Letters to the Editor
-
Noam Chomsky and LWM
LWM to Anonymous: "Thank you for putting me in such august company as George Orwell and Noam Chomsky."
Noam Chomsky:
"I find myself in substantial agreement with people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of issues; and for some years, was able to write only in their journals. And I also admire their commitment to rationality – which is rare…."
~ Noam Chomsky, in an interview entitled "Noam Chomsky on Anarchism," December 1996
-
Yes, douchebag bucky
I provided you with that link.
Congratulations! You douchebag. You can cut and paste, cherrypick and take things out of context with the best right wing proto-fascist propagandists around.
5. Many "anarcho-capitalists" claim that anarchism means the freedom to do what you want with your property and engage in free contract with others. Is capitalism in any way compatible with anarchism as you see it?
Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system which, if ever implemented, would lead to forms of tyranny and oppression that have few counterparts in human history. There isn't the slightest possibility that its (in my view, horrendous) ideas would be implemented, because they would quickly destroy any society that made this colossal error. The idea of "free contract" between the potentate and his starving subject is a sick joke, perhaps worth some moments in an academic seminar exploring the consequences of (in my view, absurd) ideas, but nowhere else.
I should add, however, that I find myself in substantial agreement with people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of issues; and for some years, was able to write only in their journals. And I also admire their commitment to rationality -- which is rare -- though I do not think they see the consequences of the doctrines they espouse, or their profound moral failings.
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/interviews/9612-anarchism.html
FOAD, Bucky and take your girlfriends Dimwit in the Dimness and Mona with you.
-
Well LWM is again a slime-boy
Slime-boys for Chomsky? (I think he would disown you)
LWM claims ---> I provided you with that link.
You provided this?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/wall/wall26.html
Who’s Afraid of Noam Chomsky? by Richard Wall
Damn, I did not think you read lewrockwell.com!Did you provide this one also?
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/
Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5843Chomsky's does recommend, as critics have pointed out, seemingly arbitrary support for coercive or aggressive state action, in situations where state action is deemed the lesser of two evils. As Mao always said, "all government flows from the barrel of a gun."
If you want to be an anarchist, you must answer why you want a state killing people to enforce the lack of state!
--------------
Question to Noam C. :
Critics complain that anarchism is "formless, utopian." You counter that each stage of history has its own forms of authority and oppression which must be challenged, therefore no fixed doctrine can apply. In your opinion, what specific realization of anarchism is appropriate in this epoch?
Noam Chomsky:
I tend to agree that anarchism is formless and utopian, though hardly more so than the inane doctrines of neoliberalism, Marxism-Leninism, and other ideologies that have appealed to the powerful and their intellectual servants over the years, for reasons that are all too easy to explain. The reason for the general formlessness and intellectual vacuity (often disguised in big words, but that is again in the self-interest of intellectuals) is that we do not understand very much about complex systems, such as human societies; and have only intuitions of limited validity as to the ways they should be reshaped and constructed.
Anarchism, in my view, is an expression of the idea that the burden of proof is always on those who argue that authority and domination are necessary. They have to demonstrate, with powerful argument, that that conclusion is correct. If they cannot, then the institutions they defend should be considered illegitimate. How one should react to illegitimate authority depends on circumstances and conditions: there are no formulas.
Tell us LWM; why do you want a state to force others to bend to your will? Chomsky said that the burden of proof is yours. :-)
===
Note: The idea of you complaining about data-mining or cherry picking was hilarious. Next you or a cabal member will complain about all the anonymous guys that started up after your little "vacation" antics as anonymous.
-
@Anonymous re: I am the very model of a modern Libertarian
That was very, very good.
-
Especially When You Realize...
Michael Harold:
@Anonymous re: I am the very model of a modern Libertarian
That was very, very good.
it was written in Periclean Athens. And it's still good today.
-
@ Paul R.
Are you laughing or crying? (I do so hate to be between that particular Scylla and Charybdis of emotion before I've had my first cup of coffee.)
I think I'll laugh. Periclean Athens indeed. I'd give a month's pay to see bucky1 in a homespun tunic, kicking the feral pigs out of the way so's not to be interrupted during his peroration.
-
re: I am the very model of a modern Libertarian
The author is Kim Plofker.
http://brown.edu/Departments/History_Mathematics/plofker.html
The earliest (June, 2001) online copy of Ms. Plofker's ditty seems to be at
http://taint.org/2001/06/21/125849a.html
Here's the recipe:
In fact it's element'ry since the solit'ry parameter
Is: write six rhyming couplets in a quick hexadecameter.
In all of God's creation nothing's quite so overkillable
As G&S's patter song in lines of sixteen syllables.Many have tried the recipe. See some other examples (mostly pretty lame, but the Xena song is great) at
http://luxumbradei.com/parody/piratesidx.html
-
Deroy Murdock at the National Review has a solution
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWI0ODU5MDQ5ZjEwZTAyYWVlNTJlYjVjNjJiY2M3MzY=&w=MA==
That's right. EXPAND Gitmo to be a global concentration camp where no one is ever released. That's sure to spread some democracy and win some hearts and minds.
-
Q: How dumb is LWM?
Multiple choice:
A. He thinks George Orwell wouldn't have learned anything since 1950.
B. He thinks Noam Chomsky is "august."
C. He thinks sharing the faults of significant figures rather than their talents puts him in their company. (Can you moonwalk, LWM?)
D. He still believes in socialism.
E. All of the above.
-
The idealist
Thank you for articulating so well something that has been baffling me for some time.
This July 4th was a bereft holiday for me, and as we walked back from watching the fireworks, I came back to a conversation I've had with my husband many times: namely, is the U.S. fundamentally different now than it was, say, during the Nixon administration - or is my youthful idealism just dying a rather belated death?
My husband remembers the Nixon years, and I don't, so we come back to this conversation now and again.
For me, there has been a clear, fundamental shift in how the U.S. behaves in the world at large and towards its own people.
In years past, even as I marched for nuclear disarmament, even as I marched against the first Iraq war, I had a sense that my voice could be heard; that together we could make a difference.
I've always felt a deep love for my country, and much of it was rooted in the sense that every individual could have a voice in our government, that abuses would come out, that we as a nation had similar ideals. Over the past six years, even as I have become more educated about the world of politics, and more engaged, my sense of helplessness has increased. I no longer know how to make a difference. This is in part to seeing the media reaction to revelations such as the NSA scandal and Abu Ghraib. How on earth did we become so corrupt as to argue - openly - in favor of torture?
I do believe that things are different now on a basic level. But that leaves me with two questions: 1) how do we fix it, and 2) how had we created the environment where the Bush administration could flourish, and how do we prevent it from happening again?