Chomsky an intellectual clown? Actually, he's the world's most cited living academic. He's an MIT professor at that, such an academic superstar that his position is unassailable even by an intellectual-industrial complex that hates him.
The fact the Mr. Chomsky is an MIT professor does not qualify him as a ‘superstar’ in anything. What may qualify him as a ‘superstar’ is his scholarly work, which is very good indeed…but not all of it. In a way I am qualified to point this out to you, because although am not an MIT professor, but I am an MIT graduate (physics). Believe me, - MIT has its share of nobodies. I did graduate work there and I know this first hand.
I am extremely aware of Mr. Chomsky’s work, even heard him speak… and I know how his work informs related fields. His field is linguistics. His academic work is very good, but his attitude towards where that work needs to go is not so much. For instance, the Artificial Intelligence guys and Media Labs people do not think much of him, and for a very good reason. No matter…this is not what we are discussing here. I called him an intellectual clown, because of his POLITICAL views, not his expertise in linguistics. You absolutely cannot mix those issues together. To wit, - Rogers Waters is a great musician, but he will never win a political office due to his discredited political views.
Mr. Chomsky is a classic left-wing Marxist of Berny Sanders variety. But he is a Zionist! I bet it comes as a surprise to you. Let me tell a bit about Mr. Chomsky, so that you too will know what he is and what he is not…
“Today Mr. Chomsky is something of a saint for the far-Left. Thus they have been alarmed at a strange, under-reported reality: Chomsky the anti-nationalist and anti-imperialist voice is, when all is said and done, a Zionist supporter of the ethnically-Jewish state of Israel. Look here:
· Chomsky opposes the cultural boycott of Israel
· Chomsky denies the Israel Lobby has been a critical influence on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East
· Chomsky is opposed to the right of return for descendants of the Palestinian refugees who were expelled from their lands in the 1948 Israeli-Arab War. Amazingly, Chomsky instead supports the right of return
only for those Palestinians who were themselves expelled, a generation which is so old it is on the verge of dying off!
· Chomsky supports the “two-state solution” as the only “practical” one. This is again rather strange: on all other topics, Chomsky’s far-Left politics have never been constrained by issues of “practicality” or mainstream elite appeal. Furthermore, in any case, a two-state solution is perfectly impossible so long as there are over 500,000 settlers in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Chomsky, is as much of a Zionist as Netanyahu. But Chomsky is a far better and more subtle advocate of a Jewish State for his people than Netanyahu, undermining anti-Zionism where it would otherwise be most likely to flourish: the far-Left!
Chomsky has increasingly come into conflict with Israeli leftists, notably in a book by Ilan Pappe
because Mr. Pappe advocates a “one-state solution” by creating a binational Jewish-Palestinian state, with Jews as a minority…and Chomsky is against this.
Mr. Chomsky is mainly known for his systematic opposition to “imperialist” U.S. foreign policy and to “corporate power” within the United States. This includes a claim that the mass media essentially dominates public opinion (look up his book ‘
Manufacturing Consent’), its elite controllers carefully tuning the message in the service of U.S. imperialist and corporate interests.
I have never found Mr. Chomsky’s particular brand of ‘let’s hag everybody’ internationalist anarcho-communism particularly persuasive. Chomsky suggests academics and students are going to impotently protest and
nag their way to a better world, which strikes me as a conceited and dishonest view.
Chomsky’s position on Israel however, reveals him to be the most subtle Zionist, of 1920’s kind, actually being just another (conscious or not) hypocritical ethnic activist.
One of Chomsky’s foundational moral arguments is the following, - justifying his systematic criticism of the U.S. government (as opposed to foreign powers):
But why limit yourself to your own
government? Governments after all, are only the agents of
elites. Why don’t we criticize
the most privileged and influential ethnic elite in the U.S.? If, in public discourse, people oppose and criticize supposed White privilege and ethnocentrism, then one must also criticize far greater Jewish privilege and ethnocentrism. Right? LOL!
So much for Chomsky. He won’t be read or remembered (except perhaps as a warning).”
To summarize, - I called Mr. Chomsky an intellectual clown mostly due to this intellectually dishonest political position that on the surface looks like ‘next best thing since sliced bread’, but in reality would lead to the demise of Israel. I am not sure if he understand this, and I hope he does not. Because if he does, then that makes him identical to the likes of people that quote him the most today, - yes…his views today appear on neo-Nazi sites and pro-Palestinian forums that dream and openly advocate for Israel's destruction and also quoted by openly anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists.
