Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Chomsky : Being anarchist is more lucrative than working

Discussion in 'Anarchism and radical activism' started by ungovernable, Jun 3, 2010.

  1. helenfordsdale

    helenfordsdale Member New Member


    5

    0

    0

    Jun 7, 2010
     
    Chomsky has had some wonderful ideas regarding anarchism, whether he personally is a sell out or whatever. Reading some of his papers has given me some of the best personal justifications for believing in anarchy, for which I thank him. I could really give a shit what he does in his personal life, and if I feel like reading his work, I just look on the internet or on go to the library, so that rich bastard will never see a dime. Who knows, maybe he's secretly saving up to start a revolution :lmao:

    I have to disagree here, a lot of stuff I've read of his is quite optimistic, encouraging people to realize they don't need a fucking university education just to have an opinion. I've never had any formal education, I just read a lot and I didn't find is writing to be that inaccessible. Maybe I'm being an elitist prick here, but I think his writing still has a lot of merit. I'll make sure to check out Pinker though!
     
  2. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Yes like i said he did write some very good stuff and thats not going to change anything. But saying you don't give a fuck if he makes tons of money out of the writting you support is kinda stupid. I'm pretty sure you wouldnt react the same if an anarchopunk band was selling out and making thousands of dollars of profits. Would you say "i like the music and the lyrics, i dont give a fuck about their personnal life ?"

    Funny because he usually makes conference only for university students.
     
  3. helenfordsdale

    helenfordsdale Member New Member


    5

    0

    0

    Jun 7, 2010
     
    Ah man that sucks, kinda ironic he became the very "privileged elite" he always criticized so brutally. Selfish old man haha.

    Actually, I would react the exact same. Yes it does personally offend me that someone would embrace such hypocrisy, but that doesn't mean I won't appreciate what they've contributed, take influence from it, and learn from their mistakes. Can I really say I would turn down such success? I'd like to think not, given my current beliefs, but people suck like that.
     
  4. QueerPunk

    QueerPunk Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    430

    5

    0

    Dec 29, 2009
     
    In the last few years I have seen nothing but an arrogant academic looking through his nose at activists out there (many of whom are not privileged uni students) as if to say, seriously people you know it's not going to work out, it's just too difficult.

    His analysis of linguistics and in some cases, politics are wrapped up in language that would mostly be understood by university educated people and therefore it is not as highly accessible to others...the same can also probably apply to Foucault.
     
  5. Vegetarian Barbarian

    Vegetarian Barbarian Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    719

    2

    0

    Oct 19, 2009
     
    If someone here wrote a book, and then they were told that they can be offered 300,000 euros to talk about it to a group of people. You'd fucking do it. I know you would. And if you say you wouldnt, your a lieing sack of poop.

    I like Chomsky's ideas, i understand where you guys are coming from too. But the man is 80 years old, he has hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills he has to pay! :p

    And about his linguistics... Thats BULLSHIT. I can easily get you a copy of like 4 books he went in on. Go to a damn library! (granted i went to college, and i took linguistic classes with Chomsky's books). But in that aspect, the dude is a fucking genius. But linguistics is hard as fuck anyways. It does take a little more of an educated mind than others to understand it.

    But understandably, it is bullshit he only talks in places where you have to pay a shitload of money to see him. Which is bullshit and thats why i dont bother. People are going to pay it.

    So yea, i dont idolize the guy (or any other anarchist philosopher for that matter, like some of you do), but i dont hate him. There are a lot worst evil people out there to worry about than Chomsky.
     
  6. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Ok then you must listen to a lot of shitty sellout punk bands...

    For his conferences, he have not been OFFERED money. he is ASKING for money.

    If i wrote a book maybe i'd take the 300,000 euros. But not for an anarchist book, and no i'm not lying. I wouldnt even have put copyrights on it.

    What you say sounds like "if you were offered a lot of money for selling out your anarchopunk band you would take it so it justify the bands who sell outs"
     
  7. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    201

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Wow so your saying everyone here is a piece of shit sellout fake anarchist? Well you'd be wrong and don't speak for all of us when what you mean is YOU would sell the fuck out Veg Barb.....
     
