The Vision Thing - Chomsky v Marr 2/3

[fLcGambit]

I would just say that i think it was rude of Chomsky to not atleast let Marr finish his thought. Regardless of whether or not he was right, that's how a platform discussion or debate ought to be conducted.

[fLcGambit]

Chomsky just has too much general knowledge

[smithryansmith]

its saddening the way that journalists react so defensively whenever criticised. rather than try to defend themselves they should try to, I don't know, listen to what's being said and try to improve.

[RipTheJackR]

"Its interesting that I have to explain it because its VASTLY *awesome gestures* more significant than WaterGate, that all ready makes my point.."

hehe awesome.

[HuxleyWasRight]

the fact Marr didn't know what cointelpro was illustrates chomsky's point about the bbc, and media outlets like it, only employ people they know can be trusted to stay within the framework of an issue, Marr and people like him are only interested in being stenographers for the government.

[corcaighrebel]

Marr is a perfect example of how the media works and the high regard it wrongly holds itself (with a few honourable exceptions), this interview is a classic, Chomsky's points are confirmed by Marr looks especially when he looks a tad indignant ('this brought down a president) or completely at sea. At one point it looks like Marr suddenly realises he has just entered the ring with Ali, shifts uncomfortably in his chair, heat is on. Chomsky demolition. Love it.

[MichaelStepkoff]

If you think you are wiser than God, then good luck.

[lyricalloonytoon]

At 7.15 the look of fear in Marr's face when Chomsky says "Shall I tell you what happened?" is fucking priceless!

[MegaLotusEater]

This is the most stunning interview on the web. Ive watched it so many times and each time I learn something new and profound. Chomsky = truth

[larkydozer]

There's a great interview with Noam Chomsky on the blog called Protein Wisdom.

I really captures the essence of his tactics.

[ThePatcam]

lol andrew marr looks like he's about to cry as he watches his world FUCKING CRUMBLE WOO YEAH

[fiveredpears]

Chomsky demolishes all the standard cultural narratives. It's always a breath a freash air to listen to him. Especially when you spend your life breathing in air stagnant with lies.

[warriorprince1010]

Chomsky is a guy who supports the idaology of stalin and Mao, even saying hitler created growth [he did not]. Chomsky is along libe of activists who claim to care for justice and the poor as a trojan horse to get through greed a corruption at amazing levels.

[lenglain]

@warriorprince1010 Can you show me where Chomsky supported the ideology of Stalin? Or Mao? You won't because you just fabricated that. Chomsky consistently refers to Stalin as an example of evil, insanity, authoritarianism etc...

[warriorprince1010]

@lenglain Chomsky claims the Soviet Union made progress under Stalin. They did not. Economically or in human rights.

[conic92]

@warriorprince1010 no he has said that Soviet did not DO AS BAD economicly as "western" propaganda says. Big difference there.

[larkydozer]

@conic92

Thomas Sowell has published a number of books which cite evidence to the contrary.

[conic92]

@larkydozer I have not claimed one or the other , just clearing up blatant lies from someone commenting.

[larkydozer]

@conic92 You "have not claimed one or the other".

So, you're essentially saying that you don't know what is true or untrue, aside from

the statement made by the commentator you were addressing.

Isn't that funny. It's often a tactic of Chomsky's to go on and on about what he doesn't believe, or what he didn't say. In debates he's deflected the question of "what is a just regime?" by saying that the question would have to be engaged in an academic forum.

[conic92]

@larkydozer I am not saying anything about the issue at hand since your comment had nothing to do with me at all. You should write him a letter or write comments not replying to me since ur not replying to me, ur replyin to Chomsky.

[larkydozer]

@conic92

"I am not saying anything about the issue at hand since your comment had nothing to do with me at all."

Clearly you are a young person. For who else could write such an incoherent response to something which one had earlier expressed an interest in?

[conic92]

@larkydozer "Clearly you are a young person." Clearly you are still talkin to someone else then me, the only one being incoherent here is you. I expressed and interest in not puttin words in someones mouth, like the first poster clearly did. And then you show up one month later only to reply to me when you are truely talking to Chomsky lmao.

[larkydozer]

@conic92

I responded to your comment which was responding to yet another commentator, regarding this Chomsky video.

For you to have said "I am not saying anything about the issue at hand" clearly demonstrates that you're incoherent and lack the ability to demonstrate otherwise.

