Added: 3 years ago
From: thorkyll
Views: 49,945
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (229)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • One of the few areas where I disagree slightly with Chomsky. His defense (which probably isn't intended as a such, since he is opposed to irrational belief) is that religion provides an outlet to fulfill the human need of solidarity and other expressions. Needs that can be fulfilled and channeled in more productive ways. Then he offers the terrifying proposition that this can quickly and easily turn to a Fascist movement, and be used as a dangerous political tool of control. Too high a cost.

  • "Populist Part" or "Populist Party"??

  • Nicely put as usual by Dr. Chomsky.

    But I wonder how reliable are the polls that show the percentage of literal believers of the Bible etc.

    If the figures indeed are correct, then Chomsky's point looms ever truer.

    But, Christopher Hitchens argues that people lie to the polls when asked if they believe the Bible as the literal truth bcz admission to be athiest is still so abhorrent to them. And that those who don't believe the theory of evolution are people who know nothing about the theory.

  • I disagree with quite a few of Chomsky's points and some reasoning, but his general premise is correct, still a great intellectual.

    Thanks for the awesome videos, great read ;-)

    P.S. folks, try to understand the psychology of why people need to resort to a religion, due to suppression, and constant feeling of lack of belonging to anything. Growing up with fanatic believers, and being one for a while myself(ages ago) - reason with them nicely.

    I have to say Einstein had his perception correct.

  • @1cyanideghost You're not alone. I usually agree with Chomsky's analysis, but I think his stance is too soft on religion. As I've mentioned above, the dangers (which he correctly presents) are too high when compared to the benefits which can be more productively fulfilled in other ways.

  • Even as a Christian, I enjoy reading Chomsky's thoughts here. He has a nuanced view which I like, as so many athiests or secular humanists are content to simply bash religion.

  • For somebody who wasn't president, Bush did a lot of damage to this country. The rise of the "tea party" tells me you, as always, got it right. (And that wonderful voice!)!!! Still the best.

  • Chomsky  = Brilliant.

  • ELITIST HEEB

  • I fear Chomsky is for the converted. I respect his views on linguistics but once people start attacking religion and start espousing socialist types of beliefs I switch off. Chomsky politically is a very controversial figure. But one thing we have is freedom of speech and he certainly uses it. Am I religious? Yes a devout Catholic and I love the music, Mozart's Requiem. Once one starts talking about religion - polarization occurs.

  • Haha, I watch this man for comedic relief. One wonders whether he ever read Plato; obviously if he had, he wouldn't have all of these ridiculous misconceptions about human nature. O well, so he ignored the ancients.

  • @sirmattu777 Why am I not surprised to find a youtube comment dripping with conceit? Look up the term "Plato's problem" and who coined it.

  • @cavalrycome Why conceit?

  • @sirmattu777

    No, he just evolved. Maybe you should too.

  • GANDHI REFUSED TITLES - for equality he always said his profession as "FARMER"- why dont YOU do the same? if you are true in saying u dont want human/animal slavery-in the world- you will go grow your OWN food/clothes -so that your slavesan be FREED &they dont have to work 14hrs day to feed/clothes you & your kids living in WASTEFUL excess-please stop keeping slaves-thank u

  • Why does it matter if Bush was president or not? There are over 30 levels above the puppet I mean president of the US.

  • If Chomsky is wrong. I don't want to know what right is.

  • that is bullshit and propaganda!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is he against religion or what. and he's comparing apples to oranges(religion to industry). it was hard to read the whole thing esp when he got to Bush. I am Catholic and proud of it.

  • How can he think Bush was "totally secular" when Bush said he didn't believe atheist Americans were actually citizens? That's more than simple pandering.

  • Modern day intellects are merely stating the obvious for the rest of us, I like Chomsky. Some people went further by presenting a solution to all of this crap, like the zeigeist movement, which I believe is a system that cannot be put into reality.

    after watching 'manufacturing consent' we seem unable to handle our lives well. We seek power & money and will do anything, even by ignoring the 'obvious'. We have just got out of the bloodiest century in history I wonder where we're going!

  • There's only one problem with this analysis: most people are too lazy to read the whole thing.

