pouter keg
Noam Chomsky is coming to the University of Arizona next month to give two lectures, one on linguistics and the other on education. Today the U. of A. shared an article about those two speaking engagements on its Facebook page. For the most part comments on the article remained civil, but there were two bottom-feeders who felt the need to share their disapproval. The first wrote, "Sooo now we're calling communists 'one of the most important philosophers of our time'..I'm embarrassed for U of A!!" Her identification of Chomsky as a communist made about as much sense as her grammar. I explained that Chomsky is a libertarian socialist and added that he's been repeatedly critical of communists. I offered the essay "Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship" (in American Power and the New Mandarins) as an example--that is, if she cared to do her homework before calling Chomsky a communist. I'm sure she headed to the nearest library shortly thereafter.
The second bottom-feeder had slightly better grammar, if you can ignore the accidental repetition of a word and the fact that he makes mainstream and viewpoints into two words each: "There are no doubts that he has contributed greatly to the field of linguistics, but his political views are so are [sic] out of the main stream of US politics as to be irrelevant. I trust the school will be bringing in other speakers with opposing view points at a later date to provide their views." Not wanting to be a troll, I left that bottom-feeder alone. Had I not been so inhibited, I would have told him that Chomsky actually fits quite well into the mainstream--that is, as long as we drop the qualifier "of US politics" and look instead at the mainstream of international politics. He has been repeatedly critical of America's disregard for international law and its nearly isolated contrary positions on countless UN resolutions. (Thankfully the U.S. has been able to count on Israel and the occasional Pacific atoll to keep it from being completely isolated in its stances against the international mainstream.) I wish I could say that the mainstream of U.S. politics is so out of the international mainstream as to be irrelevant. Unfortunately, the U.S. pours an enormous amount of its wealth into a military that is beyond the wildest dreams of any past empire; that military makes sure that whatever is on the U.S. agenda, no matter how fringe by international standards, remains very relevant.
Perhaps I should have countered with a question of my own: did this bottom-feeder find it discordant when, around this time last year, the U. of A. appointed George H. W. Bush as an honorary chair for its National Institute for Civil Discourse? As I wrote then in reaction,With a...lack of shame and remorse, George H. W. Bush famously declared, on August 2, 1988, "I will never apologize for the United States--I don't care what the facts are." The facts were that U.S. missiles had shot down an Iranian civilian flight on July 3, 1988, killing the 290 passengers and crew aboard the flight. And who can forget how he poisoned Iraq with depleted uranium weaponry, or how, as Vice President, he served in the administration that the World Court found guilty for military and paramilitary actions against Nicaragua?
If that passed with little comment, I think Chomsky's lecture should as well. Conservatives saw an honor bestowed on their monstrous sociopath. The least they can do is let a tireless critic of monstrous sociopaths have a couple of hours in Centennial Hall.
Speaking of Chomsky, locakitty gave me a CD collection of his recorded speeches for my birthday, which was a ridiculously great gift. I've been listening to the CDs while driving, cleaning, and eating.
The second bottom-feeder had slightly better grammar, if you can ignore the accidental repetition of a word and the fact that he makes mainstream and viewpoints into two words each: "There are no doubts that he has contributed greatly to the field of linguistics, but his political views are so are [sic] out of the main stream of US politics as to be irrelevant. I trust the school will be bringing in other speakers with opposing view points at a later date to provide their views." Not wanting to be a troll, I left that bottom-feeder alone. Had I not been so inhibited, I would have told him that Chomsky actually fits quite well into the mainstream--that is, as long as we drop the qualifier "of US politics" and look instead at the mainstream of international politics. He has been repeatedly critical of America's disregard for international law and its nearly isolated contrary positions on countless UN resolutions. (Thankfully the U.S. has been able to count on Israel and the occasional Pacific atoll to keep it from being completely isolated in its stances against the international mainstream.) I wish I could say that the mainstream of U.S. politics is so out of the international mainstream as to be irrelevant. Unfortunately, the U.S. pours an enormous amount of its wealth into a military that is beyond the wildest dreams of any past empire; that military makes sure that whatever is on the U.S. agenda, no matter how fringe by international standards, remains very relevant.
Perhaps I should have countered with a question of my own: did this bottom-feeder find it discordant when, around this time last year, the U. of A. appointed George H. W. Bush as an honorary chair for its National Institute for Civil Discourse? As I wrote then in reaction,With a...lack of shame and remorse, George H. W. Bush famously declared, on August 2, 1988, "I will never apologize for the United States--I don't care what the facts are." The facts were that U.S. missiles had shot down an Iranian civilian flight on July 3, 1988, killing the 290 passengers and crew aboard the flight. And who can forget how he poisoned Iraq with depleted uranium weaponry, or how, as Vice President, he served in the administration that the World Court found guilty for military and paramilitary actions against Nicaragua?
If that passed with little comment, I think Chomsky's lecture should as well. Conservatives saw an honor bestowed on their monstrous sociopath. The least they can do is let a tireless critic of monstrous sociopaths have a couple of hours in Centennial Hall.
Speaking of Chomsky, locakitty gave me a CD collection of his recorded speeches for my birthday, which was a ridiculously great gift. I've been listening to the CDs while driving, cleaning, and eating.