Chomsky : Being anarchist is more lucrative than working

chomsky isn't even an anarchist, he says he's anarchist friendly. he says that nazis and fascists deserve freedom of speech. fuck him, he's a fool.

 

I didn't know being an anarchism
being an anarchism

 

I wouldn't usually link to something the Hoover Institution's put out but: http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2912626.html

Yep, he's a sell out. Haha.

 

No, Chomsky was cool, he's losing all validity now. I also agree with him being some sort of icon for people getting into "Libertarian Socialism," but because they're new, many people look past his shattered sense of ideals because he has gotten so popular. Just another way to use the phrase "too big to fail" I guess. As for his tour thing, that's bullshit.

 

Fuck him seriously he is an establishment supporting academic and they are all the fucking same he goes around discouraging people from rebelling because 'oh it's all so difficult...'


Read Steven Pinker...he is worth a look and he is a better linguist in my opinion because he writes in a way that is accessible to all, not just uni students who could afford a tertiary education.

 

Come on man, only exclusive theoreticians who overuse academic non-language can truly be revo. You, as existing outside of our moar learned university intelligentsia, would no doubt fail to comprehend this. All the better for our movement.

 

while i was reading it i was trying to make an excuse to defend him. but meh not rea;;y. only thing i could think of was he had to charge the money for like booking the venue, and you said he was on tour? hotels,food,planes,hookers it adds up...but he most likley made a nice bit inhis pocket....and the news thing well ya thats just hipocritical

 

Well what I do know is that he has been recently barred from entering Israel...so did Norman Finkelstein.


[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sak6dRHi0YY&feature=fvst[/video]

 

His popularity comes from the average person reading or listening to some small amount of his work and then believing that they are radical intellectuals. He kinda caters to liberals who think they're radicals but who also like things like absolute freedom of speech. He's radical enough to grab their attention but familiar and safe enough for them (i.e supporting elections, again absolute freedom of speech) If you ever walk around Cambridge you can find so many kids with MIT and Harvard sweatshirts going and on and on about how much they love Chomsky and how they changed their lives.
He reminds me of PETA (i know it sounds weird). PETA is popular and digestible enough for most people and by supporting it people feel like they are really they're really well informed. Celebrities indorse PETAand some probably rant about how much they love Chomsky too. Major point being people believe that they are informed and intellectual by referring to a popular source. I don't know if that makes sense to anyone else (it probably just ended up sounding confusing).

 

No, it makes total sense.
chomsky - radicalism for non-radicals.

 

maybe if the mainstream gets a taste of what reaky anarchism is they will become addicted and the revolution will happen

 

I'm still not getting the lack of support for freedom of speech here, i would think it to fit the anarchist ideology fairly well. But anyway Noam Chomsky is still human like the rest of us, he has some respectable ideas though in recent times they seem to have developed a bit of a drop off in agreeability, but his opinion is his opinion, though it is pretty fucked up hes profiting from it.