The US mainstream media's lack of interest in Chomsky is a testament to the danger his views and knowledge of facts pose to centers of wealth and power.
there was SOME critique by the generals pre-invasion on the matters that were mostly ignored, but if these sorts of things are kept up only the most incompetent of ruling groups will continue to ignore them, it's been proven time and time again
when america was mostly divided between "no war" and "completely support war and everything related to it"
it had already screwed up, a switch to "how should the war be carried out" should have happened
israel shouldn't have existed, but shouldn't die now
comparing iraq to stalingrad is stupid, the key matter is that the way the iraq war was held was a strategic blunder, as it made strife more common
a well excecuted mission would have removed saddam and set iraq onto a better reformative state, but to be honest, I didn't see it happening with a half-assed attempt at it
this is the problem of democracy at times, well representative democracy anyways
people like noam chomsky don't give good critique so the warhawks have no constructive criticism
that hack noam chompsky never does anything useful it seems, screws around with hatred of israel and complains that obama when claiming to want to be a diplomat, obama doesn't step on many toes at once
hurrdurrr great one
I can see why public television wouldn't want to hear him
not surprising since he has NO understanding of human political history as far as I'VE seen him in his videos
I'm glad he points out specific things in such great detail, but he lacks an overall understanding
By any sensible, judicious measure and assessment of the vast body of evidence surrounding any policy of, or action by Israel, (most notabley, the so-called "Israeli - Palestinian conflict"), the information managers are obedient, subservient puppets of Israel's Zionist criminal cabal.
Necessary in disputing this reality, is a meticulous, acrobatic dance of cherry-picking only key aspects within that body, and grossly exaggerating or outright ignoring countless, contradictory facts.
I guess around 80 or something., but old isn't on an equal with wise. he maybe right on some things, but he says a lot of absurd things too. like anarcho-syndikalism is the way to go, and US is the leading terrorist state, and that the economic crisis is because of lack of regulations.. :S
but if germany wasn't an aggressive and occupying force towards other countries, only commiting the cruelties within the reich, should we just let them? or should we try to prevent them by using military force...
this is one of the hard questions in my opinion. but don't misunderstand me, I think US have done some questionable things over the years, but to call US a terrorist state is a bit of an overstatement..
Most of the people killed by Norwegians in WWII were from the Soviet Union. The Norwegian Waffen-SS divisions were some of the most feared on the Eastern Front. Certainly they were not terrorists, most of them volunteered because they remembered the Soviet attack on Finnland and hated Communism. They didn't commit any atrocities or anything.
Wow, you gotta be kidding me...You think the last 2 statements are absurd...Fucking Christ, we really are in trouble. This is a man who spent his whole life analyzing history, media, government, & politics. You have one elk video on your profile. Who do you think is gonna be right? Well I can tell you from reading some of the things he wrote, and hearing some of the things he said- he is. America has supported & even created terrorism. It was founded on it for chrissake!
I admit I'm not a professor of history, but at least I know that terrorism existed before the 18th century and that America was founded on the principles of liberty.. I mean Noam Chomsky agrees with me on that, so I think you should cool it..
Founded on the principles of liberty...Riiiight. Who lied to you? We made our open debut by committing mass genocide. Killing Indians. Then British soldiers. One blood bath after the next. 200 years later, we have people like you sugar coating it. Saying it was for liberty, freedom, etc. Bullshit. It was for resources. And all the shit we're in now goes back to 1913 & 1932. America no longer stands for those same principles you think it once stood for. It stands for: Manipulation, Greed, & Power
I generally agree with you, but you need to brush up on history yourself, ElectricMelon.
The USA made its debut killing Indians THEN British soldiers?!? You seem to seriously misunderstand the American Revolution: We didn't fight to gain our independence from the Cherokee Nation. Before we ran off the British, there was no USA.
The founding of America was based on liberty. It was colonists versus their imperial masters. Everything else came after, even Manifest Destiny.
the problem is that the US consistently violates its own constitutional principles of liberty, life, and justice, i.e., the very principles it purports to defend. on this topic, see Howard Zinn's comments on Democracy Now with Amy Goodman.
Those that have ears... can listen very clearly! Congratulations for Chomsky for speaking common sense something a virtue so blatantly ABSENT in mainstream USA media.
.....5,21 what..Obama wants the people who are in the mix,,,,Israil most every other person in goverment is a jewish person well in a nut shell anyway.
She has an informal tone, but she does bring up a really good point: Obama won the election based on his rhetoric of diplomacy, so why appoint all of these hawks. I understand why democrats have been such pussies on foreign policy in the past. They talk about diplomacy, the repubs attack, dems poll numbers go down, but this is not the case here. He talked about diplomacy, and beat the hawks, now he appoints them to his cabinet. It doesn't make sense.
