7 ms·

Noam Chomsky on language, left libertarianism, and progress

35 points by hackandthink 3y ago

abss 3y ago
"It’s not a movement, but it’s all over the place. It’s changed the way we see and think of things, almost everybody. It’s libertarian, socialism, anarchism. Of course, they’re not going to be popular. We have a class-based society, rigid class-based society. The business classes, the ultra-rich are dedicated to class war. They’re basically vulgar Marxists, fight values inverted, constantly fighting a harsh class war. They control the resources, control the institutions, control the economy. So yes, ideas that they don’t like, you don’t hear. Nothing novel about that." Ideed, nothing novel and basicaly impossible to avoid if you have a society with elites (even left oriented elites will do the same, even worse)... It is a tautology that elites will censor what it is against their interests. I wander if is even desirable to build a society with elites that are open to be replaced by "better" values, or "better" execution. It looks to me that the only good approach is to have societies composed by many small "sub-societies" with different values and different elites that compete on attracting supporters. Of course this is not with very serious challenges too...
- hellisothers 3y ago
  I’m not sure that word means what you think it means, you’re just describing entrenched power, it’s always going to do that. No need to evoke the word elite like it’s a boogeyman
- panarky 3y ago
  What are the ideas that they don't like, that we don't hear? Is there a list of these dangerous ideas somewhere? Because I'm searching for new, dangerous ideas that I haven't heard before, and they're not so easy to find.
  - nswest23 3y ago
    > Because I'm searching for new, dangerous ideas that I haven't heard before, and they're not so easy to find. You’re so close.
    - johnthescott 3y ago
      advatia vedanta. also, the frame problem in ai.
ajuc 3y ago
If you you argue for letting countries invade others and not to help the defending people - you're not a libertarian. You're an useful idiot of dictators.
- hackandthink 3y ago
  Yes Chomsky sees it the other way around: Ukraines elites are useful idiots in an American proxy war against Russia. (Noam Chomsky On The Russia-Ukraine War) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD_JdwimnjU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD_JdwimnjU I do not think that "fight Russia to the Last Ukrainian" is driving Western politics, but I believe there's enough cynicism and hypocrisy (and useful idiots) in the West.
  - fatfingerd 3y ago
    But why stop with recent idiots, I think the whole point in flattering Putin for the last few decades was to get Russia here, instead of being the counterbalance to the US in Europe.
    - ajuc 3y ago
      Nah, Western Europe wanted cheap resources, USA just didn't wanted to deal with Eastern Europe, so they supported Putin. The deal was "keep order and deliver resources and you get to do what you want". Russia was playing along till mid 00s and when they got their economy more or less together - they immediately started testing the boundaries. Each time they tried anything - nothing bad happened to them. So they tried some more.
  - ajuc 3y ago
    Yes, I know. And he's catastrophically wrong. I think he's blinded by his anti-western bias. Yes, west isn't the good guys. But Russia and China are definitely the bad guys in comparison. Americans didn't wanted to have a proxy (or any other) war against Russia. Americans tried to preserve USSR to keep the region stable and nukes in one place, when it didn't worked they tried establishing good relations and even invited Russia to NATO. Russia didn't wanted to be in an alliance where Latvia has as much say as they do. Because Russia wanted to regain its empire. This is what Eastern Europeans were trying to say for 30 years, and the West didn't listened. Even after 2008 and 2014. And then comes Chomsky&company and says "you easterners should be happy to live in a dictatorship >sphere of inlfuence< because we leftists know better what's good for you. No need to thank us". This is just colonialism. Since 90s it's always been Russia escalating and the West refusing to respond strongly enough, which gave Russia the perception that the West is weak and they can get even more if they escalate further. If West reacted in 2008 how they react now - we could have saved 100s of thousand of people AND avoided 2 wars and billions in military and humanitarian spending. We didn't, because it was easier in the short term to look the other way. But you can't ignore such things forever.
skellyclock 3y ago
[flagged]
- postsantum 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - skellyclock 3y ago
    Maybe, but if I had ties to a convicted pedophile, child sex trafficker and politician blackmailer for mossad I would hope my response when confronted about it would draw more scrutiny than Noams did when he said "First response is that it is none of your business. Or anyone’s."
    - postsantum 3y ago
      Would you also dismiss Kissinger's immense expertise on the grounds he is a war criminal? I don't think it's a good strategy when your goal is a honest discussion
      - tomjen3 3y ago
        I would dismiss his expertise based on lack of evidence.

