Noam Chomsky

I've read 2 of his political books and they were toilet paper tier.

Which ones? I bet they were just collections of lectures, which are there for a wider audience. Have you read Manufacturing Consent or On Palestine?

The most important thing in judging the grammatical validity of a sentence is how it sounds. If it doesn't SOUND good, it's wrong, even if all the grammarians in the world can find no fault with it. If it does sound good, on the other hand, a good writer will use it no matter what the grammarians might say, and they will have to modify their grammar afterwards to account for how he used it. Speaking comes first, even historically, and grammar much later, not the other way around, as Chomsky and his followers still seem unable to understand. Woe to the race of beings who waited for grammarians to invent a language before they began to talk! Woe to the child who must learn their rules before being allowed to open its mouth and say "mommy"! Language is a living thing, and what the Chomskyans are busy "analyzing" is so unreal it's not even dead. Theory comes AFTER action, not the other way around, and a priori knowledge of the kind which all philosophers (aside from Nietzsche) have been hitherto fond of is no concept that can be grasped at all but a contradictio in adjecto.

I read Chomsky and I'm a right of centre libertarian. He's incredibly level headed for a political critic. Look at his Trump coverage, newscasters always trying to get incendiary sound bytes out of him comparing Trump to Hitler all of which he shuts down.

He's an anarchist who wants us to stop chucking bombs at the fremen. Hard for me to hate.

Chomsky's a regressive leftist self hating jew who hates democracy and the west but is in love with radical islam

His propaganda model shits on everyone, I don't see why the left alone would subscribe to such a reasonable idea.

>Democracy
>West
Top kek

whats his opinion about trump?

He takes the standard marxist view that all politicians serve the ruling class and are thus no different.

He is the foremost authority on moral philosophy as it relates to foreign policy in the world

Autism.

The white race deserve to rule over the rest

Because most normies and lefties have willingly plunged headfirst into the nihilistic toxic brew of atheism and positivism and when a fellow """intellectual""" appears to reinforce their notions of a westernized evil empire keeping the little colored people down they bend over and kneel at the altar of king cognitive dissonance and supposed virtue signaling.

If they even knew about what he did to behaviorism and his arguments in favor of a rationalist-based ontology they would burn his books.

How is he an authority on moral philosophy when he hasn't done a genealogy on the topic?

Because his commentary on contemporary politics are intelligent, lucid and accurate.

I am a leftist, but I stand with Israel and against the regressive left, Putin and Islamofascism.

>If they even knew about what he did to behaviorism and his arguments in favor of a rationalist-based ontology they would burn his books.
Tell me about it. I've only read two of his political books.

Not an argument.

If you conflate the regressive left with Putin, whilst also being pro-Israel you really don't have a clue what you are talking about.

The regressive leftists just love Putin and Hamas, haven't you noticed?

>pro-giving some made-up sand nation more money for no raisins
>"leftist"
You're an idiot.

Because he is true and right

>communist!

Nope, anarchist, his professional and political work was banned in the Soviet Union

>Pol Pot supporter

Myth, try to actually quote and cite him doing it

>Self Hating Jew, wants Israel destroyed, loves terrorists

Criticising the policies of the state of Israel does not make you an anti Semite or a self hating Jew. Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948 and massacred several villages. It is illegally colonising the territory seized in 1967. This is all fact. This will lead to conflict.

>anti-American

Conflating the state and the government and its policies with the people, society, and culture

As an American it is his duty to speak up if he thinks his government is doing wrong

>his scientific work is wrong so his politics is bogus

Lolno

>he's a linguist not an expert he can't comment

Like every other political science major in the media we do listen to hmm?

They might seem that way to someone of low intelligence or someone who is in the dark and generally out of touch. Is this you? And how would you know if it was?

In English?

>what he did to behaviourism

He destroyed it my good man, problem?

>regressive left
What the fuck does this even mean?

His review of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior helped to end behaviorism as a tenable philosophy in psychology circles. His critique heralded the cognitive revolution in the study of behavior and brought the mind back to the forefront of consideration in the cognitive sciences. His rejection of the tabula rasa and ideas on universal grammar also helped make the a-priori relevant to the philosophy of mind, language, and linguistics again.

>problem?

Nope

SJWs, stalin worshippers, antisemites and people whose only politics involve knee jerk opposition to America.