Great job Julia! I knew that this would happen as soon as I heard that Obama had Axelrod. Then that sickening AIPAC speech. In fact, if you go back to 2003, everyone, including Pelosi and Dean gave similiar groveling speeches. The AIPAC website brags about how much servitude these lackeys show. Have you ever heard an Israeli politican grovel about the USA in a speech? Anyways, keep it up. Also read Christopher Jon Bjerkness.
I didn't have any problem grasping what he said. I had to look up a few words he used, but that's half the fun when you listen to people far more intelligent than you.
Have you guys ever seen propaganda comments that there have been no Palestine?
now look ur self
Torah the part which is now in bible too "Genesis 10:14 Pathrusim Casluhim which the 'Philistines' descended" Philistin is the way Midleasterns and Real jews call Palestine. Torah clearly explains when Jews MOVED there Palestinians were living there.
Palestine was there befor Jacob, Salomon, David,,,
Palestinians were living there since human and soil co-existed
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
why the stupid hippie music intro, and then the fawning interview. why not ask him, how is u, the most important intellectual in the usa , hasnt changed anything in 30 years. its worse than 68. what have ud done except continue to identify the government as the problem meanwhile never once examining in detail the money economics behind the government, which is permanent, while all the obamas rotate in and out, lieing?
Obviously you haven't read anything he has written in the past 30 years. He has constantly made the link between private concentrations of capital and policy. In fact he has said exactly what you said, that
"In the US, the political system is a very marginal affair. There are two parties, so-called, but they're really factions of the same party, the Business Party. Both represent some range of business interests." -- feb. 1990 interview with Adam Jones
as an aide, but its 80 % talk on the actions of the evil puppets, every president is bad, for so and so reasons, (he's right) but verylittle aalysis of the underlying economic structure except in general terms, and consistenly pro Un , as it that would be an adequate replacement for the evils of the us. if chonsky did not exist, the corporations would have to invent him. as he says, this is institutional economics, not conspiracy.
Can you cite a source on this 80% of the talks? Is it your imagination?
It's true he primarily focuses on US foreign policy, because it happens to be quite destructive and urgent, and something the wider public can curb without having to be completely radicalized. But certainly he has talked extensively about the economic connections, and wider social change, possibilities for a more participatory society, his libertarian socialism, etc. Maybe you should take a wider sample.
hisManufacturing consent is excellent on this and on how information control is achieved without a top down military like hierarchy censor. this is his most important contribution. He, imo, completely ignores the role of other soft power, and the destructive impact of the liberal free trade system social agenda. I think he ignores this because in his mind, UN mandated family planning , coercve even, is ok. typical new york liberal thinking of his generation. just 1 exampl, others outthere.
@Chomskyan Do you think for yourself or are so besotted with the blathering of an MIT professor of linguistics? Don't bother replying or blocking me, I already blocked you.
I have found that most people who take a differant out-look other than professor Chomsky havn't a clue what they are saying,alot of the people just have diarrhea of the mouth.But it free speech .
yes, i am judgmental of people who like use the word like twelve times in like a sentence. in front of the linguist chomsky of all people. i felt embarrassed for her douchebaggery as should you mr. douchebag chomskyan. take it personal why don't ya.
Notice I didn't call you a douchbag, I don't even know you. I just said you were a judgmental douchbag IN THIS COMMENT.
Noam talks to anyone because he has no need to be a stereotypical "intellectual" who thinks their time is too valuable for "the little people." And he's always been accessible to interested people, from high school students to head of states, to preeminent scholars.
Take it or leave it. If you think you can do better, write Noam and arrange something.
look. to be honest, i'm glad the interview is posted here. the interviewer was a distracting nuisance. i appreciate you defending your buddies, but jeesus man don't take it personal. maybe get a life?
Day 8 of the Obama Administration: Obama is now the Third Bush Administration with regard to Middle Eastern foreign policy. He's also as principled as a Nazi officer after Stalingrad.
I'll see you in six months, once actions speak louder than these "week" words.
Hey guys, Julia here, I'm going to post the entire transcript of our interview on my blog very soon, so don't sweat about the audio being too soft. I'll ask Charngchi/"Chomskyan" to put the link in the box once I'm finished.
Julia, wow, you got to interview Chomsky! I am so jealous, but thanks so much for speaking out about the horrible injustice that is going on. I like your keffiyah, I just got mine yesterday.
"...with the notion of speaking truth to power, as if you had anything to tell power that power was not already aware of. You speak truth to people, not to power."
Thanks for offering Professor Chomsky the chance to speak truth to power for....well, the umpteenth time. And may he, like Pete Seeger in a different way, have a vigorous and activist old age.
