I would not have thought anyone would pay attention to the man after he was so completely wrong about Afghanistan. I would have thought anyone paying attention would find him to be consistently contrarian and unable to speak or think in any other terms. But it would seem that consistency is not a requirement to be king of the lost anti crowd.
If one needs to disprove Chomsky, one need only wait for the pages of history to repeatedly show him to be wrong. In the meantime, we can scold him for not displaying a pinch of original thought in these remarks. He's supposed to be a serious thinker, a Big Man of Academia, and he's repeating the same old crapola, albeit in Ivory Tower terminology.
Frankly I don't know how anyone can stand to read shit like this:
Quote:
Ramachandran :How do you think the U.S. will manage the human - and humanitarian - consequences of the war?
Chomsky : No one knows, of course. That is why honest and decent people do not resort to violence - because one simply does not know.
|
No one knows -- that is, except for the logistics experts offloading shipping containers of food and medicine on the docks that haven't seen food or medicine despite years of UN programs allegedly meant to deliver nothing else.
But at least ol Noam is effectively shown to have been reduced to his component parts: 99% babbling nihilism coated with 1% academic schlock. Think about that quote, people. You don't resort to violence, because you simply do not know what will happen. What the fucking fuck?
You can be absolutely, positively certain that Saddam Hussein and his thugs won't be in charge. Chomsky may not know that. But you and I do, because we're smarter than he is.
Quod erat demonstrandum, Chomsky remains a dolt.