  • Chomsky = another case of brains leaking from ass

  • @Trimixtech Your comment reveals much about you & nothing about Chomsky.

  • Probably the chief similarity between Christian and Muslim fundamentalism is that both exalt the practice of corporal punishment as well as other sorts of cruelty (and bribery), using it first and foremost on their own children, and letting things spread from there. My understanding is that Chomsky denies any link exists between his linguistic work and his peace activism, an oversight that has always blown me away. Obedient yes, but carrot and sticked children become depressed, angry adults.

  • Great vid

  • An example of this is to compare the "red state, blue state" phenomenon. The majority of republican supporters are in southern states, the "bible belt". They are also among the highest users of government assistance. Most of those states are also lawfully called "right to work" states, which prevents unions from forming "closed shops", or compulsory union support. Due to this, southern people stay in poverty, but one can't convince them of this. Mention "union" and they tremble in fear.

  • He says something about depoliticalization being the cause for religion becoming the way it's become. Actually, I think the opposite is true. Government has been injected with religion (the fifties, then the examples he used from the eighties onward) because of the church being the political arm of the country. This is evil and that is evil is the popular outcry (evolution, contraception, origin, abortion, homosexuality, etc..). Blissfully ignorant is America's problem. She's dumber by the year.

  • minor point i guess but it takes up 2 slides... what is Chomsky saying about Bush not being the president? Is he saying that Bush added the words "so help me God"? I looked up Reagen and Truman and those words are part of their inaugurations also and I'm assuming of probably every other president....

  • @hyperreality8 I believe Chomsky was joking.

  • @thorkyll They did say this though.  Which is interesting.

  • He makes a lot of very good points! Denominations and dogma have really messed up North America. No one is willing to think for themselves any more...we believe whatever propaganda the media, government, or our local pastor feed to us. Wake up people!

  • @hoppercap -- His words are not intended to be controversial, he is stating the obvious but sometimes the obvious needs to be repeated as a reminder about reality to the whackos.

  • @thorkyll Most people belong to some religion that represents some supernatural deity. It must feel good to be smarter that the vast majority of humans past and present. I would be interested to see what kind of society Chomsky and his atheist pals could create without the labor and sacrifice of the masses of God believers.

    Chomsky can be shown to be a fraud by the fact that he doesn't think Jews are the establishment.

  • @hoppercap FAIL

  • @Pitfytr How so? "FAIL" doesn't help me.

  • @hoppercap Because Chomsky is Jewish, you assume he's a Zionist??? You are grossly misinformed. Do some reading before you attempt to write with any credibility!

  • @SIMKINETICS lol yes, the internet pops up some real beuties, dosnt it? The downside of democratised debate i guess...

  • Comment removed

  • @aaronsdavis The internet has been very informative for me. I'm now finding how much range of intellect there is among my fellow humans! My career has been a bubble working with many PhD's in life sciences; but now I can witness both intense idiocy & brilliance amongst the madding crowds! Democratization by the internet is a needed dose of reality for us all. For that, it's more upside. Our thoughts & actions can have wider relevance in this more transparent venue!

  • @SIMKINETICS i agree, the upsides FAR outwieghs the net's downsides. Comparable with the printing press, even more important as it is much harder to censor the net, and acces is broader than the printed page. Possibly the most important issue of this century, i think, will be free information, net censorship etc. China has proven you can supress the net, now there are murmers in the west hinting at the same for us. We must fight this new threat with all our might.

  • @aaronsdavis Excellent attitude!!! I agree whole-heartedly that we must fight for internet free-access with all our might. All who watch this & other videos must take note, and spread the word! Write your congressman a short, pointed message to keep the internet free from censorship now & forever. Our democracy is at stake! Julian Assange is our hero & must be kept free; do not allow Wikileaks to become a poster-child for internet censorship! Freedom depends on us. Take action now!

  • @SIMKINETICS The great thing is, they can even kill Assange (i hope not of course) but Wikileaks will continue...interesting times ahead.

  • @aaronsdavis Julian Assange may be the greatest of heros. Like you, I hope he avoids all evil. Our mantle of honesty must be carred forth from this day onward. Fight for freedom, one and all!