  8. QueerPunk

    QueerPunk Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    430

    5

    0

    Dec 29, 2009
     
    Well for linguistics I really do suggest that you try and get your hands on Steven Pinker...


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Pinker


    Personally for linguistics I find him better to read than Chomsky and as for political analysis I can find better writers elsewhere that don't live solely in the academia world.
     
  9. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    Probably? try definitely!

    oh BTW:

    Q. 'What do you get if you cross a Situationist with a mafioso?'

    A. 'A guy that makes you an offer you can't understand.'

    :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: fuck i rule! :/ :/
     
  10. QueerPunk

    QueerPunk Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    430

    5

    0

    Dec 29, 2009
     

    Hahahaha.....

    That beats my other one-liner from the other night....

    Insurrection is just a radical version of a hard-on...

    OR

    Q: What does an Anarchist wake up with in the morning?

    A: A raging insurrection :lmao:
     
  11. sponsoredwalk

    sponsoredwalk Member New Member


    8

    0

    0

    Jun 18, 2010
     
    Hi everyone, I was just browsing online & came across this message board & I felt I had to clear up some foolish elitist misconceptions.

    First off, what is wrong with Chomsky making money for doing his talks?

    The man is an M.I.T. professor who is asked to give a talk, what is wrong with making money when the main mode of life in our capitalist society is to spend and make money?

    Furthermore, what is wrong with a band making money?

    This childish view gives any form of Anarchism such a bad name that it's embarrasing to come onto these elitist message boards with cries of "SELLOUT" etc... Please keep this incoherent, reactionary, elitist view away from the word anarchism or else expect to be called on your ignorance.

    What are you all doing on the internet, why aren't you all off in your anarchist communes living collectively in an attempt to abstain, religiously, from all impurities like money & the less than privelidged people (morally privelidged, according to the meaning you people obviously ascribe to it) who read Chomsky while studying at Cambridge while thinking about doing something they want with their lives?

    This is such a teenage thing, to criticize someone for raising their head above the others, you start bandying about labels like "cult of personality", "sellout", "he used to be cool". etc... Have any of you read any of the mans words? Have any of you given any thought to what he is saying?

    Do you know why he supports Chavez; because he was democratically elected. That's it, he doesn't throw massive support his way he simply points out that the Venezuelan people voted him in. He also always mentions that the U.S. doesn't like this & talks of how they undermine him, but to you people that' support. I think the media rubs people different ways - some fall for it & others take the feeling and make up their own lies, in any case the media propaganda must work because you just bandy about terms in line with the propaganda mill instead of cogently discussing anything he's said.

    This whole post focuses on the cult of personality, essentially feeding the idea that the cult of personality is what matters & not what he talks about, yet you people are the right minded ones :lmao:

    Now, can you explain to me what is wrong with someone making money when our system is so constructed in that if you don't make money you're going to lose all those luxuries like the internet, your home, food, etc... Why do you criticize bands & speakers for getting a message out? This is a method of controlling other people's minds, i.e. you can't do that - it's not in line with our ethos so you're a sellout if you do that - traitor...

    If you people could think for 5 seconds you'd realise that anarchism is about accepting people, not confining them :ecouteurs:

    What did Mikhail Bakhunin, or Emma Goldman, or Proudhon do with their money and all of the money made from selling their book, just burn it? I suppose they had a cap off point, I'll make X amount of money and then just burn the rest because it would be immoral to make any more than that :/

    Do you ever criticize these views you all hold? Do you not see how religious you all sound, how dogmatic and foolish you appear with those one liners 'hes' good for those just discovering libertarian socialism' i.e. those not as elite as you with your correct views, please...

    That said, I'm probably talking to 16 year olds who don't know who Good Charlotte are & how people have actually been fighting over these issues for years - before they grow out of this mentality because it's just wafer thin mischaracterization of anarchism or what punk is about, (seeing as this is anarcho-punk.net).

    Oh, and Steven Pinker is more readable than Chomsky because he writes about a different aspect of linguistics. Insulting people who have an education & who go to university while talking about literature is so childish that I'm surprised anyone who'd mention Steven Pinker's name would say such a thing, let alone in the very sentence he's mentioned in.
     