I finally found the time to reply to you, but now I'm not sure whether it's worth my time. I have a feeling you will simply categorically reject everything I say as untrue, and any source that doesn't align with your preconceived views as having ipso facto proven itself biased and invalid.
Well…well…So, - you just abdicate and call it a day…Please note that I never simply rejected your views. I told you WHY I reject them. You are welcome to argue in order to support your views. But you choose not too…why? I can (and do) substantiate EVERYTHING I ever wrote in response to you. Can you do the same? So far you have not been able to do that.
My point remains, - Palestinian Authority and their apologists, like Mr. Finkelstein, and to a much lesser degree Mr. Chomsky, are responsible for most of the misery that Palestinian Arabs currently experiencing. Israel is not at fault here.
The PA’s absolute rejectionizm of ALL Israeli peace proposal and open support for terrorism against Jewish population, is a testament to their desire to eventually get rid of the Jews for good. They want another Arab state instead of Israel, not next to Israel.
The work by Finkelstein and Chomsky is also leading to that end. This is not a path to coexistence and peace. This is a path to war. History does not support the Arab narrative here, - they lost all conflicts so far. Do you really think that anyone wants another war? I am sure that Israelis do not, but the Palestinian Arabs, well…no so much.
It does not strike me as very intelligent, but, - hey…go and listen to Mr. Finkelstein and his ‘Israel must commit suicide by adhering to human rights standards as specified by Israel’s enemies’! Sure, Mr. Finkelstein…we are all stupid!
- - - Updated - - -
Greetings and peace be with you ethnhunt;
Agreed, it is a secular state, and they make up their own secular laws. If they complied with God's law, then they would have to take note of passages like.........
Leviticus 19
33 " 'When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. 34 The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.
.
Ezekiel 47
21 “You are to distribute this land among yourselves according to the tribes of Israel. 22 You are to allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the foreigners residing among you and who have children. You are to consider them as native-born Israelites; along with you they are to be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. 23 In whatever tribe a foreigner resides, there you are to give them their inheritance,” declares the Sovereign LORD.
Leviticus 24
You are to have the same law for the alien and the native-born. I am the LORD your God.
Exodus 22:21
"Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him, for you were aliens in Egypt.
Leviticus 19:10
Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.
See above
In the spirit of searching for God,
Eric
You jest, Eric!
On one hand you agree that Israel is a secular country, but you immediately chastise Israel for not religiously follow the laws of Torah! You can't have it both ways.
Please understand that, first of all, you quote Leviticus and Exodus as translated in what appears to be King James Bible, which FAR from accurate and you quote this out of context.
Secondly, if you were to continue on this line of reasoning by bringing a 5000 year old Bible into 21st century, you also must adhere to a much later written Jewish Law as deliberated in Talmudic tradition and writings of 2-6 century. You will quickly discover that in the case of self-defense many passages from Leviticus might be suspended and superseded by a different understandings.
Today, Israel finds itself in a rather defensive posture relative to PA's position. Israel is waiting for a new PA leadership that just might deal with Israeli peace proposals. While waiting for it, Israel must treat Palestinian Arabs as a hostile population, which without a doubt and by their own admission, - it is.
As you see, - the reality is by far more complex then what you are making it out to be. If Bible can be applied and all parties were to respect it, then perhaps it might work. But that is a wishful thinking.
Let me put it to you in away that you may find plausible, - in order to 'turn the other cheek' and achieve what that pronouncement demands, ALL MUST 'turn the other cheek'! If its only you who is doing it, - well, - then that act will be the last thing you will ever do on this Earth. At best, - you will be eaten last!
- - - Updated - - -
Greetings and peace be with you ethnhunt;
I believe it was the Jews who were not content with a 50-50 split.
In the spirit of praying to One God
Eric
No. You are wrong. It is on record that Ben-Gurion, in his capacity as a leader, publicly and numerous times pronounced that the Jews agree to the partition. There is ample evidence including the videos. Please google this.
- - - Updated - - -
Salaam
Another update
Chomsky: U.S. Is Helping Israel Annex So Much Land, Palestinians Could Have Essentially Nothing
Yes, indeed. Please look up the Israeli peace proposals to PA in 2000, 2009 and 2013. I like 2000 deal the best. To summarize, - the Arabs were offered up to 97% of the land that they asked for. Yet, they said NO!
They were also offered economical rehabilitation, defense treaty, open market leading to open borders. They said NO to all of that.
As it stands, in an absents of an agreement, Israel may annex 'Area C' and unilaterally delve-define its borders. Any country in this situation will probably do the same. Clearly the Arabs, as led by PA, do not want to have a deal. Therefore they will only loose more as time goes on. That is how the world works.