  • @hoppercap I don't think most American Christians would compare themselves to Iranian fundamentalist Muslims. A lot of Americans consider themselves more civilized despite interpreting mythology and ancient superstitions literally.

    And Chomsky is not a gatekeeper for Zionists - he condemns Zionist Israel more than any intellectual alive.

  • @brdy 99 Other comments by hoppercap:

    "The white guy has guts. He goes in front of a crowd that hates him. Even the security guys and the Jew host hate him, and he stands his ground. Admirable" "Say what you want about the KKK, but those 16 KKK members that showed up have major cahones" "Funny how when whites are violent to blacks it's racism but when blacks are violent towards whites it isn't. The joys of living in a Jewish owned nation"

  • @hoppercap Quote: "He [Chomsky] has no solutions, only obfuscations.

    That's exactly the conclusion I came to about Chomsky... mesmerising- almost hypnotizing- particularly to the young and naive.

    Note he is "Institute Professor of Linguisitics and Philosophy" at MIT.

    Think of all those brilliant, young, impressionable minds getting sucked into such "Black holes" of mental debate.

    Not simply his religious view, but his many videos, i.e. here on Youtube.

    Ramblings, a la movie "Animal House"?

  • @garwoodv6 You are right. As far as my observation goes, Chomsky has no clear solution. But honestly, do you expect him solve most notorious social and global problems by himself ? You know at least he's honest and informative. He has a an impeccable reasoning and quite a lot of precise information about many events and social and political issues that people rarely know. I think what he does is extremely valuable to the society and you should not criticize him on such trivial grounds.

  • @hailmomo ,I think that by just expressing his ideas he's doing his part.There's no ONE clear solution.The world is not a simple mathematical problem that can be solved on a piece of paper, and if we dig dipper into this kind of stuff (rational thinking) and help with spreading it around we will be doing our part ,too.

  • There is no such thing as religion. It's just a way to control you.

  • Religion is born out of mans quest to answer the unknowns. Who are we, were do we come from or how were we created and what is our purpose? If we could learn the genesis of these questions, perhaps with the help of science, we can one day answer these questions. But the usefulness of religion has largely been co-opted by the worlds power brokers who use it to suppress knowledge and critical thought by fanning the flames of fanaticism. Divide, profit, and conquer is what religion is used for.

  • Reagan a "born again christian"?

    That is derogatory to my religion- I am not saying the personnal Reagan was bad BUT the polcies? What would Jesus do- allow the lay offs of thousands of workers for beefy profits in corporations? Not saying Jesus is a Communist but could he back capitalism? Send that to the southern Americans. LOL!

  • @dancthegr I have read that Reagan didn't even go to church that much, but that's not what really bothers me about Reagan.

  • @pennypyro42 what really bothers you about Reagan?

  • @dancthegr cutting funding for research into alternative energy. spending obscene amounts of money on weapons. supporting the Contras, who tortured and raped people. playing nuclear chicken with Russia.

  • KK, Chomsky does not understand the psychology behind religion..

    what is wrong in believing in miracles? are we supposed to be dry and simply see extremely lucky things that happen to us as mathematical occurrences?

    Religion, of any kind shape or form is motivated by hope, which can be irrational, but it is also the driving force in the hearts of most good people in the planet.

  • It seems you're presenting this as Chomsky's critique of religion, when it's actually his critique of religious fundamentalism/extremism - difference.

  • @FrogmortonHotchkiss All religions are fundamentalism. Otherwise ,they are not religious.

  • @sunshiningyan I'm supposed to be persuaded by that? What's the point in bluntly asserting a (technically 100% wrong) view without explanation? I am concerned with Chomsky's view and how it is being used by the vid-poster to make his own point. I am not concerned with some random commenters point of view unless they have something helpful and persuasive to say. The comments area is hardly the place to try to change someone's entire worldview.

  • @FrogmortonHotchkiss I'm not using Chomsky's views to make any point. I just wanted his views to be out there.

  • @thorkyll If you say so, I take your word for it. But you can see why I have thought this: look at the actual title of the talk, then look at the title you have given it. You have implied that his statement on religious fanaticism is his statement on religion. The statistics on American belief that you quote relate to Biblical literalism, which is different from religious fanaticism. In theory one could be a lax creationist who doesn't attend church or read the Bible.