  12. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    What is elitist is the people like you who refuse to hear critics. You are worshipping the heroes of anarchism and refusing to critise them, thats exactly the same thing as elitism.

    Anarchism is not a fucking job. Since when is it normal to make THOUSANDS OF EUROS OF PROFITS OUT OF ONE SPEECH ???

    Anarcho-punk bands are critized for selling out, no one will ever say there's nothing wrong with an anarcho-punk band making thousands of euros of profits from one single show.

    He's doing exactly what he is critizing. He lives a bourgeois life. He invest in war and oil shares, thats fucking contradictory with his speech. It's not because capitalism is all about caring only for yourself, becomming rich and not caring about others that he have to do it. Especially if he claim himself socialy counscious and anarchist. That's ridiculous.

    Capitalism is all about making and spending money, so maybe it would be legitimate for me to make thousands of dollars of profit out of anarcho-punk.net ??

    Oh okay, so there's nothing wrong with Green Day, Celine Dion, 50 cents or Eminem. Thanks for telling us.

    Oh yeah right, critizing sellouts is reactionary. Damn, i thought anarchism was all about questionning everything, even your heroes !!

    YOU are the ignorant dude.

    Because we critize sellouts doesn't makes us primitivists. What you are saying is bullshit. There is a big difference between living in a capitalism and selling out anarchism and using anarchism to make thousands of dollars when you already have a very good job and a lot of money. Chomsky invest money in shares, he support war, oil, weapons and everything he hates and critize. Thats fucking contradictory.

    Following your stupid liberal thoughts, there is nothing wrong with an anarchist who eats at McDonalds, wear nike shoes, buy at wal-mart and invest money to support war and weapons ??? Critizing that would equal to elitism and reactionarism like you said... And you said there is nothing wrong in living your live how you want it, we shouldn't care about boycotting what we hate. If we do, then we must live outside of society in anarchist communes... hahaha

    If he care about less money privelidged people hearing about anarchism, then he should stop charging so much to hear/read his theories

    You are the best exemple of what a cult of personality is, you worship chomsky just like he is your hero and you refuse to critize him. And if you had taken the time to read, you'd understand we all said chomsky did some real good writtings, but he is acting like an idiot, like a sellout.

    What a fucking stupid argument. So starting from now, all anarchists should support any president democratically elected.
    Sarkozy is democratically elected. Thatcher was democratically elected. Georges Bush was democratically elected. Nixon was democratically elected. HITLER was democratically elected.

    Shut up dumb liberal, critizing the cult of personality has nothing to do with right wing.

    You registered only to defend your hero so dont say we are doing the cult of personnality, YOU ARE.

    Bullshit argument again. Chomsky can easily live with the money he makes with his job. Wanting more money is just greed.

    If at least he would charge a reasonnable price for his conference it could be acceptable, but he doesn't. He's a greedy fuck who want dozens of thousands of dollars for each conference. I don't even have that much money per year and i have everything you listed. There is no reason for him to own 2 millions dollars and live a life like the bourgeoisie. He's just an OPPORTUNIST. In an anarchist society he wouldnt even have everything he have. He has to much that he is part of the people that we would requisitionate during the collectivisation.

    It's not a method of controlling peoples, it's called anarchist ethics. Obviously yes, there are some things an anarchist cannot do to be coherent with his ideas. Pretending an anarchist can do anything and that if we critize the contradictions we are controlling him and we are reactionnary is just DUMB.

    Anarchism is not about blindlessly following anything like a fanboy, anarchism is about questionning everything

    Anarchism isn't about accepting anything, anarchism is about self-critisism and questionning everything. Since when critics is contradictory with anarchism ? Even chomsky your hero understand that.

    Bullshit again. Those peoples never made so much money out of their books, and they would never charge so much for a conferrence. Either they were doing it for free, or for a very reasonnable price.

    It's not about his views, it's about his actions. Oh yeah right, we are religious, we are dogmatic and elitist yet YOU are the one who can't accept to critize his heroes, YOU are the one worshipping your heroes and the cult of personnality. You sound like you are describing yourself...