[lenglain]

@warriorprince1010 The claim that the soviet union made economic progress under stalin is not an expression of support it's an observation - one widely held by mainstream scholars. So I don't know why you say that makes him a Stalinist ideologue haha. Chomsky constantly references hitler and stalin as embodiments of evil, it really takes a lot of wishful thinking to twist that.

[KaWeH17]

@warriorprince1010. He denied people rights and he slaughtered millions, true. However, it's a fact that the USSR had a period of tremendous economic growth under Stalin. It went from a barely industrialized country to becoming a serious economic threat to the (after WWII) most advanced industrial country, namely the USA. One of the reasons is due to the fact that most of the USSR wasn't industrialized yet, new industries always have period of high economic growth, until they mature.

[astroboomboy]

@warriorprince1010 Before the Soviet Union the only part of Russia that was developed was St. Petersburg and Moscow, the rest of the country was in dire poverty, and hunger, starvation, epidemics, etc. happened on a vast scale. When the Bolsheviks came to power they transformed a peasant nation into an industrial force only to be rivaled by the US. And the reason is that the US had most of Europe, Japan, and the whole of South America in its sphere.

[conic92]

@warriorprince1010 rofl you have no clue. BEST TROLL

[astroboomboy]

@warriorprince1010 If you can give citation to any of your driver I will be very surprised, but I don't think you will find it even if you take quotes out of contest. Just because you remain a moron with your face against the wall doesn't mean others will buy your shit...

[warriorprince1010]

@astroboomboy You are the moron I am afraid. The policies he supports are extremism. Communism made no progress that democratic free markets could not have done quicker and with less destruction of human rights. Scandanavia are free market countries, with democracy. They have no state controlled economy and they progressed far faster than the Soviet Union which went backwards.

[astroboomboy]

@warriorprince1010 Did I say anything about Communism, Scandinavia or market economy? I asked for sources to your drivel, and you obviously have none. What extreme policies do Chomsky support? And this time try and find a source and don't say whatever shit that's on top of your head... Fucking troll.

[astroboomboy]

@warriorprince1010 Come to think of it, as a Christian you are probably more obsessed with lies and fairy tales than truth, so don't bother answering my questions as it will most certainly be nothing but inane piss, just like the one book that you spend your life on...

[warriorprince1010]

@astroboomboy As a Christian we believe int he truth, hence why have no time for political extremists who kill people.

[littleflags]

"Andrew Marr has a private tutoring session with Professor Chomsky" should be the title of this video.

[coolasshole23]

Noam Chumsky hates uneducated stupid people, and this reporter was clearly stupid, which is why you see Chumsky was getting irritated with him.

[justsomefellow]

Marr gets taken to school....

[slovakmath]

i almost feel sorry for Marr, watching Chomsky run intellectual circles around him, making Marr look like a drooling retard with every single one of his comments and questions. He keeps stuttering, getting stumped, and changing the subject.

[stoprainingonme]

"They were not permitted into the press, and I've documented this. I'll give you references if you like."

[smoke489]

This guy for president !

[Dbmwjo]

Ohh yeah! At the end when Marr was setting up the question about the Anti-NAFTA movement, you can just see on Chomsky's face that he was getting ready to rip open Marr's mind. He begins with, "Shall I tell you what happened?"

BADASS!

[wikichris]

In the UK we've got the Labour party and Conservatives pretty much agreeing that the on the role of the huge corporate banks in London. There are some peripheral arguments over taxes and profits and nationalisation but ultimately the difference is small. The banks are hugely powerful and neither are looking to dismantle them. They destroyed our savings to create a property bubble and sell us mortgages etc.

[ekirent]

This is the most dismissive I've ever seen Chomsky act towards a reporter.

"I was very well aware of the anti gulf war dissidents.."

"mmm were you?"

I spoke with Chomsky in October. He is a very wonderful person.

[ravishingravi]

Bow to you sir!!

[nomis101uk]

an earpiece wired to Jesus

[greatleaper]

Good comparison of Watergate and COINTELPRO

[alihammadshah]

Chomsky is a fact machine. I can't comprehend how much history he has absorbed in such a tiny scull of his.

[neoone13]

Marr, conflicts with himself, I don't think he can believe the bullshit he believed. Chomsky, is something else, breathtaking. ..

[jacksawild]

Americans tend to view journalism as adversarial. One is right and one is wrong. This wouldn't be much of an interview if Marr was agreeing with everything he said and licking his balls. The best interviewers will disagree, play devil's advocate and attempt to draw arguments to logical conclusions. It isn't personal; it is, in fact based on the Socratic method and it is how discourse is furthered. I doubt Chmosky is right about everything, his goal is to make you think rather than gather fans.