Chomsky breaking through the hype and laying it down once again he puts everything into perspective once again . Judging by the hawkish tone of Obama`s inaugeration speech a air of peace with a threat of menace a silk glove with a nuckle duster in it there will be very little of that change he talks so much about .
interviewer: prepare your questions in advance and read them out.. get rid of the "um, like, kinda"s! youre not interviewing him on msn or for teenbeat!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Noam is wrong on one thing here. When Obama said that the Iraq war was a strategic blunder, he didn't mean it, literally. Chomsky, correctly, points out the flaw in Obama's word choice, but he assigns acquiescence when there was none. If Chomsky had listened to what Obama was saying throughout the campaign, and the statements he made before he was elected to the US Senate, he'd see that Obama was opposed to the war itself, not just the strategy behind it.
I would expect a quotation of Obama where he says that the war against iraq "is against international laws" or "highly immoral and sick". This would be principal opposition.
Saying "we can't fight this war, because we need more power to fight against other countries (we devasted before)" is not opposition, but just a different strategy of how to be imperialistic. Dont forget: Every break of the UN-Charter is a break against your own constitution.
Is that why he voted to fund the war after he became senator? Is that why he & his PAC campaiged for & supported Lieberman against his anti-war Democratic opponent for re-election? Is that why he voted to confirm Bush's pro-war cabinet nominations & why he's selected nothing but pro-war hawks for his cabinet? Bill Clinton was correct when he called Obama's alleged anti-war record a "fairy tale." With the exception of 1 speech he gave before an anti-war constituency right before seeking office.
Some of these decisions were clearly political. And principles take a back seat to politics very frequently. I agree with you, I don't get his support for Lieberman, but he was only in the Senate for 3 yrs at the time; maybe he was looking to make friends and not waves. He should've voted "no" on Bush's nominees just on principle. But it seems like he was trying to judge these candidates on their merits/competence (?), since the ideological battle had already been lost after the 2004 election
Re: Clinton. He was correct in what he said, but the media intentionally misinterpreted it. Bill's real foot-in-mouth moment was in South Carolina as you remember. It's too late to look back, but Hillary had this thing in the bag and lost it. I was for Edwards since early on, but it didn't work out. Obama is far from perfect, but... I'd rather have him in the White House than Abe Simpson and the Church Lady.
Sometimes is very hard to be against everibody. These days after all the propaganda against palestines then it is very courougeous for a jewish american man to be against the insanities of the israeli state. Brave man
Because of its immediate consequences, which would be ending an occupation by a more repressive state.
A consistent anarchist should be able to hold both short-term goals and long term commitments. And at times they may appear contradictory.
It's the same with his "support" for state-run social programs: without non-hierarchical alternative institutions, dismantling parts of the state structures would strengthen private concentrations of wealth, which does not contribute to anarchist goals.
Great to have some new Chomsky, thanks very much for this. His recent talk on Gaza was amazing, he was very much back on form. Afraid I have to agree with previous comments about the interviewer. Also - hate to criticise, but it seems such a waste to make Noam repeat stuff he's said very recently. Some quick research into his recent talks would mean you could ensure you ask new questions and thus get new insights from the great man. There are a million things I could think of asking.
I did not conduct the interview, so your critique is misplaced. I helped the girl set up the interview and I taped it. She did it for her student newspaper and for the chance to meet him.
It is sad to see him so broken up because of his loss. And it would be very sad the day he leaves us. But it just means we need to take on more of the responsibility, carry on his work collectively.
For future reference to the lovely interviewer in this video, if you're giving a recorded interview with someone, just nod when they are answering. Don't constantly mumble "uh huh, huh, yeah, uh huh, mm hmm, yeah, yeah, mm hmm, uh huh, uh huh, yeah, uh huh" while the interviewee is speaking.
Her over use of the word "like" was another sore spot for me.
Listening to Chomsky was, as always, interesting but the young woman really should have been quiet and allowed him to speak, he didn't need her constant, and annoying, affirmations.
She did, but it's hard to hear Noam speak. It's just a little peeve I have, when interviewers mumble agreement while the interviewee is talking. I'm still glad she did the interview, and that you made it available. Thanks.
His assistant told me he is not doing well with his wife's passing. Also he told us he received a call at 4 am that morning saying that "the Zionists will come and kill you."
Chomsky just chilling with his hot chocolate.
SmokiSounds 3 months ago
Chomsky of President
bluegreen1138 4 months ago
The US mainstream media's lack of interest in Chomsky is a testament to the danger his views and knowledge of facts pose to centers of wealth and power.