>I stand with Israel

What does that mean? You uncritically support its Occupation of the West Bank? The Settlement construction and expansion? The daily brutalising of the Palestinians? A lot of people who say they support Israel, actually support its moral degradation and eventual destruction because that is where this sort of support for these sort of policies will eventually lead. There will be nothing but conflict as a result of these policies, and when Israel is no longer of use to the USA these policies will have left it isolated and embittered.

>regressive left

>islamofascism

Lolwut

His works in linguistic are great at the point that they are used in discrete mathematics.

What is he unintelligent and inaccurate about?

Antisemitism is still a thing, Hamas and the Alt Right are pretty alike in their plans for Jews, that's why a jewish homeland is still necessary. People who are being threatened with destruction have a right to defend themselves.

Well said

No he doesn't, in fact he rarely cites Marx.

He says the whole system is designed to serve the rich and powerful - and he is right look up what James Madison said about the way in which he was designing the government - and there are a few good people, like Sanders
He is an anarchist, of course he isn't going to tell you what to do and lay down the detailed plan on what to do and how to do it!
And he sees it as largely self evident, people in devastated third world countries can figure out what to do but here in the west wealthy people with all the privileges whine "what do I do I don't know tell me why do you complain and not guide us"
Its like Eugene Debs said: organise, organise, organise.

Look at Bolivia. For the first time in 500 years a country in the Western Hemisphere has an indigenous leader. Evo Morales.
How did that happen?
Did they sit idle twiddling their thumbs waiting for a saviour to come?
No.
Way back in the 1990s the Neo Liberal Reform agenda set its sites on privatising Bolivias water.
Great for the multinationals.
Bad for the poor indigenous people of Bolivia, who make up the majority of the countries population yet have no political engagement.
So they got organised, they got educated, they elected people from their own ranks to councils, they elected people from their own ranks to their legislature, they elected someone from their own ranks to the executive.

Read his work and you'll find out. He's the most important incisive political critic of the last half-century, and even if you don't agree with his views his encyclopedic knowledge of world history can't be discounted.

>Criticising the policies of the state of Israel does not make you an anti Semite or a self hating Jew. Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948 and massacred several villages. It is illegally colonising the territory seized in 1967. This is all fact. This will lead to conflict.

Hamas do not share your little distinction between Jews and Zionists. Nor does most of the Middle East.

Fact is that Israel is surrounded by countries whose citizens would gladly kill every last one of its own. Regardless of how justified the Israeli state might be, the consequences of its disestablishment and/or capitulating to the "Palestinian cause" would be far worse.

>its " retarded user believes in what (((media))) tells him about a board thats on a website he visits" rerun
k

>Great for the multinationals.
>Bad for the poor indigenous people of Bolivia, who make up the majority of the countries population yet have no political engagement.
>So they got organised, they got educated, they elected people from their own ranks to councils, they elected people from their own ranks to their legislature, they elected someone from their own ranks to the executive.
Yeah like 30 years too late

violent revolution would've been better

>still a thing
Nothing like decades ago, now its someone trolling on the Internet.
>Jewish homeland necessary
Two state solution.
But Israel has chosen expansion over security.
>Threatened
>defend themselves
No, they're the aggressor.

>look mom I'm edgy

A particularly ridiculous thing to suggest for South America with its long and bloody history of authoritarian states violent repression of dissent
They would School of the Americas those people and you wouldn't give a damn because at least your juvenile power fantasies have been sated

Chomsky is pure ressentiment.

As you may have noticed, ressentiment is extremely popular with normies and lefties.

He's the literal embodiment of "The West is always wrong/evil/etc." Although he calls himself an anarchist, he frequently identifies with the Left in general. Recently, for example, he made some Youtube video advertising for what is basically a Left-wing reading club to counter the rise of Populism.

His whole shtick is that natives and/or the 99% being screwed over is somehow a problem for those of us who benefit from it. Sorry bub, not buying your ressentiment.

>It is not surprising that the lambs should bear a grudge against the great birds of prey, but that is no reason for blaming the great birds of prey for taking the little lambs. And when the lambs say among themselves, "These birds of prey are evil, and he who least resembles a bird of prey, who is rather its opposite, a lamb,—should he not be good?" then there is nothing to carp with in this ideal's establishment, though the birds of prey may regard it a little mockingly, and maybe say to themselves, "We bear no grudge against them, these good lambs, we even love them: nothing is tastier than a tender lamb.

I will continue to wring my bread from the sweat of other men's brows. The salt makes it all the tastier, Chomsky.

>Nor does most of the Middle East.