[marx102]

@jacksawild

I think Chomsky prefers to go after "liberal" journalists, I can understand.

[oxfordpictionary]

@jacksawild exactly! that's what gets the best answers out of chomsky.

[TinyArts]

Good old PWNsky !

[Devasenawraith]

Chomsky = Legend

[jameswp266]

Chomsky tears Marr to pieces. The two are in different intellectual leagues.

[FukCommando]

no1 can beat chomsky even if he is wrong, hes just too knowledgable

[matt301273]

Marr is the personification of the propaganda model and he still giving 'interviews' on the tv and my Dad thinks he's 'really good'. Give me strength...

[bsjunior]

@matt301273 Oh mate. tell me about it......stay strong.

[Donkolopis]

the way marr interviewed chomsky is a good example of what Chomsky was trying to prove, that the media ignores the most important issues. Even when presenting a topic that is usually ignored, due to the reporters being indoctrinated they often don't even know what the important issues are.

[maqrux]

Noam Chomsky, one of the true greats, he should get the Nobel Peace Prize

[zachvoch]

Why all the speech about Chomsky `owning' Marr?

Marr deserves credit for posing questions and allowing detailed, largely uninterrupted answers from Chomsky. Certainly, Marr's questions come across as rather combative, but that is perfect for Chomsky to respond as he would to a critic or apologist.

[GOLUCKY222]

I am a cat. Every time I take a bong hit I can type English for 60 secomeow meow meow meow meow meow meow moeow meow meow meow meow

[AndrewCormack339]

lol at 7:16 Andrew Marr looks scared.... I would be

[rodeo179]

it's nice to see that the interview wasn't edited like the recent ones with BBC. I guess BBC learned its lesson from this one..

informative!

[corcaighrebel]

Man, I've watched this interview countless times, it would have ended another person's career. Marr's naivety is quite remarkable. Not knowing about COINTELPRO and getting so excited in his seat about 'Watergate'. You can't meet Chomsky unprepared and if you adopt a confrontational approach he will take you apart.

Marr actually proves Chomsky's arguments by his very person. Thank you for posting this, tremendous.

Viva Chomsky!!!!

[BloggerMusicMan]

It always amazes me not only how much Chomsky knows, but also how rationally and coherently he puts this information together into a thought, and that's the mark of a great intellect.

[sponsoredwalk1]

Chomsky owns Marr

[YetAnotherLook]

Interviewing Noam Chomsky is like being roundhouse kicked by Chuck Norris!

[JohnAdamCulligan]

I get the impression that a significant number of those who post interviews on youtube fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of interviews. Presumably the "V" in the title is supposed to indicate there's a contest going on here, like a sort of wrestling match of the minds.

At least it doesn't read "Chomsky owns Marr."

[paganiniGOGO]

The reason it doesn't say "Chomsky owns Marr" is because we assume Chomsky will 'own' whomever he is talking to.

The poster was very generous to Marr putting 'v' as though there was any contest.

[elstonieo]

I think most people that have posted have missed the point in this interview was Marr owned; well yes this has to be true.

But surely a good journalist gets the best out of the interviewee did Marr do this even by mistake?

[paganiniGOGO]

He definitely opened his eyes.

[DavidUK84]

@elstonieo

Chomsky is a perfect example of what happens when a clever man becomes paranoid and starts to see conspiracies everywhere.

Marr did just what a good journo should, he let his man talk. And in doing so got a rather scary insight into the mind a man both talented, and appalingly egotistical. To imagine that you alone have seen the true purpose behind the US actions in the Gulf of all the millions of pages written about it is no more than egoism.

[stanzavik]

@DavidUK84

1 thing 2 simply denounce him as a conspiracy theorist; another 2 actually ADDRESS his accusations. We invite you to SPECIFICALLY refute, point by point. (I've not yet seen it done by any1). Why do his words pass a simple sniff test? Power wants to keep..and expand -- from there, all else follows....

[owenhunt]

@DavidUK84 I would say Chomsky is the least egotistical intellectual on modern record. His overt grilling of Marr in this interview is completely against the norm. Perhaps he saw and opportunity to convert a seemingly open-minded, and possibly mentally superior young man into his way of thinking. Marr was open to Chomsky's criticism from the off, only turning his nose up towards the latter part of this interview.

