Chomsky never supported the Khmer Rouge. It's true that he was initially skeptical of the killing fields in Cambodia, but if you've read Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell", you'd know that he was by no means alone. So did many members of the US gov't and many others. He has since not only acknowledged them, but bitterly condemned them (in the Manufacturing Consent documentary and in a variety of interviews).
@BloggerMusicMan i don't understand how ppl misinterpret chomsky's positions on these things. his entire point is about hypocrisy. he doesn;t ignore the khmer rouge, in fact, he says we ought to treat the atrocities we "support" with just as much outrage as you would for ones we easily villify, like the communist khmer rouge
I think some people understand and merely disagree that the atrocities of our own support are comparable to those committed by official enemies. While I highly disagree with this view, there can at least be discussion here. I also don't know how most people can misinterpret Chomsky's analysis, as it's as crystal clear as it gets. I think most people are just ignorant and haven't taken the time to seriously look into his views, some just try to use smear tactics.
Hmmm - you might think that he [Trivers, I assume] sounds like an "idiot". But this "guy" [Trivers] is one of the most important scholars in all of ethology. And perhaps even for the social sciences.
what i love is how these two men bluffing off about how knowledgable they are on the subjects while discussing just this. i strongly wonder if they are noticing this irony or not...
@lygophile You sir are an idiot. These two scholars are among the most knowledgeable people on this planet. Now man may not be very knowledgeable in general but among men these are two of the most informed.
@1JPC1. uhm.. i think you missed my point entirely. i'm didn't call them ignorant, i'm just drawing a comparison between their behavior to one another, and their topic of conversation.
Robert Trivers wrote the forward to the first edition of Richard Dawkins' "the selfish gene". Dawkins claims that this is where Trivers chose to "announce to the world a brilliant new idea, his theory of the evolution of self-deception." Here is a quote: "Thus the conventional view that natural selection favours nervous systems which produce ever more accurate images of the world must be a very naive view of mental evolution".
This Jewish cancer must be destroyed at the root. These foul creatures must be rounded up, deloused, and have their still-beating hearts ripped out from their chests!
@Dogar230 Yeah, but he has an ideal partner for this in Robert Trivers, since he's also very outspoken about social and political issues, particularly in respect to the United States. So this could very easily have turned into a political debate (of course near the end it displays signals of doing just that) :) And they are actually two of the few whose political commentary interests me, particularly in that constellation.
Comment removed
pathoplastic2 3 months ago
This is great, Chomsky kind of sounds like me when I'm talking with teachers :P
CartoonDiablo9 4 months ago
i have never seen chomsky listen to someone else educate him, that's awesome lol
ThePatcam 5 months ago
@ThePatcam Haha. He knows everything.
blackprincess82 4 months ago
2:40 digging Trivers dating advice
munkdo3 6 months ago
Why doesn't chomsky choose an example from his own past. Perhaps, Camur Rouge good, capitalists bad.
Hypatia1951 9 months ago
@Hypatia1951
Chomsky never supported the Khmer Rouge. It's true that he was initially skeptical of the killing fields in Cambodia, but if you've read Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell", you'd know that he was by no means alone. So did many members of the US gov't and many others. He has since not only acknowledged them, but bitterly condemned them (in the Manufacturing Consent documentary and in a variety of interviews).
BloggerMusicMan 7 months ago
@BloggerMusicMan i don't understand how ppl misinterpret chomsky's positions on these things. his entire point is about hypocrisy. he doesn;t ignore the khmer rouge, in fact, he says we ought to treat the atrocities we "support" with just as much outrage as you would for ones we easily villify, like the communist khmer rouge
ThePatcam 5 months ago 2
@ThePatcam
I think some people understand and merely disagree that the atrocities of our own support are comparable to those committed by official enemies. While I highly disagree with this view, there can at least be discussion here. I also don't know how most people can misinterpret Chomsky's analysis, as it's as crystal clear as it gets. I think most people are just ignorant and haven't taken the time to seriously look into his views, some just try to use smear tactics.
BloggerMusicMan 5 months ago
Amazing thanks for putting this up
TheALPH4 10 months ago
Where is the rest?
PsySwitch1983 1 year ago
love it
BobSlydell100 1 year ago
Hmmm - you might think that he [Trivers, I assume] sounds like an "idiot". But this "guy" [Trivers] is one of the most important scholars in all of ethology. And perhaps even for the social sciences.
PeterEsq77 1 year ago
this guy sounds like an idiot
yourmajezty 1 year ago
@yourmajezty
Look in the mirror for the real idiot.
watayapupuya 10 months ago
what i love is how these two men bluffing off about how knowledgable they are on the subjects while discussing just this. i strongly wonder if they are noticing this irony or not...
it's all very interesting.
lygophile 1 year ago
@lygophile You sir are an idiot. These two scholars are among the most knowledgeable people on this planet. Now man may not be very knowledgeable in general but among men these are two of the most informed.
1JPC1 1 year ago
@1JPC1. uhm.. i think you missed my point entirely. i'm didn't call them ignorant, i'm just drawing a comparison between their behavior to one another, and their topic of conversation.
lygophile 1 year ago
@lygophile
Bluffing off? How so?
brightsuperstition 1 year ago
Thanks for posting this, really interesting.
pazomblez 1 year ago
Robert Trivers wrote the forward to the first edition of Richard Dawkins' "the selfish gene". Dawkins claims that this is where Trivers chose to "announce to the world a brilliant new idea, his theory of the evolution of self-deception." Here is a quote: "Thus the conventional view that natural selection favours nervous systems which produce ever more accurate images of the world must be a very naive view of mental evolution".
dappercad 1 year ago
i need this 4 my presentation:)
MultiSpongebob12345 2 years ago
in the land'o china they dont go to church.....mama always said life's a box'a choch'lets
dirtyharree 2 years ago
ain't got not street cred son!
PlasticJesus341 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
This Jewish cancer must be destroyed at the root. These foul creatures must be rounded up, deloused, and have their still-beating hearts ripped out from their chests!
AnonymousWhitePerson 2 years ago
stop being a fool.
rolpho 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Could you do me a favour, good chap? Could you shit down my throat just once? I promise to drink every last delicious drop. I swear of it.
AnonymousWhitePerson 2 years ago
haha, I get it now.
rolpho 2 years ago
Fun discussion, thanks for posting!
swynhyrde 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Your comments thus far are racially inferior to mine own.
AnonymousWhitePerson 2 years ago
Rofl I love Chomsky, it's like he can't NOT divert the conversation towards the ills of the US.
Dogar230 3 years ago 25
Chomsky seemed a little off topic with that comment.
modernmariorc 3 years ago 3
@Dogar230 what do you expect from two people in different fields with different expertise? they will try to relate to each other with what they know.
ieruybvke 1 year ago
@ieruybvke
Hmm. Fair Enough.
Dogar230 1 year ago
@Dogar230 Yeah, but he has an ideal partner for this in Robert Trivers, since he's also very outspoken about social and political issues, particularly in respect to the United States. So this could very easily have turned into a political debate (of course near the end it displays signals of doing just that) :) And they are actually two of the few whose political commentary interests me, particularly in that constellation.
noparadigm 1 year ago
Very informative. Thanks for posting.
graaaaaagh 3 years ago 12