4 ms·

You could just go to his wikipedia article. Anyway, he tried to downplay the genocide and the violence committed by the Khmer Rouge: https://en.wikipedia.org/w

by maeln 3y ago

You could just go to his wikipedia article. Anyway, he tried to downplay the genocide and the violence committed by the Khmer Rouge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial#Chomsky_and_Herman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial#Chom... He, in the same fashion, downplayed the bosnian genocide: https://www.dw.com/en/dissident-intellectual-noam-chomsky-at-90/a-46629642 https://www.dw.com/en/dissident-intellectual-noam-chomsky-at... https://books.google.fr/books?id=7Bl9KT9NME0C&pg=PA142&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.fr/books?id=7Bl9KT9NME0C&pg=PA142&redir... And said that the Russian was acting "with restrain and moderation" in Ukraine: https://archive.is/EJp7e https://archive.is/EJp7e That is how he operate. Whenever there is a conflict involving the U.S, even remotely, he is systematically downplaying the opponent violence and insisting that everyone focus on the U.S and ally violence. This way he can always look like the reasonable man, while basically defending massacre and dictator. How can he do this when criticizing (rightfully so), the U.S for the Vietnam War or the Contra, and not see the hypocrisy, is beside me.

6stringronin 3y ago
He tried to make sense of numbers, as a point that it serves the US geopolitical goals at the time to have a distraction from their own atrocities. "We do not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst these sharply conflicting assessments; rather, we again want to emphasize some crucial points. What filters through to the American public is a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered." Calling it downplaying genocide is a nice strawman. In any developing situation the media wants to jump yo a conclusion, that's his point overall. He wasn't denying or downplaying just stating, if its happening how can we know to what degree when we have unreliable sources?
LindeBuzoGray 3y ago
> he tried to downplay the genocide and the violence committed by the Khmer Rouge The US carpet bombed Cambodia just like it did Vietnam, and Chomsky condemned this. This nebulous "Khmer Rouge" you refer to was armed by the US starting in 1979 and even more so in subsequent years. The US worked to put them back in power and put economic, military and diplomatic support behind it. As reported in the New York Times, ABC News at the time. Chomsky was against this. The US establishment was anti-Khmer Touge until 1979, then began arming and supporting them in 1979. By the late 1990s they began going out of favor in the US establishment. Chomsky's opinion hasn't changed, he was against the US bombing Cambodia during the Vietnam War.

by maeln 3y ago

6stringronin 3y ago

He tried to make sense of numbers, as a point that it serves the US geopolitical goals at the time to have a distraction from their own atrocities. "We do not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst these sharply conflicting assessments; rather, we again want to emphasize some crucial points. What filters through to the American public is a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered." Calling it downplaying genocide is a nice strawman. In any developing situation the media wants to jump yo a conclusion, that's his point overall. He wasn't denying or downplaying just stating, if its happening how can we know to what degree when we have unreliable sources?

LindeBuzoGray 3y ago

> he tried to downplay the genocide and the violence committed by the Khmer Rouge The US carpet bombed Cambodia just like it did Vietnam, and Chomsky condemned this. This nebulous "Khmer Rouge" you refer to was armed by the US starting in 1979 and even more so in subsequent years. The US worked to put them back in power and put economic, military and diplomatic support behind it. As reported in the New York Times, ABC News at the time. Chomsky was against this. The US establishment was anti-Khmer Touge until 1979, then began arming and supporting them in 1979. By the late 1990s they began going out of favor in the US establishment. Chomsky's opinion hasn't changed, he was against the US bombing Cambodia during the Vietnam War.