Tippersnore 1 year ago
there was SOME critique by the generals pre-invasion on the matters that were mostly ignored, but if these sorts of things are kept up only the most incompetent of ruling groups will continue to ignore them, it's been proven time and time again
when america was mostly divided between "no war" and "completely support war and everything related to it"
it had already screwed up, a switch to "how should the war be carried out" should have happened
israel shouldn't have existed, but shouldn't die now
noobler9 1 year ago
comparing iraq to stalingrad is stupid, the key matter is that the way the iraq war was held was a strategic blunder, as it made strife more common
a well excecuted mission would have removed saddam and set iraq onto a better reformative state, but to be honest, I didn't see it happening with a half-assed attempt at it
this is the problem of democracy at times, well representative democracy anyways
people like noam chomsky don't give good critique so the warhawks have no constructive criticism
noobler9 1 year ago
that hack noam chompsky never does anything useful it seems, screws around with hatred of israel and complains that obama when claiming to want to be a diplomat, obama doesn't step on many toes at once
hurrdurrr great one
I can see why public television wouldn't want to hear him
not surprising since he has NO understanding of human political history as far as I'VE seen him in his videos
I'm glad he points out specific things in such great detail, but he lacks an overall understanding
noobler9 1 year ago
Or more widely recognized as simply a fairy tale -- and by and large, the bewildered herd buys it.
Lock, stock and barrel -- hook, line and sinker.
MichaelRMcCoy 1 year ago
By any sensible, judicious measure and assessment of the vast body of evidence surrounding any policy of, or action by Israel, (most notabley, the so-called "Israeli - Palestinian conflict"), the information managers are obedient, subservient puppets of Israel's Zionist criminal cabal.
Necessary in disputing this reality, is a meticulous, acrobatic dance of cherry-picking only key aspects within that body, and grossly exaggerating or outright ignoring countless, contradictory facts.
MichaelRMcCoy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evidence the CIA killed JFK to start Vietnam
Invasion of Vietnam 1955, Nixon & Ike.
CIA Bay of Pigs 4-61.
JFK peace deal with the Russians.
JFK wanted to focus on: going to the moon,
2nd invasion of Cuba from New Orleans -- shut down by RFK arresting 500 CIA agents:
Am Univ speech I will break CIA into a 1000 pieces.
10-11-61, NSAM #263 JFK orders US out of Vietnam.
CIA & Bush then assassinated JFK
2nd invasion of Vietnam 11- 23-63 ordered by LBJ. Youtube: paul8kangas
paul8kangas 2 years ago
ElectricMelon; I'm curious - you seem to be pretty down on the US. What nation or nations do you admire?
p0procket 2 years ago
Chomsky is amazing. Extremely open. Will talk to anyone at anytime.
Nickalispicalis 2 years ago 12
Is it easy to speak to him?
ElectricMelon03 2 years ago
i think Chomsky is a great man... proof of that is even this firefox thats making me capitalize his name (although his name isnt)
out of respect, im going to gift him a new sweater :) ... and yes...
it will be yellow
asf4321 2 years ago
don't feed the trolls.
stop consuming...\m/
theH0UNDSofD00M 2 years ago
Chomsky is an interesting man, but he should be speaking a lot louder during interviews.
gunnarsom 2 years ago
Never mind the volume .. Listen to the message .. Do you know how old he is? ..
miragin7 2 years ago
I guess around 80 or something., but old isn't on an equal with wise. he maybe right on some things, but he says a lot of absurd things too. like anarcho-syndikalism is the way to go, and US is the leading terrorist state, and that the economic crisis is because of lack of regulations.. :S
gunnarsom 2 years ago
The US is the leading terrorist state .. No terrorist orginisation could compare in body counts in comparison to the U.S ..
miragin7 2 years ago
okey so since my country Norway killed more people during world war 2, than al qaida ever did, makes us worse "terrorists"?
gunnarsom 2 years ago
No not at all .. your country was at war with an aggressive and occupying foreign force ..
miragin7 2 years ago
but if germany wasn't an aggressive and occupying force towards other countries, only commiting the cruelties within the reich, should we just let them? or should we try to prevent them by using military force...
gunnarsom 2 years ago
What do you think ??? ..
miragin7 2 years ago
this is one of the hard questions in my opinion. but don't misunderstand me, I think US have done some questionable things over the years, but to call US a terrorist state is a bit of an overstatement..
gunnarsom 2 years ago
Most of the people killed by Norwegians in WWII were from the Soviet Union. The Norwegian Waffen-SS divisions were some of the most feared on the Eastern Front. Certainly they were not terrorists, most of them volunteered because they remembered the Soviet attack on Finnland and hated Communism. They didn't commit any atrocities or anything.
einsatzdeath 2 years ago
Wow, you gotta be kidding me...You think the last 2 statements are absurd...Fucking Christ, we really are in trouble. This is a man who spent his whole life analyzing history, media, government, & politics. You have one elk video on your profile. Who do you think is gonna be right? Well I can tell you from reading some of the things he wrote, and hearing some of the things he said- he is. America has supported & even created terrorism. It was founded on it for chrissake!