Chomsky must be looking for successors. I would guess at that.

[watayapupuya]

@owenhunt

"Overt grilling"?"convert"?"open-mind­ed'?"looking for successors"?

What the Hell are you talking about?

[YetAnotherLook]

LOL! Well said!

[givebirthathome]

Chomsky is so right about them not publicizing offers to withdraw. And the vote in the Senate for Gulf 1 was so close..if people had known there was an alternative to war (and if the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter "Nayiri" hadn't lied to Congress that Iraqi soldiers were killing babies, there probably wouldn't have been a war, and what a better world we would live in today.

And virtually none of my neighbors were aware of NAFTA either.

[IckyThump101]

THAT IS FLATLY FALSE

[terps4eva9]

Plato, Da Vinci , Chomsky

[phantom5691]

Chomsky is a national treasure... he is like 81 years old and sadly, will probably not be around much longer

[givebirthathome]

Chomsky is a world treasure now...looks like the Mid-East press interviews him alot.

We can hope he has quite a few more good years- very successful people tend to live longer--but definitely, we should cherish him while we have him.

[fctchk]

Sad, Mr. Chomsky is rarely if ever invited anywhere on mainstream US media outlets. Not even Charlie Rose or NPR, supposed champions of the high(er) brow and self- proclaimed (loudly, during fundraisers) bulwark against the oh so pernicious commercial media.

Instead, they give free reign to an inbred clique of status quo and self-fellating usual suspects. These they paint with a transparent veneer of leftyness and rightyness to simulate "balance" and presenting "both" sides.

Nauseating

[lbcdemon]

It is just too perfect that Marr asks Chomsky to explain COINTEL-PRO because he has absolutely no knowledge of it.

How fantastically amazing.

[donkey69donkey69]

'we read all about it in britain','no you did not'. love ya noam :)

[DemCatBo]

Chomsky absolutely has no equal. He is beyond any reproach. He isn't infalliable, but I would consider him probably the final authority of international affairs in the world.

[josephstra]

nOAM IS bULLSHIT!

educate-yourself org/cn/noamchomskygatekepper26 sep05 shtml

[msterliz]

Noam Chomsky is a brilliant linguist/psychologist-a great speaker $ a keen mind. However, he is not an authority on any of thw world events he speaks of, nor does he have any authority on these issues - and the fact that so many people just follow his well spoken nonsense is indicative of our rapidly decreasing ability of our culture and my generation to think critically. It's sad. Is there any link out there, even a transcript (not Buckley, somethign new) where Noam debates? Not just talk?

[intrepgun]

yes. he debates perle in an 18-part debate... though, he ends up talking quite a bit [what's wrong with explaining things thoroughly? i've got plenty of time for the truth] mostly because perle refused to answer once noam struck certain cords.

also the famous noam vs buckley debate. both can be found on youtube, and link to more debates.

[mdoob11]

What constitutes an "authority"? As the author of over 70 books, I think it would be foolish to neglect his narrative, especially when it has been meticulously scrutinized , revealing hardly an error.

[cornificius22vain]

stop worrying about 'authority' and center on whether what he says is true or not

[paganiniGOGO]

give an example of something he said which isn't true.

[cornificius22vain]

why sould I? I am not critizicing chomsky, just the stupid concern for 'authority' which some of you share

[paganiniGOGO]

Okay, now I see your point, which is actually a good one. I thought you were arguing with that person from before.

You're completely right, a lot of so called "authorities" are full of shit

[mdoob11]

Trick question....

Simply can't be done.

[Jonathan6561]

I agree with most of what Chomsky says but truth or absolute proof is impossible.

[paganiniGOGO]

What you say is true, or as close as possible at least.

[shikagonga]

if someone like chris hitchens can defer to chomsky on all things vietnam, i think that's a better gauge on whether chomsky is an authority or not. it's a shame he doesn't respond in real-time prolifically anymore. maybe age is slowing him down

[themonkeywrench]

I don't know how Chomsky keeps so much information in his head - it's amazing. I just can't keep all those names and dates on the top of my head!

[lolitsjohn]

I accidentally thumbs down'd your comment. I meant to thumbs up it!

[tomheppy]

agreed

[hikupoopoo]

he has to have a photographic memory and a an IQ in the 130-40s

[paganiniGOGO]

an IQ in the 130's or 140's? I don't think one of the greatest geniuses of the 20th century has an IQ in the 130-140's. Maybe Marr has an IQ in that range.

