The answer to the question at 1:12:52 was so painfully true, especially this part: "The people who really have power in this country would not want the state to be powerful enough to go after people like me, because, if so, they would go after people like them." Great speech.
@@Numidium_ The state, who ultimately do not hold the power (he who holds the money holds the power) are pressured and cajoled into making decisions that benefit the powerful. This means that the powerful need the state to be subservient to them. In Chomsky's statement he makes the claim that if the state was truly powerful enough to silence and imprison dissenters like himself, that would make the state powerful in their own right, and they may want to exert that power on THEIR masters (the money holders). It is better for the powerful that the state appears strong but really has no teeth.
@@contentsniffer :: What makes Chomsky think that The State would turn against its benefactors ? That would mean a Revolution, at least a rebellion against the Capitalists & their interest & Capitalism. As you pointed out, they want the State to appear strong but w / no "teeth". I think your last comment is the main reason Republicans are always pushing for "smaller" / "less" Government. Public grievances would have no place to go if the Government is weak in regard to supporting Public interest & powerful enough to push through bailouts / tax-cuts & public subsidies of the rich.
Chomsky, ironically, is the greatest patriot of our time. Any human who seeks to and dedicates many years of his life to point out our discretions is a man who cares about our country being true to our values.
IF you define, ' patriot ', as a Linguistics Professor, with ZERO Real World Experience in ANY other field, and whose criticisms of others all have the great luxury of 20/20 Hindsight, rendering them all essentially worthless- -Then yes, Chomsky is a, ' patriot '. Smh
@@mck1972 He holds expertise and scholarship in many fields (just look at his background in education) his preferred area of study is linguistics as you say and apparently he is responsible for a complete reformation in how it is analysed. From my own layman understanding, it seems that a marriage of philosophy and language has led to "the right questions" being asked. As for the 20/20 hindsight, you need to check some dates. Chomsky often speaks out as atrocities are taking place and often provides rundowns of all the known scholarship and data/research available at the time. This often later gets re-framed as apologism for said atrocities when new data comes out.
@@contentsniffer , I have never denied Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics. (I will leave aside the subject of Philosophy for the moment) Yet Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics is simply irrelevant to any other field outside Linguistics! Just as what Linguistics Professor Chomsky THINKS constitutes an, ‘ atrocity ‘, is also irrelevant! Examples of Chomsky exploiting Hindsight: th-cam.com/video/6mhj-j0z-fk/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/T6nvHFlR-sQ/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/T6nvHFlR-sQ/w-d-xo.html Which renders his, ‘ analysis ‘, of these fields essentially worthless! Moreover, Hindsight includes everything that has already happened, whether 50 years ago, or 10 minutes ago! In both cases, Chomsky is reacting to Policies enacted by others-Not himself! And so the Worse, ‘ atrocities ‘, that Chomsky THINKS that our Policy Makers have committed all these years, then the Worse this makes Chomsky himself look, for never seeking a Policy Making Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can do better! Instead of spending his life merely complaining from the sidelines, about fields that he has never had the guts to work in, nor accept responsibility for, himself!
@@mck1972 What the hell does a professor of linguistics know anyway? In most cases, you would be right. But this particular linguistics professor reads everything it seems. He is also advantaged by the fact that he has many people helping him analyse the news, so he gets to read most of that too. It doesn't mean the guy is correct all the time but it does mean he's worth listening to. Those clips you linked are flimsy examples of exploiting hindsight. When discussing complex issues it is very important to understand the historical basis, simply describing the history of a situation is not exploting hindsight. When you make this claim it seems you are saying "It doesn't matter what happened before, don't talk about it". As for him not seeking power in the US and playing that game of thrones, this does not preclude him from discussing matters of state. Also, all of this would imply that he had designs on power himself, and it is at least obvious to me that he consistently puts out the message that the systems of power appear to be unhealthy for us. Why would he seek power within it? So to be fair to you, I agree he ain't much of a patriot and it's silly to make the comparison but he is more of an expert than me and I'm guessing he is more of an expert than most people. The guy just talks about the documented evidence because the news is misleading depending on where you live.
@@contentsniffer , I’m not sure you are really getting my point here: Chomsky presumes to judge others in fields that he has never actually worked himself-Which is everything outside Linguistics-And with the luxury of already knowing the outcomes of the events in question-A great luxury which those whom Chomsky presumes to judge did not have at the time! So to use a sports analogy, this is the forensic equivalent of Chomsky watching video of last season’s NFL games, pointing out the losing teams’ mistakes, and then using that knowledge to judge the performance of the players and coaches on the field! Which makes Chomsky no more than a very intelligent sounding Monday Morning Armchair Quarterback! And renders his impressive sounding recitations of facts & figures essentially Worthless-Even If Accurate! So IF Chomsky can to do a better job than those whom he presumes to judge, then he should show that he can do it-Not just complain after the fact! Which anybody can do!
"i am not smart." Dont be so quick to put yourself down. You may or may not be measured as smart within the narrow domain of the system you live in, but all that tells you is something about your suitability to this system. That is something I know Chomsky agrees with. You need to follow your heart and your own creativity and you will be exceptional ithe domain of your own making, be it within the norms of the sytem or outside of them.
