4 ms·
I have gone the opposite direction on him. I think the turning point was the debate with Dershowitz on Israeli/Arab problems. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
by starik36 10y ago
I have gone the opposite direction on him. I think the turning point was the debate with Dershowitz on Israeli/Arab problems. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ux4JU_sbB0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ux4JU_sbB0
He seems to speak in broad generalities, rather than getting down into the details. I've reached a point where I need to hear the down and gritty rather than airy statements.
- fit2rule 10y agoYou simply need to listen to more Chomsky. That debate may not have had enough details - such is the nature of the format of the debate - but if one investigates Chomsky further, it is clear that the man lived his life in the details. His position, I believe, is formulated precisely on understanding the details and facts of the situation - it has been his life work to uncover the truth.
- starik36 10y agoCan you suggest a debate where he does get into details of things?
- baursak 10y agoAre you looking specifically for debates? Otherwise, I'd recommend reading "Understanding Power", which has ~450 pages of footnotes alone, to the point where they are not included in the book and published as a separate downloadable PDF: http://www.understandingpower.com/ http://www.understandingpower.com/ Other than that, this ones seems to go into details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68wFDvTBHys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68wFDvTBHys
- RodericDay 10y agoFor what it's worth, I think Chomsky blew Dershowitz out of the water. As did Norman Finkelstein in his own showdown with Dershowitz.
- starik36 10y agoI felt exactly the opposite. Dershowitz would delve down into the details (for example, resolution 224) and how it was created and all that. While Chomsky would make general statements not backed up by anything.