Israeli intervention in US elections ‘vastly overwhelms' anything Russia has done, claims Noam Chomsky

submitted by dcjogger from msn.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]useless_aether 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

yeah, that era is his heyday. but what i also think is that for every sold soul there is a before and after partition of the timeline. the time when he was his own man and a time when not.

additionally the mit is known as an establishment institution. no academic can maintain a tenure, win grants, or just simply exist if going against the political will of the establishment. how come he managed?

and if you watch the video, you will see, that 9/11 is not the only issue where he showed his true colors.

i think he is a knight of malta, a papal knight, in kahoots with soros, the jesuits, the banksters etc

[–]magnora7 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

no academic can maintain a tenure, win grants, or just simply exist if going against the political will of the establishment. how come he managed?

Because such a thing was possible in the 60s, and he has tenure, but he's been contacted so he knows there's certain issues he shouldn't speak out on

You could be right, but I think he does far more to expose than to hide. His book Manufacturing Consent is a masterpiece.

[–]useless_aether 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

my last argument is that he is polarizing, both academically and politically, ( as a saidit user, he would be worse than most of us :-) and sowing division is the trademark of the roman empire.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

That's decent point, but I also think anyone who tells the truth in an empire of lies is going to have an divisive effect

[–]useless_aether 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

oh that reminded me, he rejects the use of the word empire to describe the system for some obscure reason, but i think its because actually it hits too close to home. its too true, therefore dangerous.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

That's interesting. He does call what the US does "imperialism" almost all the time though, not exactly all that different imo. Empire and imperialism have the same root

[–]useless_aether 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

i agree, interesting indeed. but maybe its because imperialism doesnt necessary implies an empire. there is a cognitive step from imperialism to empire, a step most people perhaps wont take and that is sufficient enough for chomsky.

[–]useless_aether 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

just a tought. in modern politics imperialism usually means american imperialism. so the negative connotations will damage america. this is fine with chomsky, so he is using it, promoting it. the international socialists and communists always wanted to destroy america anyway.

but with 'empire', the association might not automatically be with america, but with the british, holy roman, roman empires, which is a big no-no. those things must be kept outside of the overton window.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Interesting thought, but I'd say chomsky makes comparisons of the US to past failed empires all the time. I've read a few of his books, he doesn't shy away from that kind of comparison in my experience. But you might have a point, I will keep that in mind from now on