I hope it helps you to realise your potential, freedom and hapiness. Intelligence is a heavily misused idea, largely aimed at making people serfs of this planet destroying system. That isn't all that smart in my opinion. If you fail in the system it may be because you are predisposed to thrive in contravention of it, and very likely to the benefit of humanity and the planet. Diversity of thought is the route to our survival but the system drives uniformity. Be yourself and be happy :o)
What gives me hope is that they can't do it forever. sooner or later there will be an Allende that they can't overthrow and that hole in the armour will be it's undoing. Our job is to be ready and organized when the opportunity arises.
I feel more intelligent listening to Chomsky. As he explains, these are simple concepts which ought to be taught to schoolchildren in an actually free society. Some people, like Noam, have such a full understanding of a given subject that they can explain it simplistically and with sardono-comedic flair
Conspiracy Theorists, time to hold up your tin foil hats! Noam Chomsky is here, with more of his judgements of others, all after the fact! Yet some people still take this ridiculous old man seriously! SMH
@@MsMaggie926 either one of those "old conservatives" who on policy agree with Trump but just want things to be more courteous. A polite fascism if I dare say. -Or a liberal indoctrinated into the system of the U.S. corporate state, for she cannot see the world for he is blinded by his false pedestal away from reality.
The answer to the question at 1:12:52 was so painfully true, especially this part: "The people who really have power in this country would not want the state to be powerful enough to go after people like me, because, if so, they would go after people like them." Great speech.
TheDoubleBee I don’t get it
@@Numidium_ The state, who ultimately do not hold the power (he who holds the money holds the power) are pressured and cajoled into making decisions that benefit the powerful. This means that the powerful need the state to be subservient to them.
In Chomsky's statement he makes the claim that if the state was truly powerful enough to silence and imprison dissenters like himself, that would make the state powerful in their own right, and they may want to exert that power on THEIR masters (the money holders). It is better for the powerful that the state appears strong but really has no teeth.
@@contentsniffer ::
What makes Chomsky think that The State would turn against its benefactors ?
That would mean a Revolution, at least a rebellion against the Capitalists & their interest & Capitalism.
As you pointed out, they want the State to appear strong but w / no "teeth".
I think your last comment is the main reason Republicans are always pushing for "smaller" / "less" Government.
Public grievances would have no place to go if the Government is weak in regard to supporting Public interest & powerful enough to push through bailouts / tax-cuts & public subsidies of the rich.
@@cliffgaither My guy, I was just explaining Chomsky's joke (OP's timestamp). My own views are wildly different.
"We shouldn't speak truth to power, we should speak truth to the ones who are going to get rid of it."
Now there's a quote right there.
Chomsky, ironically, is the greatest patriot of our time. Any human who seeks to and dedicates many years of his life to point out our discretions is a man who cares about our country being true to our values.
IF you define, ' patriot ', as a Linguistics Professor, with ZERO Real World Experience in ANY other field, and whose criticisms of others all have the great luxury of 20/20 Hindsight, rendering them all essentially worthless-
-Then yes, Chomsky is a, ' patriot '. Smh
@@mck1972 He holds expertise and scholarship in many fields (just look at his background in education) his preferred area of study is linguistics as you say and apparently he is responsible for a complete reformation in how it is analysed. From my own layman understanding, it seems that a marriage of philosophy and language has led to "the right questions" being asked.
As for the 20/20 hindsight, you need to check some dates. Chomsky often speaks out as atrocities are taking place and often provides rundowns of all the known scholarship and data/research available at the time. This often later gets re-framed as apologism for said atrocities when new data comes out.
@@contentsniffer ,
I have never denied Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics.
(I will leave aside the subject of Philosophy for the moment)
Yet Chomsky’s expertise in the one field of Linguistics is simply irrelevant to any other field outside Linguistics!
Just as what Linguistics Professor Chomsky THINKS constitutes an, ‘ atrocity ‘, is also irrelevant!
Examples of Chomsky exploiting Hindsight:
th-cam.com/video/6mhj-j0z-fk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/T6nvHFlR-sQ/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/T6nvHFlR-sQ/w-d-xo.html
Which renders his, ‘ analysis ‘, of these fields essentially worthless!
Moreover, Hindsight includes everything that has already happened, whether 50 years ago, or 10 minutes ago!
In both cases, Chomsky is reacting to Policies enacted by others-Not himself!
And so the Worse, ‘ atrocities ‘, that Chomsky THINKS that our Policy Makers have committed all these years, then the Worse this makes Chomsky himself look, for never seeking a Policy Making Position Himself, and-with his superior wisdom-Show he can do better!
Instead of spending his life merely complaining from the sidelines, about fields that he has never had the guts to work in, nor accept responsibility for, himself!
@@mck1972 What the hell does a professor of linguistics know anyway?
In most cases, you would be right. But this particular linguistics professor reads everything it seems. He is also advantaged by the fact that he has many people helping him analyse the news, so he gets to read most of that too. It doesn't mean the guy is correct all the time but it does mean he's worth listening to.
