I was gonna watch this to critique the guy.
I don't like him because he has been a pawn of the ruling class by being continuously in their employ.
But, I was mildly surprised.
He does an admirable job lining out how the system works.
It was not a waste of my time, @1.5x normal speed.
You might like it, too.
I guess now I'll just have to stick to hating on Murray Rothbard, for much the same reasons, tool of tptsb.
Chomsky is one of those writers who measures every word for its effect. So attempts to critique him generally go haywire because you never know if the word he just said was meant to manipulate or meant to express his actual view.
Chomsky was regarded as the most influential scholar of the 1960s ans 1970s. For decades people made the claim that Chomsky was the most cited living writer and claims that he was the most influential American writer.
I read some of his early works. Chomsky was an advocate of the idea that we needed intelligentsia that manipulated the public with language. I think that he is the source of many of the problems of our day.
Yes, he served the purposes of the elite, or he got nothing at all, imo.
What drives me is the normies' need to get their certifications.
'I was told I was smart, so I must be!'
Smdh.
I grew to dislike Chomsky after reading his academic works. I never read his political polemics. Chomsky supposedly created two "paradigm shifts." The first paradigm shift came when he declared to have discovered universals. His alleged universals weren't universal. I can't remember the second one. It was equally pathetic.
One thing that drove me crazy about the Chomsky cult was that admirers of Chomsky would rave on about how he was the most cited living academic and that Chomsky was the most influential scholar of the day.
Chomsky didn't just create one paradigm shift. He created two paradigm shifts! Maybe he created some paradigm shifts in politics. I think he has been pushing a contradictory ideology like "Libertarian Socialism."
Anyway scholars would praise Chomsky as being the most influential thinker of the day and In the next sentence they would frame Chomsky as a persecuted intellectual voice crying in the wilderness .... unheeded.
A person can't be both the most influential thinker of the day and be an obscure voice in the wilderness.
The same is true of Marx. Professors praise Marx as being the most cited economist in history. They then claim that Marx is an obscure voice that no-one as ever heeded.
No-one has ever read Marx. If no-one has read Marx; where did all the citations come from?
The link is not working for me.
I once was a huge fan of Noam.
I am not sure what happened to him but I am quite certain that they got to him some time around the time of the demolition of the three buildings at the world trade center.
After that event what he says is mere propaganda but his older work was spot on
Here is the link, I thought no you gotta watch it there for the ads.
https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZnuc-Fv_Tc
Just take out the space.
I think anybody that gets any positive press today is a tool of tptsb.
Here this is a better than the other two
Manufacturing consent
The book was pretty good.
http://classes.dma.ucla.edu/Fall07/28/Engineering_of_consent.pdf
Not sure if you could view the links below the adverts, I can not. If you can find his earlier work it is well worth looking at. Works like manufacturing consent. He was very active during the civil rights movement.
They have got to him somehow the first time I noticed it was in 2011
These two links work but probably not for long.
Noam Chomsky speaks about Cognitive Revolution - Part 1 and two
https://mix.com/!Yzg4ODUx:https%3A-www.youtube.com-watch%3Ffeature%3Dshare%26v%3Dhznuc-fv_tc