Saturday, August 3, 2013

Noam Chomsky on US Foreign Policy

Last night via Netflix, I watched a documentary, Power and Terror: Noam Chomsky in Our Times.

The film follows Chomsky around and shows clips from 2001- 2002 as he lectures in different venues. Chomsky in the past has attacked libertarianism and Ron Paul in a very confused and vicious manner, but he is very solid in this documentary, as he sticks to his strength US foreign policy.

There is a lot to learn from this documentary, though he had me scratching my head at one point when he made the claim that the government doesn't have any influence over mainstream media. Most interesting, at one point, he correctly acknowledges that the US is not a capitalist country but rather that a form of statist capitalism exists.

Overall, it is well worth watching, you will learn a lot about horrific US government overseas adventures.


  1. Chomsky is one of the great conundrums of the universe, especially when it comes to his ideas on libertarianism, capitalism, etc.

    But boy is he solid on calling out the U.S. Empire. Look forward to watching this.

  2. His comments on Paul where dead on. Paul's notion that people being denied health care b/c they don't have insurance is sick. We don't have a capitalist society, we never have. Every developed society has had government intervention. Paul's to be commended for talking about American foreign policy with some semblance of accuracy but his moral compass is confused in almost every other way. He should've been criticized - he was running for president!

    1. "Paul's notion that people being denied health care b/c they don't have insurance is sick."

      I've actually never heard Paul express that specifically the way you put it.

      That being said, is a person who can't afford a doctor visit or service being "denied",or are they simply unable to afford said service?

      If I can't afford feed myself and expect you to feed me, are you denying me food?

      Or is the reality that I am trying to steal your work, labor, etc. to satisfy one of my needs?

      If your argument is that someone will pay me to feed you, where does that money come? It is stolen from other people, some of which may suffer as well even if the theft appears morally "ok" by your standard for health care,food,etc.

      It's theft disguised as humanitarian welfare.

      You are the one with the confused moral compass.

      You ignore the evils of every gov't that ever existed-you have THOUSANDS of years worth of evidence aside from the current...which all feature theft, death, & destruction on a massive basis; yet think the small amount percentage wise of gov't theft that actually trickles down to poor people after paying for war, pol salaries/benefits, parks, departments, etc. et al justify theft and the creation of this monstrous evil called gov't.

      Even pragmatically, if you were to strip the power of gov't to make war(which IMHO can only be guaranteed by eliminating it) and the sacrifice was to let a percentage of people die from not being able to get healthcare(despite all of the charitable institutions doing so for free/voluntarily) the end game would be that MANY more people would have lived and lived better under such a scenario.

      You are living in a fantasy land to think otherwise.

      The moment you use any cause to justify theft, you have reduced society to a state without civility in which those with the bigger proverbial clubs take what they want, when they want.

  3. It's worth recalling that our Odysseus, Pat Tillman, consumed Chomsky's input on these topics and hoped to meet him. When he got back...

    Chomsky is still a Zionist and acts accordingly, nevertheless--if anyone is trying to solve the enigma.

    P-Ray, is that a satire post?

  4. Local Ale,
    What is the meaning of the term Zionist? And how would you define satire? Finally, could you please offer some examples from Chomsky's work which might stand as proof of the accuracy of your contention that "Chomsky is still a Zionist" Thanks in advance for your reply.

  5. I, too, find Local Ale's post confusing. Further explanation would be enlightening, perhaps.