Noam Chomsky is a widely known intellectual, political, activist, and critic of the foreign policy of the Government of the of the United States and other governments. Noam Chomsky describes himself as a libertarian socialist, a sympathizer of anarcho-syndicalism, and is considered to be a key intellectual figure within the Left wing of American politics.
Libertarian Socialist- Is a group of political philosophies that aim to create a society without political, economic or social hierarchies – a society in which all violent or coercive institutions would be dissolved, and in their place every person would have free, equal access to tools of information and production, or a society in which such coercive institutions and hierarchies were drastically reduced in scope.
This equality and freedom would be achieved through the abolition of authoritarian institutions and private property, in order that direct control of the means of production and resources will be gained by the working class and society as a whole. He’s a commie!
Anarcho-syndicalism -Is a branch of anarchism which focuses on the labour movement. Syndicalisme is a French word meaning “trade unionism” – hence, the “syndicalism” qualification. Anarcho-syndicalists view labour unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the State with a new society democratically self-managed by workers. He’s a commie!
Left wing- Comprise those who prioritise (social) equality as a political end, in opposition to the right-wing who view this end (especially when accompanied by an increase in the power of the State) as a threat to individual/family/civil society liberties, and/or the continuance of inherited traditions. In general, the left-wing advocate a secular multicultural society. The term has been associated, in varying degrees, with Social liberalism (as opposed to Classical), American Liberalism and Canadian Liberalism, some forms of Populism and Deconstructive Unitarianism, Social Democracy, Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Syndicalism, Communalism, Communitarianism, Libertarian Socialism, Anarchism, Left-Libertarianism, Anti-colonialism, Green Politics, Progressivism, and the Religious Left. He’s a commie!
He’s a commie, no wonder the red flag waivers at Panhandle Правда Squad , think him fascinating! I hear he has a commie video out there somewhere. Here is someone else about as fascinating as Chomsky I’m sure they will love. Same mentality at least.
He’s a commie, no wonder the red flag waivers at Panhandle Правда Squad , think him fascinating!
Maybe they confused him with Nim Chimpsky.
My first exposure to Noam Chomsky was in the field of linguistics while pursuing my Master’s Degree in Teaching Foreign Language (MA/TFL) at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. One of his more interesting theories was the concept of the the Language Acquistion Device (or LAD for short). According to Chomsky, humans are “hard-wired” with the ability to deduce the grammar of their native languages by mere exposure (i.e. without having to cognitively learn a set of grammar rules). The LAD also enables humans to acquire additional languages with native fluency, at least up to the end of the “critical period” (believed to be around puberty). Applied linguist Stephen Krashen expanded on Chomsky’s work and developed a methodology for teaching languages whereby students “acquired” the language through exposure to “comprehensible input,” as opposed to “learning” the language through a lot of memorization and repitition.
Sadly, Chomsky assumed that because he was a pretty smart guy in one field, he could spout off about politics and appear equally as erudite. Even more sadly, leftists who don’t know a thing about his linguistic theories have fallen for his political nonsense.
In my humble opinion, Noam Chomsky holding himself out as an expert on “anarcho-syndicalism” makes about as much sense as Stalin theorizing about linguistics.
Maybe they confused him with Nim Chimpsky.
LOL! I guess in a way all lib behavior might well be considered, “chimp like”, as it is primarily emotion driven.
I followed out some of the links to linguistics as I was researching this post. You and many others certainly have more understanding and ability to use language properly than I do. But still it is mind boggling to me how complicated the subject is.
For instance if Noam Chompsky came up to me and said, “humans are “hard-wired” with the ability to deduce the grammar of their native languages by mere exposure”, my response would be, “duh” how much money and how long did it take you to figure out that bit of genius?
If he followed that by saying, “the LAD also enables humans to acquire additional languages with native fluency, at least up to the end of the “critical period” (believed to be around puberty)”. Again my response would be, “duh”. (hard to teach old dogs new tricks)
I remember back when I was stationed in the Philippines, going to houses for party’s or what ever of mixed couples (American men Filipino wives) on base. I would watch with both humor and fascination, the young kids (4 to 5) of these couples interact. They would speak in both languages seeming to pick the easiest word for what ever they were talking about. And each would understand with out thought. It was like a brand new language. That was while over there. Once back in the states some of the people ended up on the same base as me. Once in the states and as the kids got older they spoke all English.
I went to an on base school teaching Tagalog the primary dialect and National language of the Philippines, and got little out of it. The intensive memorization was just not my style. But through daily interaction with the people, I picked up a pretty good working knowledge of the language. I understood more than I could speak, never quite understood why that was. It still took allot of effort on my part.
Anyway some of the stuff I followed out in the links is fascinating. I’ve looked hard for years at the evolution of language as it applies to archeology. All language must be related, and should trace back to single source in my mind. Now that DNA is playing such a large role I don’t look at it so much anymore.
Anyway, as you said, Chimpsky and all the red flag waiving chumpskies at PTS, should stick to what they know best. They suck when it comes to politics and reality. As much as they and even myself might wish it, Nirvana, and Shangri-La, will never exist, no matter how hard they try to legislate their emotional desires into reality.