  • @thorkyll Chomsky is always very precise about these things, so although I applaud your wish to promote his thought, I think you should respectfully represent him properly.

  • I don't think things could go that bad. Christianity, especially the Protestant brand, has one major flaw that will thwart, if not prevent people from reaching such frenzy, and it is that the religion as practiced is escapist with a tendency toward social isolation. I don't remember ever reading any account given by former members of any church that did not describe their communities as oppressively familiar.

  • What fundamentalists want is to kiss God's ass while Ceasar, the government, kisses their ass. It's a chain of holiness of some kind with Ceasar being at the bottom

  • Okay, first of all, religion is a belief, nobody can say if he/she is a REAL CHRISTIAN or not, that is just silly.

    Second if you read carefully and have read noam's works he supports religion but is against religious fanaticism which shockingly seems to be the rule rather than an exception these days and not just in developing countries as pointed out by him. I believe in GOD but i do not fear to question him

    its as simple as this: If you understand what god is, its probably not what you think.

  • so true...

  • On the contrary in the industrial area or in the present information area people do not have to struggle to survive, people are not knit to or dependent on nature, people have plenty of time to spare and plenty of information about riveling religions. All factors that explain why we have just as many religious fanatics now as 100 or 500 years ago!

  • CHOMSKY IS WRONG! Religious fundamentalism is not a typical characteristic of pre-industrial societies! In the pre-industrial era people were far to occupied with surviving on a day to day basis, to have any extra recourses for fanatical religiousity. Their religiousity was quiet, knit to nature and personal.

  • In pre-industrial societies all of the major religions were created and told to the masses. What era do you think they come from?

  • The mystery of where humanity came from has excisted as long as humanity itself. The now known religions are just the latest presentations of how and what a possible god is. But Chomskys theory of fundamentalism being a speciality for pre-industrialism is not correct.

  • @kvikkurin

    Thats assuming you've done far more decades worth of learning and investigation that Chomsky has.

    But hey, whatever makes you happy...

  • Hmm, dude, people used to be much more fundamentalistic.

    Ever heard of the fricking Crusades?

    A large percentage of Muslims are still fundamentalists (of course, a much smaller percentage of those in Western countries).

    Luckily, a large percentage of Christians are not fundamentalists (exception of America and some African countries). Christianity has liberalized, thankfully.

    Religious fundamentalism IS a typical characteristic of pre-industrial societies.

  • In medieval Britain (I'm pretty sure it was late 14th, and most of the 15th century) the throne was passed back & forth between Protestants and Catholics. Social oppression and segregation on the basis of affiliation with one of these two religions was very common and oftentimes nobles feigned affiliation so they wouldn't get lynched. I believe "fanaticism" can be attached to that. And oh yeah, what about the dark ages? Remember when we had nearly no history at all because of religion?

  • The last bit about a depoliticised population suddenly embracing fascistic attitudes towards a scapegoat minority is exactly what you're seeing in Britain towards Muslims.

    Perhaps even moreso than in the United States, people have constantly complained how apathetic they are towards politics because no-one speaks for them, and all the parties are similar.

    Now, all of a sudden, in the middle of a big economic downturn, the viciousness of the rhetoric towards the scapegoat minority is obscene.

  • Thanks for posting dude, and well done.

  • wtf?

  • Jebus?

  • You want a populist party than start talking Truth about the Fascist Zionist agenda. Oh yeah, wasn't Hitler a nationalist social agenda?

  • This what jews did to juses

  • Who is Juses?

  • @thorkyll: That's a misspelling of "juices." The middle name of the Kool-Aid guy.

  • This what jews did to juses

  • 123micbo, you misunderstood everything about Chomsky. He's for the people and against the power of the elite.

    He's speaking of a paradigm shift that is happening even in your back yard. He's speaking of what is happening behind the stage when you thought those in power were doing good, he's shedding light to show you those who are paralysing you in perpetual poverty.

    He's doing you a favor regardless of your religion, and Isrealites are doing harm in the middle east, and that's a fact!

  • juses juice

  • Yeah, what happens?

