What free market ideologues purposefully obscure. Chomsky on Libertarianism and Free Markets.

[CelticKraut]

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

Chomsky is Following a playbook.

Debasing the language. Distorting meaning.

Newspeak

[OccupyIdeas]

@CelticKraut Interesting. Can you expand on this? What in the above clip specifically evidences this assertion?

[tantrikwizard]

Chomsky is still insane. Intelligent, but insane. Articulate, but insane. He has a great memory, but is insane. Monsters and goblins around every corner and dark sith lord puppet masters manipulating society like a bunch of toddlers playing with legos, the man is insane.

[mortalisk]

Chomsky is clueless about politics. He should stick to linguistics. He is so predictable and always was. The governments are 100 times worse than any free enterprise. Corporations are a creation of governments. Governments wages war, taxes people, and pretend that it is there to help. Governments create special rules for rich people. Governments gives banks all the economic power of the central bank and get the political power in exchange. Governments screw you, and indoctrinating you to love it

[OccupyIdeas]

@mortalisk You are with your comment framing Chomsky as pro-government. Does this adequately characterize his views?

[mortalisk]

@OccupyIdeas No, I guess not. But he is also ignoring that the current state of corporations are created by the state, and that it is what feeds them constantly. He frames free market libertarians for being for that system. His views are just a mess of contradictory ones, which leads him straight into the "chose your masters" paradigm of right vs. left, and "the state is your friend and helper against evil businessmen".

[OccupyIdeas]

@mortalisk This echoes a long-running right-wing critique of Chomsky, but that's one reason we actually posted this specific clip. Listen closely to it. He is not "ignoring...corps...state." In fact, quite the opposite. He states that corps and gov. are intimately entangled. Listen carefully to 2:20- 3:00: where he talks about "...use[ing] the levers of state power..." This is actually key to his argument. And there's no denying the truth of it - at least as far as US hist. goes.

[mortalisk]

@OccupyIdeas Well, as I understand it so does libertarians, because they see the non-aggression principle as the one to follow. Now, I am from Europe, but it is from the US I first ever heard the term libertarian, so I don't know what he is talking about when he says that outside the US libertarian is not contradictory of socialism. When people say it's contradictory, it is because non-aggression is contradictory of involuntary wealth-distribution.

[mortalisk]

When he says free markets have existed only where it has been rammed down peoples throats, I cannot follow his thinking. A free market cannot be rammed down anybody's throats by definition. He might be correct that it never truly existed, and it definitely does not exist today. But I do think it is to the degree there has been a lack of violent control between people, that there has been prosperity in the world.(These days there is not prosperity, only waste)

[WWWLAW]

@mortalisk No, when he says "rammed down peoples throats" he is talking about trading agreements that other countries are forced to sign, like Haiti, South Korea and basically every country the US deals with.

[OccupyIdeas]

@mortalisk WWWLAW is on target. Chomsky appears here to be referring to 1) SAP's, and 2) US funded right-wing dictatorships that have implemented economic policies that favor only the metropole and the colonial elite.

[mortalisk]

@OccupyIdeas He might be on target for what is wrong with the standard neo-con way of seeing and doing things. But the libertarian ideology simply cannot be rammed down any ones throats. It is an ideology of non-violence and is absolutely dependent on popular support to make any sense. A dictatorship means forced central planning. Libertarians are fundamentally opposed to force and many distrust central planning for economic reasons.

[mortalisk]

@mortalisk Chomsky is simply not informed about free-market libertarianism. Since he is probably opposed to the idea of private property, he conflates everyone who has that opinion, and thinks they are all basically the same, supporting each other in everything. This is a normal mistake to make, and the reason why politics divide people in two camps, getting nowhere fast.

[ChomskyandCheetos]

By the way, its nice to find a place on youtube where people debate with civility.

[OccupyIdeas]

@ChomskyandCheetos We do try to maintain that tone on all of our videos comment boards.

[MrPointspread]

If you know Chomsky is worth around 2 million why are we even talking LOL!