35 points by hackandthink 3y ago

abss 3y ago

"It’s not a movement, but it’s all over the place. It’s changed the way we see and think of things, almost everybody. It’s libertarian, socialism, anarchism. Of course, they’re not going to be popular. We have a class-based society, rigid class-based society. The business classes, the ultra-rich are dedicated to class war. They’re basically vulgar Marxists, fight values inverted, constantly fighting a harsh class war. They control the resources, control the institutions, control the economy. So yes, ideas that they don’t like, you don’t hear. Nothing novel about that." Ideed, nothing novel and basicaly impossible to avoid if you have a society with elites (even left oriented elites will do the same, even worse)... It is a tautology that elites will censor what it is against their interests. I wander if is even desirable to build a society with elites that are open to be replaced by "better" values, or "better" execution. It looks to me that the only good approach is to have societies composed by many small "sub-societies" with different values and different elites that compete on attracting supporters. Of course this is not with very serious challenges too...

hellisothers 3y ago
I’m not sure that word means what you think it means, you’re just describing entrenched power, it’s always going to do that. No need to evoke the word elite like it’s a boogeyman
panarky 3y ago
What are the ideas that they don't like, that we don't hear? Is there a list of these dangerous ideas somewhere? Because I'm searching for new, dangerous ideas that I haven't heard before, and they're not so easy to find.
- nswest23 3y ago
  > Because I'm searching for new, dangerous ideas that I haven't heard before, and they're not so easy to find. You’re so close.
  - johnthescott 3y ago
    advatia vedanta. also, the frame problem in ai.

ajuc 3y ago

If you you argue for letting countries invade others and not to help the defending people - you're not a libertarian. You're an useful idiot of dictators.

hackandthink 3y ago
Yes Chomsky sees it the other way around: Ukraines elites are useful idiots in an American proxy war against Russia. (Noam Chomsky On The Russia-Ukraine War) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD_JdwimnjU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD_JdwimnjU I do not think that "fight Russia to the Last Ukrainian" is driving Western politics, but I believe there's enough cynicism and hypocrisy (and useful idiots) in the West.
- fatfingerd 3y ago
  But why stop with recent idiots, I think the whole point in flattering Putin for the last few decades was to get Russia here, instead of being the counterbalance to the US in Europe.
  - ajuc 3y ago
    Nah, Western Europe wanted cheap resources, USA just didn't wanted to deal with Eastern Europe, so they supported Putin. The deal was "keep order and deliver resources and you get to do what you want". Russia was playing along till mid 00s and when they got their economy more or less together - they immediately started testing the boundaries. Each time they tried anything - nothing bad happened to them. So they tried some more.
- ajuc 3y ago
  Yes, I know. And he's catastrophically wrong. I think he's blinded by his anti-western bias. Yes, west isn't the good guys. But Russia and China are definitely the bad guys in comparison. Americans didn't wanted to have a proxy (or any other) war against Russia. Americans tried to preserve USSR to keep the region stable and nukes in one place, when it didn't worked they tried establishing good relations and even invited Russia to NATO. Russia didn't wanted to be in an alliance where Latvia has as much say as they do. Because Russia wanted to regain its empire. This is what Eastern Europeans were trying to say for 30 years, and the West didn't listened. Even after 2008 and 2014. And then comes Chomsky&company and says "you easterners should be happy to live in a dictatorship >sphere of inlfuence< because we leftists know better what's good for you. No need to thank us". This is just colonialism. Since 90s it's always been Russia escalating and the West refusing to respond strongly enough, which gave Russia the perception that the West is weak and they can get even more if they escalate further. If West reacted in 2008 how they react now - we could have saved 100s of thousand of people AND avoided 2 wars and billions in military and humanitarian spending. We didn't, because it was easier in the short term to look the other way. But you can't ignore such things forever.

skellyclock 3y ago

[flagged]

postsantum 3y ago
[flagged]
- skellyclock 3y ago
  Maybe, but if I had ties to a convicted pedophile, child sex trafficker and politician blackmailer for mossad I would hope my response when confronted about it would draw more scrutiny than Noams did when he said "First response is that it is none of your business. Or anyone’s."
  - postsantum 3y ago
    Would you also dismiss Kissinger's immense expertise on the grounds he is a war criminal? I don't think it's a good strategy when your goal is a honest discussion
    - tomjen3 3y ago
      I would dismiss his expertise based on lack of evidence.