    Are we so weak and corrupt that we need excuses born out of myths in order to be ethical in our lives?

    It is a very undemocratic approach, which began in Rome of course, during the shift to the Eastern Roman Empire or Vyzantine Empire in order to control people...

  • Marty, you have a fascist attitude, which is rooted in ignorance.

  • many presidents have said so help me god at the end. it's not illegal

  • That's just Chomsky being humorous, I think.

  • Watch part 1 of the video. Mr Chomsky is specifically dealing with fanaticism in part 2; whereas in part 1 he is saying that religion is a neutral thing, which can be used for good or bad, and that he personally doesn't believe in it. He's not against religion for other people, he's just given his own opinion. By the way, half of Chomsky's own family are religious Orthodox Jews.

  • Noam Chompsky is like you and many others.You are not willing to believe and take a stand for Jesus .There is no philosophy with Jesus you are either for Him or against him.Jesus said this not me so take it up with Him .There is no nuetral ground with Him . You either believe totally or you dont.Jesus holds all the answers to life and He is good and His life was given a ransom for all who would believe in him.Religion has nothing to do with a relationship with Father God.

  • Comment removed

  • marty, you are only proving noam's point.

  • Religion = bigotry

  • @marty3212000 What happens if you are against Jesus ?

  • @WendynDav All who exercise reason fear those who truly believe Christian drivel. Wherever Christians influence or hold power, government's directed towards expanding the faith or quashing "sin". Evangelical maniacs have just convinced Uganda to mandate the killing of gays!! In the interest of saving (from what?) souls (whatever those are), Christians form inquisitions, burn witches, smear Atheists, distort history, deny evolution, lie and kill and break every command they claim to honor.

  • @WendynDav I don't need a God to guide me to influence others to be kind and do good. I believe in doing good simply out of my own heart.

  • @WendynDav -Real Christians? Sounds like something a fanatic would say.

    Who are YOU to judge who's a real Christian and who's not?

  • Noam Chomsky will own a software company by 21st December 2012

  • I think Americans have so many resources and wealth compared to the rest of the world that a labor movement was not necessary and people got the idea that the mafia gets involved with labor and that makes it even worse than the government. Also I think Americans have less access to culture because of the great distances one must travel to cities so its a matter of lonliness.

  • Mr. Chomsky challenges the mind to consider the alternatives to traditional ideas, but God is, has been, and always will be. Mr. Chomsky will find out soon enough, like everyone else. There are many things that we do not understand about God, but those reveleations will come after we say goodbye to this world with our last breath. For now, we have His creation to view as evidence of who He is.

  • jee, it's frightening how accurate his predictions came finally true these days..

    an easily riled up, yet politicially detached group with undermined personal interests on the brink of violent uproar...

    welcome to the august recess 2009

  • @dontliethetruth - Indeed! And I think it has all been carefully planned for decades. USA, the most powerful force on earth, has numbed its people to an extent that they can easily be controlled. This just makes USA even stronger and capable of doing whatever they wish, the dream of any leader - the leaders being the financial big boys, of course, not the president.

  • I got to say that some of our minds aren't as limited as you may think. Most minds are not genius but Chomsky's mind is leaps and bounds more intelligent than any true catholic. Base your arguments on rational thought and proof. As far as the atom is concerned we actually can see it. No not with the naked eye but the atomic force microscope. It has the capacity to allow us to actually see atoms. To compare god to an atom is not a very good simile. God also gives fanatics a reason to kill.

  • I think professor Chomsky is making statements based on erroneous information. I kind of started liking his well articulated eloquence but now that I delved into the meaning of his statements I find them irresponsible and terribly biased. Faith is a gift that the people who hasn't had the blessing of having it and experiencing the love of god, just can't understand.

  • Yeah, Faith is such a "blessing," especially that part that states if you do not worship my God in the same way I worship you are going to burn in hell for all eternity. Keep your "gift" wrapped and away from me please

  • Its a metaphor. Which can be interpreted as "If you do not worship love and forgiveness the way love and forgiveness worships you, more likely your life will be hell flooded with greed, emptiness, depression.... etc. And I won't keep the gift of faith away from you because it is you and only you who is in control of yourself in a way you choose delegating it or not.

