3 ms·

It’s a great question. I suggest reading up on what democracy really means in the modern world: https://chomsky.info/consent01/ https://chomsky.info/consent01/

Gibbon1 2y ago
I suggest avoiding reading anything by a guy that idolizes the Khmer Rouge.
- TaylorAlexander 2y ago
  That doesn’t sound like a thing Chomsky would do. I could imagine him saying that certain tactics were effective or certain aspects of their politics were notable, but I don’t see him as someone who idolizes anyone. Do you have a source for this? To me this sounds like a misunderstanding, but I’m open to being shown otherwise.
  - Gibbon1 2y ago
    https://chomsky.info/19770625/ https://chomsky.info/19770625/
    - TaylorAlexander 2y ago
      Bit of a busy day for me so I asked ChatGPT so summarize and explain the author’s position on the Khmer Rouge. “The text is an interview with Noam Chomsky discussing the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia. Chomsky critiques Western media's portrayal of the Khmer Rouge, arguing that it's exaggerated and ignores broader historical context, particularly U.S. involvement. He suggests that atrocities attributed to the Khmer Rouge may have been exaggerated or even fabricated, emphasizing the need for independent investigation. Chomsky's attitude toward the Khmer Rouge appears critical of Western narratives, highlighting skepticism and a call for a more nuanced understanding.” That’s does not give any truth to your claim of idolizing, as I expected. It’s quite believable that western narratives could be manipulated as that is common place and the subject of Chomsky’s expertise. Pointing out the manipulation of the media and painting the target as more nuanced and not as evil as media makes them out to be is a far cry from idolization.
      - Gibbon1 2y ago
        Go believe what you want then, that's what Chompsky does.
        TaylorAlexander 2y ago
        I’m gonna believe what makes sense. You made a claim which didn’t fit with what I know about Chomsky, and left a citation that doesn’t support that claim. Your claim does not make any sense to me. It’s perfectly within my understanding of Chomsky for him to say “These people we vilified weren’t quite that bad. We vilified them for our own political aims, and fabricated stories as needed to support that. The truth is much more nuanced than media made it out to be.” And Chomsky doesn’t just make empty claims or “believe what he wants”. He usually cites sources from within the US government, like published State Department memos stating the position he’s claiming they had.

Gibbon1 2y ago

I suggest avoiding reading anything by a guy that idolizes the Khmer Rouge.

TaylorAlexander 2y ago
That doesn’t sound like a thing Chomsky would do. I could imagine him saying that certain tactics were effective or certain aspects of their politics were notable, but I don’t see him as someone who idolizes anyone. Do you have a source for this? To me this sounds like a misunderstanding, but I’m open to being shown otherwise.
- Gibbon1 2y ago
  https://chomsky.info/19770625/ https://chomsky.info/19770625/
  - TaylorAlexander 2y ago
    Bit of a busy day for me so I asked ChatGPT so summarize and explain the author’s position on the Khmer Rouge. “The text is an interview with Noam Chomsky discussing the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia. Chomsky critiques Western media's portrayal of the Khmer Rouge, arguing that it's exaggerated and ignores broader historical context, particularly U.S. involvement. He suggests that atrocities attributed to the Khmer Rouge may have been exaggerated or even fabricated, emphasizing the need for independent investigation. Chomsky's attitude toward the Khmer Rouge appears critical of Western narratives, highlighting skepticism and a call for a more nuanced understanding.” That’s does not give any truth to your claim of idolizing, as I expected. It’s quite believable that western narratives could be manipulated as that is common place and the subject of Chomsky’s expertise. Pointing out the manipulation of the media and painting the target as more nuanced and not as evil as media makes them out to be is a far cry from idolization.
    - Gibbon1 2y ago
      Go believe what you want then, that's what Chompsky does.
      - TaylorAlexander 2y ago
        I’m gonna believe what makes sense. You made a claim which didn’t fit with what I know about Chomsky, and left a citation that doesn’t support that claim. Your claim does not make any sense to me. It’s perfectly within my understanding of Chomsky for him to say “These people we vilified weren’t quite that bad. We vilified them for our own political aims, and fabricated stories as needed to support that. The truth is much more nuanced than media made it out to be.” And Chomsky doesn’t just make empty claims or “believe what he wants”. He usually cites sources from within the US government, like published State Department memos stating the position he’s claiming they had.