    Oh and chomsky is never going to spread a message if he charge so much for it. Your whole speech turns around spreading a message and blah blah blah well if he really cared about that message he wouldnt charge so much to download his speech and he wouldnt charge so much for a damn conference. You dont realize how contradictory you sound.

    Good Charlotte ? You probably love them, don't forget you said there's nothing wrong with selling out and making tons of money.

    And no, we are not 16 years old.

    It's funny how you talk about elitism and at the same time you are being elitist against young people and punks.


    And now, elitism around education and university. Worse and worse...
     
  13. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    201

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Well no we're not sixteen, and because apparently he is one of your hero's then damn I'm sorry for having an opposing view of the man. And fuck Chavez regardless of what the USA feels about him, I speak for my anarquista brothers who are being persecuted and murdered in Caracas by 'Socialist' forces so I can fucking care less how the man came to power. And we call bullshit on a man who advocates the extreme dismantling of the capitalist system and uses this same system to amass wealth for himself and his family beyond several millions of dollars. And if you don't like how we talk and discuss these points here then you can Fuck Off as well hijo de mierda..... :lmao:
     
  14. sponsoredwalk

    sponsoredwalk Member New Member


    8

    0

    0

    Jun 18, 2010
     
    I love hearing intelligent criticism, why else would I have bothered to post in this thread.

    The problem is all you were doing is bandying about wafer thin labels with absolutely no substance, criticising him for charging for doing a talk, what age are you to make such a claim?

    You were not giving any opposing views, just labels and basically popular slander.

    What is elitist is your criticism of bands taking money, i.e. if they do not understand life in a manner acceptable to you, i.e. that taking money for their albums is wrong, then they are sellouts, traitors, not real punks/anarchists....

    That is total elitism, just like those Gillman punks who beat up Jello Biafra in the 90's for selling out, just like those people who criticize musicians for not staying poor, playing music in horrible clubs to drunks, instead of getting their music out to the world to be heard by people.

    So small minded, so focused on money too, why don't you make a load of money and give it to poor people, wouldn't that be more moral than just hating it and letting the rich take all of it?

    I don't know how to quote posts here, (it didn't work), so I'll just put this in a color instead;

    He's doing exactly what he is critizing. He lives a bourgeois life. He invest in war and oil shares, thats fucking contradictory with his speech. It's not because capitalism is all about caring only for yourself, becomming rich and not caring about others that he have to do it. Especially if he claim himself socialy counscious and anarchist. That's ridiculous.

    Erm, could you provide some evidence that Chomsky invests in oil and war? That would be a lie on your part if you couldn't ;)

    Also, Chomsky chooses to live his own way, I've never seen him criticise someone for choosing to be a teacher, a social critic, a commentator on the abuses of power etc... There's nothing bourgeois about that, there's nothing bourgeois about doing talks that bring anarchists, socialists, marxists, capitalists, communists, together to hear him speak and meet afterwards to organise other events. There's nothing bourgeois about living in the society you were brought up in, you didn't choose it, but you can try to make things better in a way you feel is right. That's what he does, if you've ever just listened to any of the many mp3's online, let alone his work, you'd know this.


    Anarchism is not a fucking job. Since when is it normal to make THOUSANDS OF EUROS OF PROFITS OUT OF ONE SPEECH ???


    How do you know he made loads of profit out of it? How do you know he even got paid for it? Seriously, how do you know this? It's obvious I suppose :/ YOu can't see it in your head that people have to organise events, that people have to work to get him there, that the place needs to be rented out, that there are travel expenses, that organisers & security needs to be paid for, etc... etc... What age are you? Seriously, what kind of argument is this?

    Lets go to the more interesting topic seeing as the reality of the situation completely invaliates your agument - lets concede to what you believe to be true.

    What is wrong with him making loads of money when people want to hear what he has to say? How is that any different to what nearly the whole world does?

    Why do you pick on Chomsky for making this money, why not the whole world first? There are many other people who deserve to be the brunt of your misguided furor instead of a guy who goes out and speaks the truth as best he knows it, in a way they shows a lot of people the lies of modern society. Why doesn't he deserve to be paid for doing that?