[mdoob11]

Only 0.2% of the population has an IQ of 140. Still, you're correct that Chomsky is probably around the 150-200 range, though it's impossible to tell. He ignored my email of curiosity :D

[paganiniGOGO]

IQ becomes slightly meaningless after 150 or so. It's hard to apply intelligence quotients to geniuses. For example, Einstein's IQ was estimated to be (only) 160.

[PatrickWJ]

Most of his gift is his ability to recall information. I can't say how important his contributions are to linguistics but his contribution to foreign/domestic affairs, history, etc. are impressive, but not revolutionary. He can get away with and say a lot of things that a lot of people already know but are restricted from saying. Besides, many of the people he references share his viewpoint, which is not unique. Marr probably has a 120 IQ.

[paganiniGOGO]

He revolutionized linguistics. He is considered the father of modern linguistics. He is also one of the main contributors to the cognitive revolution in psychology. He's the most cited living scholar.

That requires a lot more than the ability to recall information.

Marr definitely has an IQ higher than 130 or "gifted." I was in a gifted program so I knew a lot of people who were technically "gifted." I doubt most of them are now as intelligent as Marr.

[pirbird14]

And yet, one person who actually does linguistics in the field, instead of from behind a desk as Chomsky does, is able to completely overturn chomsky's linguistics revolution.

Chomsly is good at exposing the lies underpinning official propaganda, but his political analysis is not all that it's cracked up to be.

Social protest against the Vietnam invasion began in 1966 when Sen. fullbright's commision exposed the lies about the Gulf of Tonkin. This was not a moral opposition to aggression

[pirbird14]

Check out Danial Everett's work with the piraha people and his subsequent debunking of Chomsky

s "recursions theory", which underpins his "linguistics revolution".

Peaceniks were a tiny, tiny minority in the social opposition to the war in Vietnam. The vast majority were opposed to the war because it was based on lies. Most people are not pacifists, because we are not masochists - we believe in the right to self-defence.

[Baustrophedonic]

@pirbird14

Daniel Everett's work is not even near being universally accepted, and it seems that more often than not his refutations are dismissed by his fellow linguists as misrepresenting Chomsky's theories. Chomsky's contributions have had significant impact on theoretical computer science that are irrevocable, so he still has and will always have that. Besides, the soft sciences are not set in stone, we don't bash Freud because his ideas are outdated so why should it be any different here?

[mdoob11]

Nobody has over turned Chomsky's linguistic revolution you twat. It's still the dominant paradigm in linguistics.

[pirbird14]

Oh, that's a convincing argument! You have shown me the light! [rends tunic, places ashes on head]

[mdoob11]

paganini is correct. His gift is beyond memory. Intelligence is twofold (in conventional measurements); one, memory; two, making connections with information.

Chomsky is absolutely phenomenal (I would go so far as to say unprecedented) in his ability to do both. His memory is... legendary, and his ability to "connect the dots" and make sense of the world and his million facts is extraordinary.

And yes, my ass hurts, but then again, there is no shame in riding Noam's dick!

[PatrickWJ]

haha!

[paganiniGOGO]

I agree.

But I didnt need that image in my head you fucking asshole.

[mdoob11]

did you mean

But i didnt need that image in my head; your fucking asshole.

??

[andyx1205]

@themonkeywrench i've wondered the same thing lol, there's a thing to understanding events and their significance but remembering even the precise details and dates, and remembering the citations from where you read the stuff is just amazing. on top of that he's got expertise not just in history but in philosophy and linguistics, mind-boggling lol.

[erby1kabogey]

Chomsky is a great thinker and one of the most brilliant men on the planet but all the talk in the world will not change anything and that is my beef with intellectuals, talk talk talk and hope a real revolutionary will come along and initiate real change!

[henjokongo]

I agree that to stop at intellectual discourse would be futile. But given the dominance of a limited venue of political views in this country, Chomsky does a good job seeding the minds of people with other possibilities. As a layman, not a scholar, it seems reasonable to me to think that people will need to have other possibilities before they can act on them.

[ChocolateExplosion]

Chomsky is brilliant, in the true sense of the word.

[Colmpaschal]

a verbal Bruce Lee

[tokotokotoko3]

Haha, perfect description. I'll remember that one.

I'm watching this one now for the third time - just for the fun of how he owns this guy.

[visco54]

Very intelligent, nice to listen too

[estopa2006]

chomsky is such a wonderful human being.