Those clips you linked are flimsy examples of exploiting hindsight. When discussing complex issues it is very important to understand the historical basis, simply describing the history of a situation is not exploting hindsight. When you make this claim it seems you are saying "It doesn't matter what happened before, don't talk about it".
As for him not seeking power in the US and playing that game of thrones, this does not preclude him from discussing matters of state. Also, all of this would imply that he had designs on power himself, and it is at least obvious to me that he consistently puts out the message that the systems of power appear to be unhealthy for us. Why would he seek power within it?
So to be fair to you, I agree he ain't much of a patriot and it's silly to make the comparison but he is more of an expert than me and I'm guessing he is more of an expert than most people.
The guy just talks about the documented evidence because the news is misleading depending on where you live.
@@contentsniffer ,
I’m not sure you are really getting my point here:
Chomsky presumes to judge others in fields that he has never actually worked himself-Which is everything outside Linguistics-And with the luxury of already knowing the outcomes of the events in question-A great luxury which those whom Chomsky presumes to judge did not have at the time!
So to use a sports analogy, this is the forensic equivalent of Chomsky watching video of last season’s NFL games, pointing out the losing teams’ mistakes, and then using that knowledge to judge the performance of the players and coaches on the field!
Which makes Chomsky no more than a very intelligent sounding Monday Morning Armchair Quarterback! And renders his impressive sounding recitations of facts & figures essentially Worthless-Even If Accurate!
So IF Chomsky can to do a better job than those whom he presumes to judge, then he should show that he can do it-Not just complain after the fact! Which anybody can do!
Those who doubt what I and others say should watch and hear this powerful speech from one of the greatest minds of our age.
"i am not smart."
Dont be so quick to put yourself down. You may or may not be measured as smart within the narrow domain of the system you live in, but all that tells you is something about your suitability to this system. That is something I know Chomsky agrees with.
You need to follow your heart and your own creativity and you will be exceptional ithe domain of your own making, be it within the norms of the sytem or outside of them.
Great video with this great guy. Thanks for sharing. 20 years old talk and yet so relevant today.
Bravo. And timeless!
One thing I adore about Noam Chomsky is how ruthlessly he tears up the hypocrisy of the liberal establishment.
Good. Damn. Speach.
Dear prof Dr.
Very smart this lecture
Thank you very much 🙏🙏🙏🙏😅
Starts at 01:08
The world needs hero's like you.
thank you for your words. i will think about what you have said here.
i am not smart. he is perhaps the smartest. and i can understand all he is talking about. that is his genius i believe. thanks for this.
TheGoldenChild80 ::
You claim you're not smart but you understand everything Chomsky is saying !
Which is it 😄 ?
I hope it helps you to realise your potential, freedom and hapiness. Intelligence is a heavily misused idea, largely aimed at making people serfs of this planet destroying system. That isn't all that smart in my opinion. If you fail in the system it may be because you are predisposed to thrive in contravention of it, and very likely to the benefit of humanity and the planet. Diversity of thought is the route to our survival but the system drives uniformity. Be yourself and be happy :o)
Chomsky ...you are the bravest best...☀️🌿💫✨️
A one-of-a-kind speech.
the world needs more independent thinkers and free people :)
0:02 I thought it was gonna be the final fantasy theme
You will go down in history and the one who has been on the side of the truth!!
Shout out to the 503!!
Thank you!
He is a great thinker and human being
i believe you mean free thinkers and independent people.
Very great lecture 🌹
Everyone is smart, that's why governments are having such a hard time dumbing us down.
Li Qin ::
Trump became president ! The dumbing-down worked w / many ; although, HRC was such a known political abomination.
excellent talk
What gives me hope is that they can't do it forever. sooner or later there will be an Allende that they can't overthrow and that hole in the armour will be it's undoing. Our job is to be ready and organized when the opportunity arises.
1:35:27
It felt like that guy's question lasted longer than Chomsky's lecture
i'm sure you are smart, i think almost everyone feels unintelligent when watching chomsky
I feel more intelligent listening to Chomsky.
As he explains, these are simple concepts which ought to be taught to schoolchildren in an actually free society.
Some people, like Noam, have such a full understanding of a given subject that they can explain it simplistically and with sardono-comedic flair
3:23 Winston Churchill in World War III........ well, it's possible he will command the zombie army.
You might be smarter than you think.
I’m nutter contempt 😊
ok
HAHAHAHAHAH lololololololol
Conspiracy Theorists, time to hold up your tin foil hats!
Noam Chomsky is here, with more of his judgements of others, all after the fact!
Yet some people still take this ridiculous old man seriously! SMH
M CK are you a trump fan?
@@MsMaggie926 ,
NO!
@@MsMaggie926 either one of those "old conservatives" who on policy agree with Trump but just want things to be more courteous. A polite fascism if I dare say.
-Or a liberal indoctrinated into the system of the U.S. corporate state, for she cannot see the world for he is blinded by his false pedestal away from reality.