In 2004 the Arab League voted unanimously in favor of the Saudi Peace Plan: full normalisation of relations with Israel, peace treaties, etc in exchange for Israel returning to the Pre June 1967 border - withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights.
Iran and Hezbollah back it too.
Hamas started out as crazies - and lets not forget that Israel backed them early on as a religious bulwark against the PLO - but these days they are professionals and accept negotiations and cease fires, which Israel constantly breaks.

Lets just imagine that everyone goes ahead with this, but Hamas refuses and it alone insists on continuing to drive Israel into the sea - what would happen?
They would be isolated. They would be pariahs. The majority of Palestinians would be content living in peace with no more Settlers, checkpoints, watch towers, etc. Every other state in the region would be at peace with Israel having normal relations with it. And nobody would be supporting Hamas, any acts of terrorism they attempted - which would be limited given their limited support - would be condemned and there would be support for bringing them to justice and handing them over for trial.

You just want to throw up one road block after another. Relying on racist innuendos about untrustworthy Arabs lying and saying whatever to stab you in the back.

>criticises his country bombing and invading and overthrowing governments and supporting dictators
>dude srsly stop it with the "The West is always wrong/evil/etc." that is SO ressentiment

The rest of your post is edgelord rambling, don't forget to tip your fedora

>How dare you contradict me you thought criminal! the strong should always bow down before the weak and apologize constantly for their natural superiority.

We're hitting levels of naivety that shouldn't be possible.

Of course they have to *appear* supportive of the peaceful solutions, so as to get the rest of the West off their ass - and by extension, reduce their level of commitment untoward Israel.

>regressive leftists just love Putin
eh no. You might want to go outside or read a newspaper. Nice trolling effort tho.

>criticises his country bombing and invading and overthrowing governments and supporting dictators

Why is this a problem? It's in our interests.

Overthrowing governments isn't bad by default. Leftists of a more radical persuasion advocate it all the time. Same goes for installing dictators/totalitarian regimes/etc.

I just don't share your pathetic commitment to Western Liberal Democracy/Human Rights/etc. Sorry, Last Man.

Try reading my comment again as well as the one I was responding to.

Can't tell if same fag or retarded. Either way
lurk moar

I said:
>Relying on racist innuendos about untrustworthy Arabs lying and saying whatever to stab you in the back.
And you responded
>>Of course they have to *appear* supportive of the peaceful solutions, so as to get the rest of the West off their ass - and by extension, reduce their level of commitment untoward Israel.
Hmm

And again, suppose Israel does pull out of the West Bank but there are still people who want to fight? The vast majority will not support them, they'd be like the various IRA factions today, nobody cares about them in Northern Ireland, they run drugs more than anything else.
>muh imperialism
National Interests mean corporate/state interests.
You do not benefit. You pay again and again and again. You pay for the war. You pay for the aftermath. You pay for the consequences. Your economy gets tanked fighting the war. You suffer any retaliation. And the energy and engineering firms and contractors make off like bandits.
You don't get a dime.
>muh interventions
Grow up edgelord

>it isn't bad to meddle in other countries affairs and overthrow their government and replace it with a dictatorship
What did he mean by this?

Why don't you just call them Arabushim and get it over with

You're the one who has to prove those "racist innuendos" are not justified - considering that most of the Middle East has never demonstrated any significant degree of tolerance for Jews and/or Israel.

>And again, suppose Israel does pull out of the West Bank but there are still people who want to fight? The vast majority will not support them

They keep voting for Hamas, who have made it a point of principle to drive the Jews into the sea. However much you might like to think of them as some sort of "reformed" and professional get-up, they're the same uncompromising radicals they were when they began.

>You do not benefit.

That's weird. By every metric, I am benefiting.

I meant what I said. What you just greentexted is realpolitik. Your idealism has no place in the real world.

It's called being realistic.

#
>you're the one who has to prove a negative

Lol

Anyway, suppose someone was arguing that Jews and Israelis are intrinsically untrustworthy? We'd know what to think of them.
Yet here you are arguing it about someone else with a straight face.
>never demonstrated
2004 Arab League Peace Treaty.
And if you chose expansion over security as Israel has done then you are going to come into conflict.
I guess what's why these farcical persecution complex fantasies exist, you have to rationalise to yourself the conflicts without admitting your aggressor role.
>voting for Hamas
Because they get shit done unlike the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank
They are open to negotiations, they stick to cease fires while Israel violates them.
So this is the new qualification?
"Everyone's agreed to peace except this one minor guy, so we can't have peace until he changes or goes"
A cynic might think you were looking for an excuse to maintain the political impass and the Settlememts.
>by every metric I am benefiting
Maybe if you have share in Boeing or Bechtel, but at the expense of your fellow citizens and society
>muh realpolitik
And when it blows back in your face?
Operation Ajax has been the gift that keeps on giving am I right?
>its called being realistic
You don't know what that word means do you

Democracy is an idea that is almost exclusive to the West

Native Americans had democracy

>what is chiefdom

>fremen

Get the fuck out of here with your Dune references you fucking pleb.

