Noam Chomskys home office/library

Some sort of savant or autistic ability?

Normie Chumpsky

The most useless human being on this earth. He's made a living off of sounding intelligent to plebeians. May he rot in hell

t. statist apologist

so messy

but I guess it makes sense if one is as old as he is

he'll die before he'll need to re-read or use most of the stuff buried there

also I kinda feel bad for the guy, he said in some interview that he doesn't have the time to read as much fiction as he'd like to. he should just retire.

>implying chomsky isn't practically a slightly more critical liberal leftist
he is such a reformist that his "anarchism" basically translates to "well uh I'm kinda critical of power and I don't hate socialist experiments"
note: I do not mean that he is worthless, but he isn't, in practice, some big radical anarchist/communist

>hurr durr

Chomsky lives in the real world, he accepts it and doesn't insist on living in an ideal
As such in living in the real world we have and not what we'd like we have to deal with its existing structures
That means governments
That means electing people into it and pushing it as far as it will go
If you truly believe in workers self management, seizing the means of production, abolishing the government and corporations and all the rest of that - are you going to reject OHAS legislation protecting workers because it comes from the government?
No because it is a step towards improving working conditions.
If you're juvenile enough to insist you'll have no part of it because it legitimises the government, them you're just not serious about doing anything about working people's conditions.

>That means electing people into it and pushing it as far as it will go
This is fine, but I believe it is unrealistic to consider it enough - thus, it must only be done while simultaneously aiming at the radicalization of the oppressed. A more radical change will probably be needed to avoid horrible things happening.

Anyway, I was nowhere saying that Chomsky is bad. I was just describing him as what he is: in practice, a slightly more critical liberal leftist. He is no revolutionary radical. I find it hard to even call him an anarchist (or communist). He is nonetheless pretty good, he tends to have some facts to back up his claims, etc.

Dude. Where do you live? The world isn't nearly as bad as you think it is. You're falling for the old serpent's memes. They only work when you believe that the universe is serious and that it's up to you to save the world. Wake up.

>everything's fine just sit back and be passive

>This is fine, but I believe it is unrealistic to consider it enough
Protip: neither does Chomsky
>thus, it must only be done while simultaneously aiming at the radicalization of the oppressed
Protip: that's what the man always says
>I was just describing him as what he is: in practice, a slightly more critical liberal leftist.
You have just critiqued my analogy by saying more needs to be done parrallel to that over the long term
Which are precisely the positions that Chomsky himself advocates
YOU JUST STATED THE SAME POSITION AS CHOMSKY
So you clearly don't know what the fuck you are talking about or what you are reacting against when you say this nonsense about merely being a slightly more critical