    There are so few people in this world with the ability to make such claims and be heard, if Chomsky wasn't so famous for the massive contribution to linguistics that he made he would probably be forgotten. This seems to entail your furor for some reason though, i.e. you want some poor person to be on the stage preaching X, Y, Z to please your psyche. The world does not revolve around you...

    Again, anarchism is not about constricting people, it's about freeing them.

    Still though, lets have some fun. Seeing as you've got Mikhail Bakhunin as your avatar - go to his wikipedia page. Look at the quote talking about how Bakhunin was such a rich man, tell me; should one of the earliest anarchists have burned all of his money to appease you? Does the fact that he was well to do suddenly make him non-anarchist? :lmao:


    Anarcho-punk bands are critized for selling out, no one will ever say there's nothing wrong with an anarcho-punk band making thousands of euros of profits from one single show.


    I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with that, provided they weren't lying to everyone claiming that they hated money i.e. using the image of hating money to make money.

    Besides, who the hell cares what everyone else says? Are you that weak that you have to listen to what others say about some band before you pass judgement on them?

    I don't mind if Leftover Crack or G.B.H. or Crass make money, in fact I hope they do, because we live in a capitalist society at the moment, (well I do and the bands/people I'm talking about do) and I don't wish anyone to be poor nor do I wish to dictate how they live their lives - I'm not a control freak... ;)

    I don't think capitalism is a moral system at all, however you have to use your brains and realise that in our society no change will come along until everyone accepts it and actually wants it, many don't. At present, anarchism offers no real solutions that benefit everyone, it really offers the moral & intellectual power for people to slowly change the system as it is to make it better so that we can get to the point where changing from capitalism will work. This is why real anarchists are out working for unions, for bringing people together at meetings such as Chomsky's instead of living under illusions about sell outs & focusing on what moment of Eminem's career he went from hardcore to sell out...


    Oh okay, so there's nothing wrong with Green Day, Celine Dion, 50 cents or Eminem. Thanks for telling us.


    Who cares? Why are you so focused on what popular media sell to you? People like this stuff, let them have it. Why the hell do you care?

    This is more of that elitism - because people's tastes aren't refined as yours are they are lower than you, please - grow up. This is the reason why I assume you're 16.

    What a fucking stupid argument. So starting from now, all anarchists should support any president democratically elected.
    Sarkozy is democratically elected. Thatcher was democratically elected. Georges Bush was democratically elected. Nixon was democratically elected. HITLER was democratically elected.


    No man, sorry. That's not a stupid argument. Did you actually read it? I read you didn't speak English as a first language so I'll assume that is why you missed my point but don't start insulting me, you've just misread what I said and reacted. Go back and read it.

    I said,

    Do you know why he supports Chavez; because he was democratically elected. That's it, he doesn't throw massive support his way he simply points out that the Venezuelan people voted him in.


    Do you see that? I said, "that's it". I also said: "he doesn't throw massive support his way he simply points out that the Venezuelan people voted him in".

    That's all I've ever heard him say, everytime he's then gone on to start talking about how the U.S. has reacted seeing as Chavez was democratically elected & that it sends a message to South America that an alternative method of governanace can be achieved.

    That's all I've read him say, why are you talking about Thatcher, and Bush etc... people who explicitly manipulated their populations & lied to them crazily.

    I just had to search online just now and I found a letter of his to Chavez, here, signed with many other people, in which he is critical of Chavez's actions. I'm sure if he knows about whatever anarchist thing you're talking about he'd criticize Chavez too.

    Maybe Chavez is a monster, he probably is. All I've heard Chomsky talk about Chavez on is what I've told you. Still, 'd like some sources to hear what Chavez is doing to anarchists if you're going to condemn him.

    That said, if you'd read any Chomsky you'd know that he would criticize Chavez if he is doing anything to anarchists, or anyone for that matter.

    I don't worship Chomsky, I respect him & his work. I'm just pointing out all of the nonsense you have been promulgating in this thread & it's not fair, it's at best - childish.

    Either they were doing it for free, or for a very reasonnable price.

    Lol, I thought you were about questioning everything - even your idols.