ElectricMelon03 2 years ago
I admit I'm not a professor of history, but at least I know that terrorism existed before the 18th century and that America was founded on the principles of liberty.. I mean Noam Chomsky agrees with me on that, so I think you should cool it..
gunnarsom 2 years ago
Founded on the principles of liberty...Riiiight. Who lied to you? We made our open debut by committing mass genocide. Killing Indians. Then British soldiers. One blood bath after the next. 200 years later, we have people like you sugar coating it. Saying it was for liberty, freedom, etc. Bullshit. It was for resources. And all the shit we're in now goes back to 1913 & 1932. America no longer stands for those same principles you think it once stood for. It stands for: Manipulation, Greed, & Power
ElectricMelon03 2 years ago
I generally agree with you, but you need to brush up on history yourself, ElectricMelon.
The USA made its debut killing Indians THEN British soldiers?!? You seem to seriously misunderstand the American Revolution: We didn't fight to gain our independence from the Cherokee Nation. Before we ran off the British, there was no USA.
The founding of America was based on liberty. It was colonists versus their imperial masters. Everything else came after, even Manifest Destiny.
einsatzdeath 2 years ago 2
the problem is that the US consistently violates its own constitutional principles of liberty, life, and justice, i.e., the very principles it purports to defend. on this topic, see Howard Zinn's comments on Democracy Now with Amy Goodman.
dancebaby808 2 years ago
I agree with that. It's the ideas that I support.
gunnarsom 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
jews are bad thats commonly known,,
djenna3ali 2 years ago
This guy is Jewish, is he bad?
Cheedillow 2 years ago
it is commonly known. but we shouldnt generalise cause there are goods in any men. lets transmit
djenna3ali 2 years ago
common sense, what a great idea. Noam Chomsky you are so mono-tone so smart and so right. god love ya
drgoodvibesxxx 2 years ago 6
Those that have ears... can listen very clearly! Congratulations for Chomsky for speaking common sense something a virtue so blatantly ABSENT in mainstream USA media.
YanniChill 2 years ago 6
The names were changed to protect the guilty
HardBodyNyC 2 years ago
Comment removed
milosc9 2 years ago
.....5,21 what..Obama wants the people who are in the mix,,,,Israil most every other person in goverment is a jewish person well in a nut shell anyway.
twochaudio 2 years ago
Julia did a great job
semigotbanned 2 years ago
Very good interview.
JayDee2k9 2 years ago
lol obsequiousness.
Maarttttt 2 years ago 3
The audio should have noise reduction and voice clarification. Otherwise good interview.
Maarttttt 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Speak up old man!
JewTube001 2 years ago
"Speak up old man!"
Turn the volume up you lethargic brat.
RedJacobin 2 years ago 3
YES
barrywinehousexp 2 years ago
How would you react if you were interviewing a personal hero or someone as renown as Chomsky?
She did fine. Get off her case.
Arjuna1901 2 years ago 2
i would be sooooo nervous
tomheppy 2 years ago
She has an informal tone, but she does bring up a really good point: Obama won the election based on his rhetoric of diplomacy, so why appoint all of these hawks. I understand why democrats have been such pussies on foreign policy in the past. They talk about diplomacy, the repubs attack, dems poll numbers go down, but this is not the case here. He talked about diplomacy, and beat the hawks, now he appoints them to his cabinet. It doesn't make sense.
martyR13 2 years ago
He, like every other US pol, fears the Lobby
oldjoe5 2 years ago 2
Great job Julia! I knew that this would happen as soon as I heard that Obama had Axelrod. Then that sickening AIPAC speech. In fact, if you go back to 2003, everyone, including Pelosi and Dean gave similiar groveling speeches. The AIPAC website brags about how much servitude these lackeys show. Have you ever heard an Israeli politican grovel about the USA in a speech? Anyways, keep it up. Also read Christopher Jon Bjerkness.
iggy6 2 years ago
Good interview. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
ProgressiveDemocracy 3 years ago 2
Julia here. I posted the complete transcript of our interview on my blog, if you have trouble hearing the audio.
heyhollywood.
blogspot.
com
/2009/02/chomsky-interview-transcript
.html
juliaisafilmbuff123 3 years ago
very poor audio
very difficult to grasp the words.
please put the transcription on the right
I would really know what's he's saying
thanx
vivanicola 3 years ago
I didn't have any problem grasping what he said. I had to look up a few words he used, but that's half the fun when you listen to people far more intelligent than you.