He is easy to get into and writes rather clearly and in a language most normal people could understand. Philosophically, I think he is below mediocre. Those involved in politics typically are though.

evo is a piece of shit, get the fuck out of here with that propaganda.

Literal retard

You are dealing with two entirely different things. Nietzsche is a psychologist, applying the will-to-power to states is retarded. A nation cannot do shit like that without suffering the consequences, this isn't some comic-book where some fascist state can just keep imposing its Ubermenschen Will-to-Power and dominate the world without any backlash

Your country will fall precisely b/c of this stupid way of thinking

Nope, elected positions, representative councils, majority consensus to agree to something

Why mediocre?

he got BTFO`d by Zizek

is this a pasta? this is one of the most blatantly ignorant things I've seen

really? how?

This is a good answer.

Fucking educate yourself, piece of shit

9/10 bait, if so

But the cognitive revolution wasn't an actual scientific revolution.

Behaviorism is still alive and well, the majority of neuroscientists work under a behaviorist framework.

Cognitive psychology is literally dead because why would you tell someone to memorize words while they say "tah tah tah" when you can just do imaging studies.

No, he didn't. Zizek often says how much he respects Chomsky even though Chomsky doesn't like him.

What, with your own words and thoughts, is wrong with what he says?

He's a con man; they're his marks

I see Lit has gone full MAGA. Reminds me why I left.

I think casuals flooded in here from the other boards. I remember when Veeky Forums was a bastion of left thought with some very reasonable rightist and religious discourse.

Albeit, I'm not pondering some long forgotten future.. it was only two years ago when I was last here before returning about a month ago.

It's a shame the place has degenerated so much. At least some amount of healthy literary discussion is still possible.

>I hate Putin for...
Literal fucking brainwashing.

Methodological behaviorism is still relatively popular, but radical behaviorism as a guiding philosophy for neuroscientists and psychologists is dead. Nobody rejects the importance of mind anymore

>and there are a few good people
>like Sanders
get a load of this retard

the other day i watched the Firing Line episode he was in and he destroyed buckley pretty hard

>Nobody rejects the importance of mind anymore

Not everyone accepts the "mind" as something separate. The majority of neuroscientists (and contemporary behavioral psychologists which are mostly within comparative cognition/psychology or applied behavior analyses) see it as an extension of behavior and environment.

The "mind" isn't that important or interesting and is based on the flawed premise that we as humans are special animals that aren't susceptible to the same core principles of biology and behavior.

t. neuroscientist who rejects the importance of the mind. I wouldn't say I'm a radical behaviorist though I do tend to lean in that direction. All of the people who've advised me in academia can be traced to Skinner.

You don't have to be a dualist to believe that mental states are important and should not be discounted when considering behavior, nor do you have to believe that subjective mental states are unique to man. A radical behaviorist disregards the possibility of animal consciousness and is skeptical of the influence of mental states on behavior, just as he does in man. There are no flawed premises here that regard man as a "special" animal. This line of thinking, while applicable to certain areas of behavior, also discounts the mounting body of evidence that the mind *is* important and plays an important role in the behavioral patterns of human and non-human alike.

>Their simply brainwashed
Nice spelling, o wise one.

Moron. Chomsky has said he doesn't even understand theory like Marxism. He's not a Marxist -- not that that would be a bad thing.

Stop pretending you know what you're talking about.

samefag

Because Manufacturing Consent is a legitimate work, and because his work in linguistics is trendsetting.

Cool fact, the NYRB's last review of him is an axejob.

nybooks.com/articles/2016/06/09/a-case-against-america/
nybooks.com/articles/2016/07/14/who-rules-the-world-an-exchange/

south american left is a complete bogus, evo is a thief just like the presidents that preceded him.

>I remember when Veeky Forums was a bastion of left thought
In other words you've only been here 2~ years.

This. And he is obviously compensating for being a pedophile.

Chomsky is a genocide denier and supported Pol Pot; a dictator, but ok.