Tfw he's not going to make it to 2019

>tfw he's not going to make it to 2019

kek* good one OP ;)
Kill Every Kike

>tfw you won't have to listen to dilettantes spouting ready-made reformist tripe

>reformist

Moved to Arizona to teach at their university and its weather will be better for his health
I think he will manage
Bertrand Russell made it to 98

Are you contending that he is not a reformist, or that reformism is the "best" political position for a self-proclaimed anarchist?

Good

that's a mean thing to say about someone user

>tfw good

What happens in 2019?

There is nothing more exquisite than the thought of Noam Chomskys and Ruth Bader Ginsburgs dropping dead, in some small part due to left-kike despair, during the Trump administration.

Even if he is an armchair, he is not reformist. You people are fucking stupid, you can't recognise pragmatism and not wanting to accelerate with no outline.

He has expressly stated that he wants to expand certain aspects of the state in order to combat "private tyranny," as if private property didn't require the government to uphold it. There is no way to undercut property law while augmenting the powers of the state. Any attempt inevitably leads to market socialism, which leads back to capitalism. His philosophy is the same overdone reformism with a veneer of liberal pragmatism.

Damn this dude is old as fuck

>brainlets who only know Chomsky as political pundit

I am going to be gutted when he dies. Love that wonderful Jewish bastard. Admire the hell out of him. Too bad I won;t get the chance to see him speak live before he croaks.

Is he the one answering emails or does he have assistants? I got a reply back pretty quickly so it was hard to believe it was him.

He personally answers every email he receives if I am not mistaken.

He has assistants who weed out the bad emails and he replies to the ones that remain.

this. his politics have been less influential than his philosophy and science

>tfw he actually responded to my email

What did you ask him?

If he was ashamed over what a political nutjob he is.

How do they share the same email though? surely they can't be online all at once?

I might just directly ask if I'm speaking to Chomsky

...

And what did he reply?

He answered my email in 12 hours and it included a personal anecdote of his.

>writes several works detailing grand metanarratives in current society
>turns into a massive fedoralord whenever Marx or some other continental is even mentioned in his presence

Just a sad frog meme

Care to articulate yourself?

>ywn get to watch them be crucified

>The shitposting ghost consciousness of Bill Buckley still fanny flustered about getting so thoroughly btfo

He's an idiot and a liar. We corresponded back in 2012, when I was 16. I've read many of his books and was only able to realize the lie a few years later. He should not be taken seriously.

It's him. He's very gentle and a good man, but his political convictions are idiocy.

We exchanged some five or six emails back in 2012. I was his fan.

Reminds me of when corresponded with him at age 16 back in 2012. Too bad he's such an idiot.

What are his political convictions? Besides Anarcho-Syndicalism

fuck america lol

America has a super big plan to destroy every single nation who tries to develop itself and was responsible for everything that went wrong with my country (Brazil), though I know for a fact that America has nothing to do with our problems because I live here and am well-acquainted with our local reality.

It was after the BR crisis that I realized Chomsky is a liar. The BR left, which is as insane as it can get, decied to craft one very big lie that Dilma's impeachment was a coup (I'm a law student: it wasn't. This is also the opinion of my Constitutional Law teacher, who had his PHD oriented by the greatest living specialist in Constitutional Law in the lusophone world, mr. Canotilho from Coimbra University). And guess what? Chomsky bought it. Imagine my surprised when I saw the well-known, famous man Noam Chomsky, the world's greatest talent... saying the very same old bullshit that the bad-grades loving hippies at my college were saying. That was disappointing!

He isn't a specialist on anything except linguistics. He doens't actually read hundreds of books from every country he writes on. He just sees what the left-wing media is talking about in each country and then repeats it as if it were the truth. He's certainly much smarter than the average political pundit and certainly much more sophisticated, but he talks too much and has the vice of generality, which kills intellectual rigour. The only reason he's so respected is that no one actually goes to check his sources or read articles in Portuguese, Spanish, Arab or whatever that disprove his lies.

I am the person that you replied to and Chomsky still handed Buckley his ass in that debate.

I don't like Chomsky, but I wanted you to know that I can watch a debate on its own merits.

Also, his view of human nature is just too incredibly naive for a scientist of his caliber. He pretends to be skeptic about neuroscience and our ability to learn about human nature, but his political beliefs are based upon a very specific and false interpretation of it. He can says things which are pretty stupid when discussing the topic. I remember he once wrote that we don't really know much about consciousness at all, because we are not even able to guess whether a cockroach will turn left or right. That was the analogy he used. It's such a joke. The whole life of a pedestrian is based on judging (correctly) whether people will turn left or right, whether they will go on or whether they will stop. We have an ability to understand each other at a macro-level even though we don't understand the chemical details of it, and we have history and the humanities to teach us about human nature, enough for us to comprehend that humans are egoists and will never be able to live in an anarcho-syndicalist society, and, even if they do, this society will soon be destroyed and enslaved by its fascist neighbours, because the stronger trumps the weaker.

He also said he believed in a boarderless world. He actually said it. It was in a BR TV show back in the 90's, I think. He is clueless about the real world. He thinks everyone is a New York Jew who can adapt to different circumstances. He has no clue. No clue at all.

I don't know what Buckley was even doing, did he get psyched out by Chomsky's autistic composure? He's better than what happened there.

>Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Noam Chomsky
>not Kissinger and Restone
/pol/ NIGGER

Chomsky would call you a disgusting racist just for using that word and posting on Veeky Forums.

He thought that he could win an argument in the usual way, on his home court, by repairing to sentimentalities and being forced to retreat again-and-again, and Chomsky just kept shitposting newspaper citations point-for-point like a well-prepped high school debater to the point that Buckley just looked embarrassing.

One of his basic mistakes was in continually accepting and going along with Chomsky's frame in various ways. the National Review rag would get blown out again and rendered permanently irrelevant years later by a guy who makes his own frame.

i don’t like Noam Chomsky and thinking you have power over me with a word is embarassing brainlet