ThatsMyPurseLOL 3 years ago
Have you guys ever seen propaganda comments that there have been no Palestine?
now look ur self
Torah the part which is now in bible too "Genesis 10:14 Pathrusim Casluhim which the 'Philistines' descended" Philistin is the way Midleasterns and Real jews call Palestine. Torah clearly explains when Jews MOVED there Palestinians were living there.
Palestine was there befor Jacob, Salomon, David,,,
Palestinians were living there since human and soil co-existed
perazh 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
why the stupid hippie music intro, and then the fawning interview. why not ask him, how is u, the most important intellectual in the usa , hasnt changed anything in 30 years. its worse than 68. what have ud done except continue to identify the government as the problem meanwhile never once examining in detail the money economics behind the government, which is permanent, while all the obamas rotate in and out, lieing?
Ecothearcy 3 years ago
Obviously you haven't read anything he has written in the past 30 years. He has constantly made the link between private concentrations of capital and policy. In fact he has said exactly what you said, that
"In the US, the political system is a very marginal affair. There are two parties, so-called, but they're really factions of the same party, the Business Party. Both represent some range of business interests." -- feb. 1990 interview with Adam Jones
Chomskyan 3 years ago 4
as an aide, but its 80 % talk on the actions of the evil puppets, every president is bad, for so and so reasons, (he's right) but verylittle aalysis of the underlying economic structure except in general terms, and consistenly pro Un , as it that would be an adequate replacement for the evils of the us. if chonsky did not exist, the corporations would have to invent him. as he says, this is institutional economics, not conspiracy.
Ecothearcy 3 years ago
Can you cite a source on this 80% of the talks? Is it your imagination?
It's true he primarily focuses on US foreign policy, because it happens to be quite destructive and urgent, and something the wider public can curb without having to be completely radicalized. But certainly he has talked extensively about the economic connections, and wider social change, possibilities for a more participatory society, his libertarian socialism, etc. Maybe you should take a wider sample.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
hisManufacturing consent is excellent on this and on how information control is achieved without a top down military like hierarchy censor. this is his most important contribution. He, imo, completely ignores the role of other soft power, and the destructive impact of the liberal free trade system social agenda. I think he ignores this because in his mind, UN mandated family planning , coercve even, is ok. typical new york liberal thinking of his generation. just 1 exampl, others outthere.
Ecothearcy 3 years ago
@Chomskyan Do you think for yourself or are so besotted with the blathering of an MIT professor of linguistics? Don't bother replying or blocking me, I already blocked you.
QRF11B 4 weeks ago
I have found that most people who take a differant out-look other than professor Chomsky havn't a clue what they are saying,alot of the people just have diarrhea of the mouth.But it free speech .
k9a2g6 3 years ago
Who is the dumb bitch asking the questions? I feel sorry for Chomsky
oliver556 3 years ago
Who are you? Noam didn't have a problem with it, why should you?
Chomskyan 3 years ago
Need a transcript ....
jmorg1 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
who the hell like made the like decision to like allow this dumb college freshman to speak with this man?!
mm-hmm, mm-hmmm, yeah, mmm-hmm...
sideshow999 3 years ago
Noam made the decision himself, because he is not a judgmental douchbag like you are in this comment.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
Comment removed
sideshow999 3 years ago
yes, i am judgmental of people who like use the word like twelve times in like a sentence. in front of the linguist chomsky of all people. i felt embarrassed for her douchebaggery as should you mr. douchebag chomskyan. take it personal why don't ya.
sideshow999 3 years ago
Notice I didn't call you a douchbag, I don't even know you. I just said you were a judgmental douchbag IN THIS COMMENT.
Noam talks to anyone because he has no need to be a stereotypical "intellectual" who thinks their time is too valuable for "the little people." And he's always been accessible to interested people, from high school students to head of states, to preeminent scholars.
Take it or leave it. If you think you can do better, write Noam and arrange something.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
Well, I am saying this interviewer sucked. That is all. The original question was rhetorical. Take it or leave it.
Now i am calling you a douchebag in these comments and in general. Do you have anything in your life that is not "chomskyan"?
Take it easy pal.
sideshow999 3 years ago
hahaha
If that's how you feel, that's cool. I think its more a reflection on your (lack) of character.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
look. to be honest, i'm glad the interview is posted here. the interviewer was a distracting nuisance. i appreciate you defending your buddies, but jeesus man don't take it personal. maybe get a life?
sideshow999 3 years ago
Day 8 of the Obama Administration: Obama is now the Third Bush Administration with regard to Middle Eastern foreign policy. He's also as principled as a Nazi officer after Stalingrad.
I'll see you in six months, once actions speak louder than these "week" words.