  • If those last two quotes don't apply to the past year or so, I don't know what does.

  • Half of America believes the Earth is a couple thousand years old? Whoa Chomsky. I am not sure about that figure. This has to be an old speech.

  • Actually, if you get a hold of Richard Dawkins' new book, "The Greatest Show on Earth - The Evidence for Evolution" (it's just been released), he has the statistics in the back of the book.

    According to a 2008 Gallup poll, 44 % of Americans believe "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." 36 % believe the world IS old but God guided evolution. 14 % believe in old world and no involvement by God.

    Kind Regards

  • Hahahahahahahaha!

  • Wow. That's depressing.

  • That is disgraceful.....and very scary.

  • one would think so wouldn't they :)

  • I wonder if Chris Hedges read these passages from Chomsky's book and gave him inspiration to write "American Fascists"?

  • A question on that what Chomsky says at 1:07, especially towards american readers:

    "...fossils were put here to mislead people..."

    Doesn't this creationist statement claim to be smarter than god? I mean, that implies that these creationists catched god trying to cheat mankind?

    And now the question: how deal moderate christians with such opinions, isn't that a kind of blasphemy in there eyes?

    "God moves in mysterious ways" and all that stuff?

  • I can't speak for all creationists (I'm not one), but I don't know of many creationists who still hold to the "they were put there to mislead us" claim. If they did, they would likely say it was Satan, not God who put them there. The creation museum, however, portrays humans living with dinosaurs, so they seem to be no longer trying to deny dinosaurs, instead saying they were here but washed away during the flood.

    ... and if all the other defenses run out, there's always the mysterious ways.

  • he didnt say god did that

  • I agree with ecko and Kyer, and its very rare that I find Chomsky incomplete. I think my point is this: people in the US are not independently minded enough to speak up and say, 'no, I don't believe in god'. Instead, they just go through the motions, answer 'yes' to the survey questions about god and the devil and leave it at that. Of course, there are some very serious fundamentalist currents in the US that could lead to a 21st C style fascism, watch 'Jesus Camp' if you are not aware of this.

  • He's mixing his statistics when he talks about religious fundamentalism and then gives such a high percentage of the population. Most of that percentage associate themselves with a church or denomination without believing any of the church's teachings or even knowing what they are. Christianity is just a veneer scraped across a secular culture that clings bootlessly to the last vestiges of common grace.

  • He may be distorting some statistics around but the fact remains the same, Americans are the most religious people within the developed world, what 85% believe in god? In France or the UK, that number is closer to 30~40%. I would go on to tell you why your comment is inaccurate but I couldn't be bothered. Let's just say that America is far from the completely secular democracy you purport and leave it at that.

  • Chomsky made blanket statements, but never built a case for the irrationality of different religious beliefs. For example, i am not muslim or a fundamentalist Christian, but i have heard the Kalaam cosmological argument and it is a rational defense of their belief.

  • Never made a case?

    These are selective *quotes*, jackass.

  • Religion is irrational because you can't substantiate it with physical evidence. If you believe there a ghosts in your closet after walking in and out of your closet hundreds of times then you are holding irrational beliefs.

  • Not because your great grand father couldn't substantiate with physical evidence the existence of FM waves that does mean they don't exist and you can connect your wifi laptop to your service provider. Its all matter of faith, either you have it or you don't. You just can't prove there is god or that there is not. Who created the universe?

  • The FM waves argument is fallacious and is in no way analagous to the existence of a deity. Faith and evidence are exact opposites, so you can't make the comparison between the two. Who created God?

  • You just gave yourself your answer. Our limited minds doe not understand the term infinite. When we think about that the universe has always been there or how things started? We just do not process. In our logic everything has to have a beginning. Like the atom, we have never seen it but we can see and feel what they can do. Same with God, the only way to prove his existence is when you feel his love in your heart and you find happiness and internal peace and you have faith.

  • amen, haha just kidding, but I totally agree with chomsky here...

  • And now it is happening...

  • Don't ever quote wickipedia. No professor in acadamia would ever accept that as a valid source.