    Why are you jumping through hoops apologising for your idols based on no evidence whatsoever?

    The only thing I am elitist against in an inferior argument that aims to insult someone unjustly - such as you are doing to Chomsky now. That I am elitist against, most definitely. Using childish arguments to insult someone is something I hate. I don't hate childishness - not at all! - I just hate childish hatred which is what I've been reading here.

    Bullshit argument again. Chomsky can easily live with the money he makes with his job. Wanting more money is just greed.

    If at least he would charge a reasonnable price for his conference it could be acceptable, but he doesn't. He's a greedy fuck who want dozens of thousands of dollars for each conference. I don't even have that much money per year and i have everything you listed. There is no reason for him to own 2 millions dollars and live a life like the bourgeoisie. He's just an OPPORTUNIST. In an anarchist society he wouldnt even have everything he have. He has to much that he is part of the people that we would requisitionate during the collectivisation.


    So you think he should plan his life around money, i.e. if he makes X amount of money - hypothetically assuming he does - then he should stop doing what he is doing.

    How do you know he makes any money doing what he is doing? Why are you criticizing him for doing it? Why don't you criticize your parents for making more than African peasants? If African peasants can live on less, so can your parents - they are immoral, and so are you, if you don't conform to the logic of what I've just said :/

    This is what you're trying to say, because Chomsky makes money he is a hypocrite. Tell me, where does he criticize anyone for making money & for living their life in a way they want? If you'd read any of his work you'd realise he is in favour of people choosing how to live their lives - not dogmatically lusting over how much money someone makes & whether or not they'd have this money under your totalitarian form of Anarchism...
     
  15. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    201

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    We've already had this debate with another poster, if you are so interested the proof of these accusations have links which clearly show earnings and stock options for Mr. Chomsky as well as his defense of a Holocaust denier, but it isn't anyone here's fucking responsibility to go back and find those links for you or anyone else every time a new Chomsky zombie shows up. Find them yourself buddy. In the meantime, as I said before, go fuck yourself... :D
     
  16. sponsoredwalk

    sponsoredwalk Member New Member


    8

    0

    0

    Jun 18, 2010
     
    Ah, so you wouldn't defend a holocaust deniers right to express himself - no matter how much it may differ from your opinions...

    I see the kind of conversation you cater for then...

    I also see the freedom of an anarchist philosophy for some - to tell others to go fuck themselves...
     
  17. Anxiety69

    Anxiety69 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,341

    8

    156

    Oct 18, 2009
    Male , 46 years old
    Long Beach CA  United States
    this site does NOT tolerate or support free speech for fascists. maybe you should have read our WHO WE ARE charter before signing on. That subject is not up for debate here. Fuck fascists, and fuck idiots who say they have a right to spread hate and violence through their speech.
     
  18. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    201

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    Damn skippy there junior, you came on here in your first post insulting anybody who didn't agree with your almighty vision of Chomsky 'The Wise' calling us 'Childish', 'Elitist', etc. so don't act offended when I become insulting. And to set you straight, read the 'Who We Are' text. This forum does not recognize Hate-Speech as Free Speech. Had you come on here and stated the things you disagreed with and the things you admire Mr Chomsky for then you would have received a much more respectful response and I probably would have went out of my way to provide those links....but nope you came here to set us neanderthals right...isn't that so? :lmao:
     
  19. sponsoredwalk

    sponsoredwalk Member New Member


    8

    0

    0

    Jun 18, 2010
     
    Well while I don't fully agree with it I understand it. I still think it's better to allow people to give their views so that you can discuss them without needing authority to block a point of view. That is not freedom of speech nor in line with any Anarchist philosophy I've read. I don't care about holocaust deniers, the evidence is there to show them for the fools they are without using authority to block their arguments...

    I just find it hypocritical that you are proud of not condoning hate-speech while telling me to fuck off because I gave you a proper answer.

    Notice I didn't come on insulting you's, I criticised your childish & elitist arguments and misconceptions about Chomsky which, after reading them, forced me to assume you must be kids. Then telling me to fuck off while ignoring my arguments jut gives me more reason to think this...