Lensei 3 years ago
God Bless Chomsky
MahmoudGad85 3 years ago 12
Hey guys, Julia here, I'm going to post the entire transcript of our interview on my blog very soon, so don't sweat about the audio being too soft. I'll ask Charngchi/"Chomskyan" to put the link in the box once I'm finished.
juliaisafilmbuff123 3 years ago
that's good, you know that could also be added as annotations into this video. I think someone else mentioned that too.
representativepress 3 years ago 2
Julia, wow, you got to interview Chomsky! I am so jealous, but thanks so much for speaking out about the horrible injustice that is going on. I like your keffiyah, I just got mine yesterday.
n8glenn 3 years ago
Julia You Rock
Love,
PAKISTAN
shahabimbad 3 years ago
Great interview, Julia. Can't wait for the transcript. Will there be extra material not found on the videos?
Xenu 3 years ago
The world can't afford to have a dead Chomsky.
lionofthejungle 3 years ago 4
Shut up! don't say that!
Faanat 3 years ago
Faanat , I know what you mean, I don't even want to think about that. BTW, please subscribe to my channel, more Chomsky videos on the way.
representativepress 3 years ago 2
Ok, done.
Faanat 3 years ago
"...with the notion of speaking truth to power, as if you had anything to tell power that power was not already aware of. You speak truth to people, not to power."
irkone 3 years ago
Thanks for posting this. I wish the audio was better, even with headphones it is too much static.
saadasim 3 years ago
dude I would be pissed if my last name is "Pitt"
damasgate 3 years ago
Hi,
Representative Press has featured bits of this video on his latest video, if you want to see.
;)
CapitalistHolocaust 3 years ago
Great Talk Professor:)
TheToltec 3 years ago 2
Thanks for offering Professor Chomsky the chance to speak truth to power for....well, the umpteenth time. And may he, like Pete Seeger in a different way, have a vigorous and activist old age.
robtran 3 years ago
Bad audio. Can't hear anything.
KamratMattis 3 years ago
Try some headphones.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
CSUN rocks thats my hometown
dongster1 3 years ago
with headphones neither!
liquidus2172 3 years ago
His devotion is not to the Right or the Left but only to the truth.. A great man
tustari 3 years ago 6
Chomsky breaking through the hype and laying it down once again he puts everything into perspective once again . Judging by the hawkish tone of Obama`s inaugeration speech a air of peace with a threat of menace a silk glove with a nuckle duster in it there will be very little of that change he talks so much about .
ice9001 3 years ago 3
interviewer: prepare your questions in advance and read them out.. get rid of the "um, like, kinda"s! youre not interviewing him on msn or for teenbeat!
menikmati789 3 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Noam is wrong on one thing here. When Obama said that the Iraq war was a strategic blunder, he didn't mean it, literally. Chomsky, correctly, points out the flaw in Obama's word choice, but he assigns acquiescence when there was none. If Chomsky had listened to what Obama was saying throughout the campaign, and the statements he made before he was elected to the US Senate, he'd see that Obama was opposed to the war itself, not just the strategy behind it.
weezer543 3 years ago
I would expect a quotation of Obama where he says that the war against iraq "is against international laws" or "highly immoral and sick". This would be principal opposition.
Saying "we can't fight this war, because we need more power to fight against other countries (we devasted before)" is not opposition, but just a different strategy of how to be imperialistic. Dont forget: Every break of the UN-Charter is a break against your own constitution.
Greetings
Staubdumm 3 years ago 8
yep
trycoun 3 years ago
Is that why he voted to fund the war after he became senator? Is that why he & his PAC campaiged for & supported Lieberman against his anti-war Democratic opponent for re-election? Is that why he voted to confirm Bush's pro-war cabinet nominations & why he's selected nothing but pro-war hawks for his cabinet? Bill Clinton was correct when he called Obama's alleged anti-war record a "fairy tale." With the exception of 1 speech he gave before an anti-war constituency right before seeking office.
Xenu 3 years ago
Some of these decisions were clearly political. And principles take a back seat to politics very frequently. I agree with you, I don't get his support for Lieberman, but he was only in the Senate for 3 yrs at the time; maybe he was looking to make friends and not waves. He should've voted "no" on Bush's nominees just on principle. But it seems like he was trying to judge these candidates on their merits/competence (?), since the ideological battle had already been lost after the 2004 election
weezer543 3 years ago
Re: Clinton. He was correct in what he said, but the media intentionally misinterpreted it. Bill's real foot-in-mouth moment was in South Carolina as you remember. It's too late to look back, but Hillary had this thing in the bag and lost it. I was for Edwards since early on, but it didn't work out. Obama is far from perfect, but... I'd rather have him in the White House than Abe Simpson and the Church Lady.
weezer543 3 years ago
Sometimes is very hard to be against everibody. These days after all the propaganda against palestines then it is very courougeous for a jewish american man to be against the insanities of the israeli state. Brave man
luclark 3 years ago 6
I don't get why Chomsky - an anarchist - would want to see a Palestinian state created. But whatever, nice interview.