  • *chuckles*

    As someone who periodically updates or revises articles on Wikipedia, I agree. You wouldn't believe some of the shit that has to be cleaned up. I'm not talking vandalism either.

    One day it may be a valid source. For now, even articles that have many footnotes need to be properly vetted. It's easy to include footnotes to 20 pieces of sensationalism that cross-reference each other, and to pretend they are 'sources'.

    Took a week to partially clean up some articles on Chicago gangs

  • Don't worry, I do, as I hope all other users of the site does, validated the source material. I see no problems with quoting wikipedia as long as the sources the information is derived from has a certain merit to them.

    Ofttimes wikipedia is merely a core of information based on various sources, where you find and identify a subject. The infomation concerning the subject should however be derived from the sources.

  • What happened in Germany, Italy, Japan, and Soviet Russia wasn;t the victory of an idea.

    It was the silence of the clear-thinking majority. My local police officer, just like yours, is a CIVILIAN authorized to uphold the law. Yet we are inundated by images of that person acting like a 'hero' for doing the job he chose.

    Our police are militarized, even our fire department is seen as militarized.

    These are civilians acting in OUR name.

  • I was confused when I saw the reference to Canada. As far as I can tell, most of us tell 'religious' people to fuck off when they try to harrass us. Canada is about 80% secular right now. Most religious people stay in their churches. The 2% that do think 'witnessing' is a good idea experience a lot of doors closing in their faces.

    Fanaticism = religion under any guise, whether you call is fascism or communism. That fat old pope said condoms harm people...in Africa. Stone the old fag.

  • Quoted from Wikipedias article on Canada:

    "According to the 2001 census, 77.1% of Canadians identify as being Christians; of this, Catholics make up the largest group (43.6% of Canadians). The largest Protestant denomination is the United Church of Canada. About 16.5% of Canadians declare no religious affiliation, and the remaining 6.3% are affiliated with religions other than Christianity, of which the largest is Islam, numbering 1.9%, followed by Judaism at 1.1%."

  • Uh huh. They may 'identify' with the pragmatism of the new US President, but that doesn't make them US citizens.

    Identifying themselves as 'Christian' doesn't seem to fill the pews though. Most Canadians live a secular life with no input from religious sources, other than revulsion that the Pope went to Africa and said condoms are harmful.

    The numbers would make more sense if people were asked if they were 'observant' Christians.

  • I can agree that identifying with a religion can mean a whole plethora of things. However, what you stated was that 80% of Canadas population was secular, quite contradictory (nearly exactly opposite) to what the statistics tell us. I meant no disrespect, I was merely correcting a factual error.

    Never heard that term before "observant christian". Could you give me a definition?

  • Being an "observing Christian" basically means you go to church on a fairly regular basis and you practice and really believe in the basic tenets of the faith.

    That's what it generally means...there is no real set-in-stone definition though.

  • It's basically synonymous with the term "active christian" then. Thank you.

  • It means you're a fucken cocksucker

  • That speech was from 1989 maybe Canada was more religious 20 years ago? :)

  • That's a very good point. :)

    When I was about to go to high school in 1982, being 'Confirmed' (Catholic thing) was a VERY BIG DEAL in my life. I didn't think it was, and neither did any of my peers. But my parents bought me a special ring, a Bishop rubbed his fat, ash-covered thumb across my forehead. I had to wear a suit on a hot, sunny June day when I would otherwise be swimming, as indeed I was. My dad was pissed that I was late.

    Great observation though. Thumbs up.

  • What he said is still accurate. Canada is significantly more religious than other industrial countries with the exception of the US which is, in turn, much more religious than Canada.

  • and this speaks volumes as to why so many of you in the US are turning around to us jews...its our fault and its Isreals..here we are again...point your dirty hate mongering fingers...ill just stick my middle one right up at you...

  • While it's true that Jews usually get a bad rap - look around this site for some conspiracy videos, ugh - Israel is not always right.

    If we were serious about peace in Israel-Palestine, we would've ceded their land back already. Instead we do things like air strikes and blockades, and blame them for hitting back without realizing what we add to the problem.

    But you're right. It's impossible to remain neutral on Israel, because maniacs on one side or another want to drag me to a hard opinion.