    It's a lot harder to defend an argument than to just call me skippy & tell me to fuck off :ecouteurs:

    I came here, to an anarchist site, expecting critical discussion after I challenged you because there was no critical discussion before, now I've spooked you & you all fall back on insults because I've called you on the elitist views. If you can cogently address the points in my posts above without insults all the better, needless to say I'm not the one who looks in the mirror knowing I couldn't defend myself when challenged without insults :ecouteurs:
     
  20. ungovernable

    ungovernable Autonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,422

    117

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male
    Canada  Canada
    Intelligent criticism ? I thought we were elitist 16 years old kid saying childish bullshit. How is that intelligent ?

    We would love to hear intelligent criticism too. More than "he has the right to make millions out of anarchism and invest this money in state-supporting shares, critising him would be elitism and thats not anarchist to critise the heroes of anarchy"

    No you still don't understand. The problem is not that he charge for a speech, the problem is that he made millions with anarchism and he invest this money in state-supporting shared. The problem is that he makes 30,000 FUCKING EUROS... Don't tell me that it is normal. I don't even earn 30,000 euros in a year. Chomsky earns 30,000 in one hour while talking about how bad povrety is and how bad the separation from the lower and upper classes is bad. YOU THINK THAT'S NORMAL ???? That's like if i was eating a BigMac while talking shit about McDonalds.

    No it depends how much money they take.

    So your point is that it is impossible for an anarchist to sell out ? If a band like green day makes lots of money then the definition of selling out applies. Why wouldn't the definition also apply to an anarchist doing the same thing?

    Caring more about the money than the message is betraying your ideas, it is selling out, turning your vest, and yes thats not anarchist

    Those peoples forgot about their ideas and the concepts of anarchism and became opportunist individualist who only care about themselves and forgot about the principles that made them become anarchists.

    First, no one talked about beating up Chomsky, we are just critising him and if you refuse critics then YOU are the total elitist.
    Second, punk is not a job and if you think that the emencipation of the masses is done through mainstream and using the capitalist system then you are not better than those peoples who sell out

    That's fucking stupid. Now you are talking about reformism, and that's still collaborating with the capitalist system and betraying your ideas. To quote Karl Marx, those peoples would be the "useful idiots of the system"

    you obviously didn't even read the whole thread before opening your mouth. The source have been posted

    http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2912626.html

    But i seen him critise liberals individualists who make a shitload of money while there's still peoples dying of hunger

    What is bourgeois is to make always more and more money even if he have 2 millions in his bank account he still want MORE money. This is greed, this is the logical of profit, this is capitalist and bourgeois.
    He already have WAY ENOUGH MONEY to live his life correctly and pay for everything he needs, why he keeps charging so much for a fucking conference ? Why he keeps charging 1 dollar to hear a 1minute long mp3 of him ranting some speech ??? He can already live with his high-society job he doesnt even need to charge for conference, so charging as much as he does is totally stupid

    Wow you are being elitist on age again, nice.

    Everything has been explained in the FIRST POST of this topic, goddamn you don't even read what has been posted.

    I know this because the organizers said how many tickets were sold and for what cost.

    here is what i posted, since you can't read:


    The entrance price was 18 fucking euros. 1600 tickets were sold and god knows how many people were left at entrance...

    That's a total of 30,000 fucking euros.... And he is currently on an European tour doing similar conferences everywhere...


    And since you will call me a liar again, i can provide sources.

    So let's say 1000 euros for the plane, the security, food, and all other expenses. THAT'S STILL 29,000 EUROS OF PROFIT. And we are not even counting the peoples who bought a ticket at the doors.

    HOW OLD ARE YOU TO THINK 30,000 EUROS CAN DISSEAPEAR IN PAYING FOR THE LOCATION OF A CONFERENCE ROOM AND SECURITY GUYS ???

    I have been studying anarchism since 10 years so shut up, i have read a lot and i'm not a dumbass or a 16 years old kid.

    Ok so an anarchist is supposed to follow what the whole world does ? If there is injustice and exploitation in the world, it could also be a justification for the anarchists to act the same ???

    If you don't understand whats wrong in making loads of money just because you are famous then you are a liberal fake anarchist piece of shit.