I never took any position that "Chomsky is the most Wealthy of ALL the lefty intellectuals" LOL! All I ever said from the start is I RESPECT Him for making a ton of money. $2-$4 million networth isnt really that much in my eyes but it is in the eyes of alot of leftwing dopes who think your in the "evil 1%" if you make over $200K a year LOL!

As for Romo and the boys They still make me money from prop bets ;)

[ChomskyandCheetos]

@MrPointspread

Oh! I thought you were taking the stance of the "leftwing dopes." Well then, I agree. I thought you were claiming his stance on U.S. aggression was insincere. Can't blame Romo for that loss. Our defense sucks!!

[mjvjohnson]

Love the videos. Keep up the good work and good word. Cheers

[aidanwilde]

Absolutely. Thomas Jefferson was completely against the idea of corporations, which he viewed being an employee of one as akin to wage slavery.

[SnugglePuma]

haha, what's this? Words, logic? Blah! Me want sensationalized, corporate media analysis so me no have to think...

[MrPointspread]

And before some "occupy" activist calls me "evil" I actually support some of the message of Occupy wall street in saying no to Bailing Out the Banks who took very Risky trades on during the housing bubble and when they lost there "bets" the gov'ts of Bush and Obama wanted the taxpayers to foot the bill for Stimulus programs to "save the economy" like TARP and QE's.

[ChomskyandCheetos]

@MrPointspread

No one even discusses the $7.7 Trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve, or that citibank has been bailed out numerous times dating back to the Reagan administration.

[ymirfrostgiant]

One of my favorite Chomsky clips. It really nails American politics.

[tirmen8er]

This is absolute non-sense. 

[OccupyIdeas]

@tirmen8er Interesting. When you have a few min. if you're up for it let us know why.

[selvmordspilot]

@tirmen8er : why indeed?

[MrPointspread]

@tirmen8er Its not nonsense its 100% Marketing done brilliantly by Chom$ky. Who is Chomsky's Target Market? Mostly leftist teachers and College Kids who bitch and whine about "Rich people" all day LOL! Chomsky offers them his solution to those problems in the price of $29.99 for his hard cover books, just like some religious preacher or some "get rich" Book on late night on tv does. He has a Market and he knows the "Exact fix" his sheeple want and sells in to them in the form of "Academia"

[Stickstacks12]

@MrPointspread

So where's the proof that this is all just a marketing ploy? Or are you just another sensationalist?

[MrPointspread]

@Stickstacks12 Why are you even talking to me. The only person I talked to was the person who posted that Chomsky is talking nonsense comment. I told that poster I dis-agree with him saying that and gave my reasons for it.

Do you think Chomsky is talking nonsense? if you do then we disagree, if you dont we have nothing to talk about as we both agree. I dont care if you think Im "another sensationalist because you have ZERO worth to me. Chomsky on the other hand isnt worth ZERO to me.

[OccupyIdeas]

@MrPointspread It's sad that we've been propogandized to believe that someone like Chomsky is only thinking about his private financial gain. Long before Chomsky was making money on speaking tours or books he was speaking out against American foreign policy, colonialism, env. degredation, etc. Are we even open to the possibility that someone would devote their life to speaking truth to power, to trying to make the world a better place, for something other than financial gain?

[MrPointspread]

@OccupyIdeas Are you saying i'm lying when I state the fact that Chomsky sells his message to a "certain target market" if you do then I have nothing to talk to you about as you are Naive and Id be wasting my time.

Gezz you Chomsky fans are great at dividing people. I tell someone that said Chomsky is talking nonsense that he is far off the mark. and I even tell people I support the message of "no more bail outs" and Im told Im a sensationalist LOL!

You guys are amazing in dividing people

[MrPointspread]

@OccupyIdeas Also Just because someone doesnt make any money when they are younger doesnt mean shit. Steve Jobs didnt just magically stumble upon money and wealth he WORKED HARD FOR IT. Same with Chomsky he had to work for his money and wealth he didnt just stumble upon it. You people are going to be in the dark for many more years to come if you think people will work for nothing there whole lives LOL!

If Noam cant enjoy the "fruits of his labour" why should he continue to "work" anymore?

