freedom. It's just so utterly idiotic. -
Show 51 - 100 of 270 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is