To be fair, he's pretty even handed in his criticism of both western super powers (US, UK, etc) and east (Russia). He's surprisingly (to most people unfamiliar with his theories) less critical of China and its rise though.
Don't know much about Noam Chomsky. I first heard of him a few years back when reading "Without Roots" where Marcello Pera mentioned him.
Edit: Here is the quote that I remember about Chomsky (page 88)
If President George Bush says that there is an axis of evil he is decried, not for bad policies, but rather as a cowboy or an illiterate - an accusation one could of course never make of a European intellectual, ever wise, profound, and knowledgeable. Noam Chomsky can claim without qualms that the United States is a "leading terrorist state."
Professor Emeritus at MIT who neo-liberalism and is a libertarian socialist, so he is a great American! The conservatives would call him "one of those fancy college folk."
He's a linguist and mathematician who just decided to start talking politics one day. He's right about a lot and wrong about a lot. He's not particularly good at accepting when he might be wrong though.
I rather like good ol' Noam. Perhaps you just can't come to terms with his being both Jewish and anti-Zionist?
I don't see him as being "anti-US", or "anti-UK", or "anti-Israel". He's just "anti-imperialist".
And he's not just a political commentator. His work on formal languages and grammars is well regarded by computer scientists.
I can't really come to terms with anyone being anti-Zionist. Being Jewish or not has nothing to do with it.
If by "Zionism" is meant simply that Jewish people should be entitled to self-determination and a state of their own, then I have absolutely no problem with Zionism. (I don't think Chomsky opposes that form of Zionism either.) It's only when "Zionism" is interpreted as a right to trample neighbors and appropriate territory that I object.
I rather like good ol' Noam. Perhaps you just can't come to terms with his being both Jewish and anti-Zionist?
I don't see him as being "anti-US", or "anti-UK", or "anti-Israel". He's just "anti-imperialist".
And he's not just a political commentator. His work on formal languages and grammars is well regarded by computer scientists.
I can't really come to terms with anyone being anti-Zionist. Being Jewish or not has nothing to do with it.
If by "Zionism" is meant simply that Jewish people should be entitled to self-determination and a state of their own, then I have absolutely no problem with Zionism. (I don't think Chomsky opposes that form of Zionism either.) It's only when "Zionism" is interpreted as a right to trample neighbors and appropriate territory that I object.
But in order for the Jews to have a state of their own they would have to have some territory, so in order to get territory they would have to either take it from some other state or settle in an uninhabited place. But if a place is uninhabited then there probably is a reason for that, which would mean the Jews would most likely be either unwilling or unable to settle in that place. So for the Jews to have a Jewish state, then the Jewish state would have to get its territory at the expense of someone else, as indeed happened with the Arabs/Palestinians.
I rather like good ol' Noam. Perhaps you just can't come to terms with his being both Jewish and anti-Zionist?
I don't see him as being "anti-US", or "anti-UK", or "anti-Israel". He's just "anti-imperialist".
And he's not just a political commentator. His work on formal languages and grammars is well regarded by computer scientists.
I can't really come to terms with anyone being anti-Zionist. Being Jewish or not has nothing to do with it.
If by "Zionism" is meant simply that Jewish people should be entitled to self-determination and a state of their own, then I have absolutely no problem with Zionism. (I don't think Chomsky opposes that form of Zionism either.) It's only when "Zionism" is interpreted as a right to trample neighbors and appropriate territory that I object.
But in order for the Jews to have a state of their own they would have to have some territory, so in order to get territory they would have to either take it from some other state or settle in an uninhabited place. But if a place is uninhabited then there probably is a reason for that, which would mean the Jews would most likely be either unwilling or unable to settle in that place. So for the Jews to have a Jewish state, then the Jewish state would have to get its territory at the expense of someone else, as indeed happened with the Arabs/Palestinians.
Yes, although I object to brazen imperialism, I'm also pragmatic enough to realize that almost all states rise at the expense of others and that harsh Darwinian processes often determine which states thrive and which states wither.
Israel may seem to hold a promising future for Zionist aspirations at present, but the nation's aggressive imperialism may provoke a backlash that will ultimately be its undoing. Only time will tell.
He's the left wing version of Ayn Rand. At first they seem really wise when you're in high school or college but later you realize anything they say that makes sense has been said by others before them and is damn obvious and all the rest is bull****.
I rather like good ol' Noam. Perhaps you just can't come to terms with his being both Jewish and anti-Zionist?
I don't see him as being "anti-US", or "anti-UK", or "anti-Israel". He's just "anti-imperialist".
And he's not just a political commentator. His work on formal languages and grammars is well regarded by computer scientists.
I can't really come to terms with anyone being anti-Zionist. Being Jewish or not has nothing to do with it.
If by "Zionism" is meant simply that Jewish people should be entitled to self-determination and a state of their own, then I have absolutely no problem with Zionism. (I don't think Chomsky opposes that form of Zionism either.) It's only when "Zionism" is interpreted as a right to trample neighbors and appropriate territory that I object.
Well yeah that's pretty much what Zionism means.
I don't understand how Zionism could be interpreted in this way, considering the definition, which is pretty much what you posted. I am pretty sure this interpretation mostly comes from anti-Zionists themselves.
@samanthademeste: Do you have any source that gives evidence that Chomsky does not like the U.S. and the U.K., or at least doesn't like their policies.
I rather like good ol' Noam. Perhaps you just can't come to terms with his being both Jewish and anti-Zionist?
I don't see him as being "anti-US", or "anti-UK", or "anti-Israel". He's just "anti-imperialist".
And he's not just a political commentator. His work on formal languages and grammars is well regarded by computer scientists.
I can't really come to terms with anyone being anti-Zionist. Being Jewish or not has nothing to do with it.
If by "Zionism" is meant simply that Jewish people should be entitled to self-determination and a state of their own, then I have absolutely no problem with Zionism. (I don't think Chomsky opposes that form of Zionism either.) It's only when "Zionism" is interpreted as a right to trample neighbors and appropriate territory that I object.
Being an anarchist, I think that he would probably oppose that.
Log in to comment