[MrPointspread]

@OccupyIdeas When Agents book Chomsky a very nice Mercedes to go from Lecture to book tour its because he earned it from all the books he has sold over many decades. Doesnt matter if you agree or disagree with Chomsky's worldviews in those books, Money isnt bias it doesn't care about politics,countries or race it goes were it can double and to the hands of successful people. Chomsky is a very successful person at what he does and that is why people book Mercedes for him to ride around in.

[MrPointspread]

@OccupyIdeas The public would perceive my comments about Chomsky as "back handed complamaints" but the Public are fools for the most part



I speak Truth. Its not the first and last time I will be attacked for telling the truth because it happens no matter the "icon" I speak about be it on the left/Right or Redsox/Yanks. Fan boys of any political spectrum are always going to look at there "idols" through rose coloured glass's. As a Handicapper I can't afford to look at the world that way.

[donnyforte2]

@MrPointspread The minute you start talking about "icons" you lose credibility. You use words icons to cage your opponent for alternative thinking. I know this because I do the same thing at times. In another video, you're probably trying to sell free market fantasies and its idols. Unlike those quick rich schemes you're pointing to, Chompsky is educating the public to whatever degree. Quit shoveling shit with your rhetorical responses. Thanks.

[MrPointspread]

@donnyforte2 Free Market Fantasies? Sorry buddy Chomsky has proved it works very well and has made many people alot of $ because IT DOES WORK.

I dont talk shit I back everything I say with Cold Hard Money dipshit. Just by talking to you Im giving away somthing for free unlike you who can offer me ZERO value. your the same type of idiot who would lay 21 pts with the Patriots.

Now Piss of and go buy some books

[donnyforte2]

@MrPointspread Will do, I enjoy a good read. And when you find a man or woman without any faults (which wouldn't discredit their work in the end anyway), I have a genie in a bottle with three wishes to grant you. Do leave me a message if you find one. Until then, I'll be at the North Pole with Santa Claus. Santa needs help with his computer again... the good ol' fat boy just won't switch to Ubuntu.

[MrPointspread]

@donnyforte2 I dont understand how making alot of money selling books the the market wants is "a fault"?

anyway I take it we both respect Chomsky regadless of our reasons, so lets leave it on that good note of we BOTH RESPECT him :)

[ChomskyandCheetos]

@MrPointspread

Actually, Chomsky would've been wealthy by simply sitting on the Language Acquistion Device Theory, and his tenure at M.I.T. His stance on U.S. foreign policy actually limits his book royalties. He could've taken the route of, say Christopher Hitchens and made millions. His target audience is actually pretty limited.

[MrPointspread]

@ChomskyandCheetos Sorry mate your argument just falls short of being a winning proposition longterm,sort of like how Tony Romo fell short tonight against the very public NY Gaints and wont win the Superbowl LOL!

FYI Im actually a Cowyboys fan aswell so no need to flame me for the Romo comment ;) It was a very good SNF game though. Romo should of used the clock a little better though considering Eli is known for "late game comebacks"

[OccupyIdeas]

@MrPointspread Interesting rejoinder. Can you expand? We thought his argument was pretty good. Why is it a losing "proposition long term?" like... the Clippers?

[ChomskyandCheetos]

@MrPointspread

Yeah, lets not talk about the Cowboys, I'm still depressed. Don't see how it falls short. Jean Piaget and others became quite wealthy due to discoveries in developmental psychology. Chomsky could've given lectures for the rest of his life and done quite well. In the early 60's, he put his career at risk by protesting U.S. involvement in Indochina. His financial success is relatively inconsequential to begin with. You need to explain exactly how my argument falls short.

[ChomskyandCheetos]

@MrPointspread

Not only that, but the man does almost every interview requested of him, no matter how low-scale and responds to every e-mail that's sent to him (still, and I think he's almost 90). If this was all about money for him, why not just sit on your ass and bask in your book royalties? Also, I think his net worth is around $2 million. I guarantee you there high-toned members of academia that make far more (e.g. Cornel West).

[nycic]

@tirmen8er That all you got, sport, or might you be prevailed upon to offer something more substantial?

[ckeeler13]

@tirmen8er In fact, this makes tremendous sense.