MarxBakuninMe 3 years ago
Because of its immediate consequences, which would be ending an occupation by a more repressive state.
A consistent anarchist should be able to hold both short-term goals and long term commitments. And at times they may appear contradictory.
It's the same with his "support" for state-run social programs: without non-hierarchical alternative institutions, dismantling parts of the state structures would strengthen private concentrations of wealth, which does not contribute to anarchist goals.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Kirk Orbugock has exposed Noam Chomsky as a "Dog Walker" supporter.
ShittyMcBalls 3 years ago
man, he's sounding pretty rough these days.
solvealways 3 years ago
Great to have some new Chomsky, thanks very much for this. His recent talk on Gaza was amazing, he was very much back on form. Afraid I have to agree with previous comments about the interviewer. Also - hate to criticise, but it seems such a waste to make Noam repeat stuff he's said very recently. Some quick research into his recent talks would mean you could ensure you ask new questions and thus get new insights from the great man. There are a million things I could think of asking.
icedoutstreetgangsta 3 years ago 4
I did not conduct the interview, so your critique is misplaced. I helped the girl set up the interview and I taped it. She did it for her student newspaper and for the chance to meet him.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
I wasn't criticising you.
icedoutstreetgangsta 3 years ago
RIP carol chomsky. i hope dr chomsky is doing well.
shankyxyz 3 years ago 3
Ahhh man. He looks so fragile.
I don't think I would want to live in a world that lacks a Noam Chomsky.
Come on professor. Just live for another 50+ years. After I die, feel free.
poyani 3 years ago 11
i second that
rodeo179 3 years ago 4
I feel the same way. He is getting up in the years. I can't imagine a world without him.
Nickalispicalis 3 years ago 4
It is sad to see him so broken up because of his loss. And it would be very sad the day he leaves us. But it just means we need to take on more of the responsibility, carry on his work collectively.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
Chomskyan, hello, thanks for all your efforts. This man has meant the world to me so if I can help you in anyway please don't hesitate to ask me.
Marly61 3 years ago
Hi Marly, thanks. He means a lot to me as well.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
I'm happy to see another interview, although I'm sad to see him in the condition that he's in.
Irtidad 3 years ago 5
lol she's obviously very excited to be talking to chomsky, I'm not surprised she's nervous :P
lGnossos 3 years ago 3
perfect
EngineeringMath 3 years ago
For future reference to the lovely interviewer in this video, if you're giving a recorded interview with someone, just nod when they are answering. Don't constantly mumble "uh huh, huh, yeah, uh huh, mm hmm, yeah, yeah, mm hmm, uh huh, uh huh, yeah, uh huh" while the interviewee is speaking.
t0kt0k 3 years ago
I have to agree 100% with your comment.
Her over use of the word "like" was another sore spot for me.
Listening to Chomsky was, as always, interesting but the young woman really should have been quiet and allowed him to speak, he didn't need her constant, and annoying, affirmations.
Version25 3 years ago 2
I agree that it was annoying, but you can't get angry at her for it.
She is more or less an average person whose verbal skill can't be compared to Chomsky's, the greatest linguist of the English language.
paganiniGOGO 2 years ago
The interviewer is a bit annoying, getting in the way of the answers. But that's to be expected. I'm glad the interview happened anyway.
t0kt0k 3 years ago 2
Hey take it easy, it was her first time interviewing anybody in her life. I thought she did fine.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
I guess she may have been a little nervous and overawed. I would've been too. Fair enough.
pw3uk 3 years ago 2
She did, but it's hard to hear Noam speak. It's just a little peeve I have, when interviewers mumble agreement while the interviewee is talking. I'm still glad she did the interview, and that you made it available. Thanks.
t0kt0k 3 years ago
he's not looking well
jtr3030 3 years ago 3
His wife just passed away.
Xenu 3 years ago 9
He's 80 years old.
EGarrett01 3 years ago 6
I hope he makes it we certainly need him.
Puckle74 3 years ago 11
His assistant told me he is not doing well with his wife's passing. Also he told us he received a call at 4 am that morning saying that "the Zionists will come and kill you."
Otherwise he seems okay.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
I didn't realize you did the interview. How does one go about interviewing someone like Noam?
jtr3030 3 years ago
Julia sought me out and asked me to help, I just emailed him about it and he agreed to meet with her, then we set up a time with his assistant.
Chomskyan 3 years ago
I have some problems hearing him. :/
Anarkokommunist 3 years ago 2
¥T
TRUTHINLIEZ 3 years ago