    Anarchist isn't supposed to be bourgeois politics for the high society. I thought anarchism mainly targetted the peoples who were poor and already had trouble to survive in this society ?? A lot of people can't even afford chomsky conferences because they are too poor, how the fuck is chomsky's message reaching the people if they can't afford to hear it ?? thats bullshit

    Other people don't claim themselves anarchist, they are not contradictory.

    he doesn't deserve to be paid 25,000 euros for 1 hour of work, especially when he critize that big multinationals make a lot of money while their workers gets almost nothing. He deserve to be paid a normal salary just like any other workers. That's what he believe in, after all?

    Oh so maybe he should be paid more than others because he has a special ability ??? Now you are talking about privileges and capitalism. Where is your anarchist principles ? Where's egality and collectivism ??

    Anarchism is about freeing the people to make as much money as they want while not caring about others ? No. That's liberalism. Not anarchism. You must be confused.

    You are not going to teach me anything on bakunin.

    You still don't get the facts. Bakunin didn't get rich by making conferences at 25,000euros each. Chomsky became rich because of anarchism, not because of his job of his heritage. You are amalgaming everything.
    You can say the same thing for many other anarchists. Kropotkin was a prince, prudhon was rich, etc... But none of them made their wealth with anarchism. None of them are sellouts.

    Oh because anarchists love money now ?

    Then why they are preaching equality and collectivism ? Why do they hate the rich ? Why do they fight against bourgeoisie ?

    You sound so stupid.

    Oh okay, so you don't want to tell McDonalds they can't keep exploiting workers, you can't tell the proprietaries they can't keep making money on proprety and oppressing peoples, you can't tell wal-mart to stop exploiting third-world countries, you can't tell the rich they can't have millions of dollars while povrety still exist..... Just because you don't want to be a control freak.

    Then you are not an anarchist. You are not a revolutionnary. You are a fucking liberal.

    Because you want a solution that would benefit the bourgeoisie?

    Typical liberal point of view. Offer and demand. Wal-mart exist because people like cheap prices. McDonalds exist because people like cheap food. Earth and forest is being destroyed because companies like to pay less for wood and pay less for a car working with oil. So let it exist.

    You are a liberal dude.

    Ok, so next time someone talk shit about hitler i will point out the fact that the german people voted him in. YES YOU SOUND STUPID.

    They were elected democratically, dude. You should focus on that instead of critising them, like your hero Chomsky.

    He is doing things against anarchists, you are just ignorant.

    Ok so now critising peoples for being contradictory is childish. No, what is childish is calling other peoples elitists and religious just because they critics your heroes. YOU are being religious with chomsky the way you act. All anarchist philosophers agree that critics is very important and thats also what makes anarchism progress. Self-criticism and questionning everything is very important in anarchism, but to you it's just childish. Opposing views are also important. Isn't it why Chomsky defended faurisson ? Oh well, i won't even talk about the faurisson affair, i bet you are another of those idiots who believe in freedom of speech for negationist or neo-nazis

    I am for questioning everything, dumbass. I can critise all philosophers i like. Prudhon was a sexist, Kropotkin signed the "manifesto of the six" to support first world war, nestor makhno was a platformist, etc etc.... I'm not like you, i don't think that critics is childish or elitist. What is elitist is when you can't admit someone is wrong and you can't accept critics.

    And i repeat that Bakunin and the others never made as much money as chomsky out of their conference. If you want to make such accusations, provide evidences or stop lying.

    Thats funny how you accuse me of having idols but you deny chomsky is your idol.

    If he has 2 millions in his bank account (he does) he should stop making conferences for 30,000 euros each

    1) i already said how i know he makes so many money. you just can't read, you are too much in a hurry to come defend your heroic idol
    2) my parents don't claim to be anarchists, so it's not a contradiction. Nor do they earn as much money as chomsky. And on top of all, they don't earn money while talking about how the rich peoples are bad. If chomsky earned a lot of money with his REAL JOB, i could care less. But he earns money while selling anarchism out. He earns money while talking about how bad the peoples who do the same are. Thats like critizing mcdonalds while eating a bigmac.
     
Loading...