Professor Noam Chomsky Lectures Leftists on Why They Should Vote for Neo-Liberal, Imperial War Hawk Hillary Clinton

Posted: August 16, 2016 in Uncategorized

*
*
Leaves me wondering who paid Chomsky to write the article. Who exactly is he working for?

Counter Information

Global Research, August 15, 2016
noam-chomsky-400x226

In an article worthy of the convoluted and deceptive logic of the New York Times that he is so fond of criticizing, Noam Chomsky, together with John Halle, has published a piece on his website shilling for the election of Hillary Clinton.  “An Eight Point Brief for LEV (Lesser Evil Voting)” also comes with a most unusual addendum: “Note: Professor Chomsky requests that he not be contacted with responses to this piece.”

Since personal responses have been ruled out, I will respond in this public forum.

Chomsky begins by writing that “presidential elections continue to pose a dilemma for the left in that any form of participation or non-participation appears to impose a significant cost on our capacity to develop a serious opposition to the corporate agenda served by establishment politicians.”  Meaning: there’s a price to pay for voting or not voting – at…

View original post 767 more words

Comments
  1. PeaceFrog says:

    “One of these candidates, Trump, denies the existence of global warming, calls for increasing use of fossil fuels, dismantling of environmental regulations and refuses assistance to India and other developing nations as called for in the Paris agreement, the combination of which could, in four years, take us to a catastrophic tipping point. Trump has also pledged to deport 11 million Mexican immigrants, offered to provide for the defense of supporters who have assaulted African American protestors at his rallies, stated his “openness to using nuclear weapons”, supports a ban on Muslims entering the U.S. and regards “the police in this country as absolutely mistreated and misunderstood” while having “done an unbelievable job of keeping law and order.” Trump has also pledged to increase military spending while cutting taxes on the rich, hence shredding what remains of the social welfare “safety net” despite pretenses.”

    https://chomsky.info/an-eight-point-brief-for-lev-lesser-evil-voting/

    He could have added to Trump’s highly questionable stances, his proposed ban on Muslim immigration ‘until we know what to do with them”.

    I have to say that this is not that bad for a conformist intellectual. Remember, the beloved pink baby diaper, Ralph Nader, took enough votes from Gore to hand Bush Florida. Nader, effectively (along with Diebold, Republican “elves”, and overt collaborators) became a useful idiot for installing the most reactionary Administration in modern U.S. history. He also makes a good point about the externalities (an economic concept) of voting your conscious.

    • I think you put it exactly right Peace Frog – Chomsky is a conformist intellectual – and not a dissident anarchist as he portrays himself to be. He’s also the main gatekeeper (as you point out below) shaming the left into rejecting the notion that the CIA and FBI played any role in 9-11 or the assassination of JFK, RFK or Martin Luther King.

      I think Greg Palast and Bev Harris (who founded Black Box Voting) would disagree with you on what happened in Florida.

  2. sojourner says:

    I’ve read some scathing articles about Chomsky, and how he has sold out.

    Another idol bites the dust. They always do, sooner or later.

    • To be honest, sojourner, I never saw fit to join Chomsky’s claque. I don’t know if you’ve read any of his books. They’re very difficult to get through because so little is new or original. It tends to be a general rehashing of other people’s research.

  3. gerry campeau says:

    Its interesting how the JFK assassination research group has ganged up on Chomsky that i’m begging to wonder about there motives too. The left seamless change from supporting Sanders to Clinton as lesser Evil makes me wonder.

    • I think the main beef assassination researchers have with Chomsky is that he dismisses their work out of hand without even looking at it. The US intelligence industrial complex clearly plays a preeminent role in both US domestic and foreign policy – to dismiss this reality isn’t rational – unless someone is making it worth your while to take this position.

  4. PeaceFrog says:

    Comsky is full of it on JFK and 9/11. In my opinion, he is mainly a gatekeeper. Nevertheless, this particular piece, as well as many others he has written are good.

  5. berlioz1935 says:

    Voting really is a numbers game. Perhaps Chomsky realises, that a vote not for Hillary, in reality, is a vote for Donald Trump.

    Hillary Clinton is the establishment and people are being sick of being manipulated by the
    establishment.

    But being against the establishment does not give you much choice.

    It seems to be beyond the intellectual capacity of the majority of the American voters to vote for Jill Stein. It must have been hard for Chomsky to reject purity in favour of security. But this is the choice the voters have in the United States; no choice at all.

    Just for a moment, imagine a President Jill Stein. What will happen? The establishment will create chaos, the military / industrial complex would go berserk. The smart voters (Chomsky and others) know that.

    I can see dark clouds only on the horizon.

    • To be honest, I think electing Clinton will result in riots in the streets. Both the dissident left (under Saunders) and the dissident right are extremely well organized around Clinton’s criminal activity and the DNC vote rigging (with several major lawsuits in the courts). This time these mass organizations are far too angry to simply go away after election day – and there have already been successful instances of them uniting against Obama (eg on TPPA and Syria).

  6. As an admirer of the work of Noam Chomsky, I was very disappointed on his turnaround.

  7. lazycat1984 says:

    Chomsky’s entire frame of reference was focused on the period from the 30s to the 50s when he was young. At that time, labor was organized and powerful, the USSR, even if it was loathed by anarchists and Trotskyists was still an example that an alternative to bourgouis capitalism was possible. (Of course so was National Socialist Germany and Fascist Japan and Italy) There was a palpable expectation that the world ruled over by bankers and business oligarchs that had come about in the wake of the French Revolution was doomed. Chomsky really seems to think there’s going to be a time when all this solidarity will be relived.Which doesn’t seem very likely. The neoliberal elite, exemplified by Clinton and her masters like Soros and Dimon and the whole globalist intelligentsia form the core of a breakaway civilization.

    The last time we had an tiny international elite of sociopathic individuals surrounded by paid mercenaries it was called feudal western Europe. The vicious slave based civilization of Rome was replaced by Germanic warlords who ruled a peasantry to traded their liberty for some degree of physical protection from the depradation of other Germanic warlords or Arab slavers. I don’t see any way to avoid this. As Mao famously said, all power grows from the barrel of a gun. And the people wielding the guns are not inclined to reset the balance and restore the Republic.

    • berlioz1935 says:

      Sad and true at the same time. We live at a time in which the enlightenment has been totally forgotten. Dark clouds are indeed gathering. The dance around the golden calf is in full swing and the neo-liberals are playing the tune.

  8. Excellent analysis, lazycat. For the most part, I agree with it. However I also believe we’re in a period of resource scarcity at the moment – everything (oil, energy, water, topsoil, nitrates, posphates) is becoming more scarce. I agree with Richard Heinberg that without fossil fuels the enormous empires and nation states we have now won’t be possible – just because transportation and communication over long distances will be impossible. Without cheap energy, the whole world is doomed to split up into small regional entities – in other words we’ll be back to the Middle Ages again.

    In other words, the winding up of our current period of militarism and empire building (which David Graeber talks about in Debt: the First 5000 years https://stuartjeannebramhall.com/2016/08/15/the-hidden-history-of-money-debt-and-organized-religion/) is inevitable. I guess the whole question is whether this happens fast or slow and how many human casualties it will produce.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s