  • i agree completley, hate isreals policies but i dont hate isreal, all in all i believe isreal stands for good and has contributed more positive things to this world, especially within the field of science and technology. What isreal is suppose to stand for and the position in which she finds herself in today are two different ideals. The same for the US, i hate much of the US's policiies but I love this country.

  • Wow.. These comments show just how petty this atheism vs. religion argument is getting.

    The argument isn't theism vs. anti-theism.

    It's religion vs. anti-religion.

    There is a difference.

    You all are wasting your lives away arguing about a subject no one will win because no one know what happened at the beginning of time. No one from them can tell me about it either. They can't tell me it in some written word or by a rock tested by flawed dating methods. Fuck. Get a life instead of wasting it.

  • Was this directed at me? I am a theist, actually, I just agree with Chomsky's take on religion. He's not saying anything that isn't factual, anyway.

  • No. It wasn't. It was directed at all the people who want to argue in the comments of these videos or in forums, talk shows, in classrooms, or anywhere they can. I'm sorry. That particular night I was just fed up with seeing people wasting their lives arguing a topic that no one will win. They might win a personal war, but the topic itself will never be resolved because no evidence will show absolute for one side or the other.

  • If only people could discuss, not argue, without so much baggage, judgment, and closed minds when they delve into such topics, then topics like this could be intellectually stimulating instead of suppressing. Guys like Chomsky are ones to take note after. He is very genuine, patient, and keen. He never takes rebuttals as personal attacks. He takes them as intellectual discourse, which is what they should be. If you watch his speeches, this character is so obvious and ever more present each time.

  • irtidad: you're right, it is kind of an unnecessary thing to say... i agree with you, but i think chomsky has stuck his neck out enough for fanatical conservatives to take a swipe at him that he deserves to point out a constitutional technicality like that to get a few chuckles (which i did)

  • Dam, I think you are right, and i hope i am dead wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Illegally,Heavily funded Christian missionary activities and their increasingly inventive methods of deception must be exposed AND MUST BE STOPPED AT ANY COST IN EVERY SOCIETY INFESTED BY THEM. The politicians who value their VOTES, will try to paint and ban, any such exposes as disruptive of communal peace, and they will abet these missionaries' crimes, driving down the poor, diseased and ignorant into the abyss of hell which is the Heaven preached by Missionaries.

  • There are several million SANE PEOPLE LIKE NOAM CHOMSKY but there are billions INSANE, around, who talk of 'Your God' and 'My God' and then goes to vehemently "argue" My God is TRUE and Your God is actually Devil, etc.! This is the MOST TRAGIC TRUTH which makes you wonder whether there is a God at all. AS LONG AS RELIGIONS ARE BRANDED AND SOLD LIKE HIGH PRICED GLITTER PACKED PRODUCTS, MISUSING MEDIA AND FRAUDS AND MIRACLES, TAKE IT THAT ALL THOSE WHO "CONVERT" WILL COME TO GRIEF SURELY,SUDDENLY.

  • I don't think you understand Chomsky. He never said religious people are "insane," he said the level of fanaticism among many American fundamentalists is abnormal for an industrialised country and could boil over into facism.

  • Nor have I understood Chomsky to believe religious people re "insane". I do believe that without being religious hemselves (truthful, considerate to fellowmen, honest, and so on), people still talk of the religion which they were accidentally born into, as though that is true, and simultaneously all the others are stupid, srong, etc. If that is not so, why should religious freedom is assumed to be an automatic to proselytize and preach hatred against, and denigrate, other religions ?

  • 2/2. NC is of course one of the wiest men with great ideas for a saner world order, which worthy of consideration - if mankind wants a saner order - which he lays open with unrivalled boldness and candor..

  • Where does Chomsky say that?

  • Say what ?

  • I think you need to lay off the coffee, none of that was even remotely comprehensible.

  • I think I'm a Born Again Chomskyan lol

  • As usual, he's excellent. But alas, no one is listening. America is already a fascist state. Obama won't change that.

  • Obama is either a very laid back Christian or a cloest athiest so I would venture to guess he may move legislation in a more rational direction in a very underhanded and secretive way to keep his grasp on religious voters

  • That was frickin' terrifying. Nicely done.