from Hacker News

Noam Chomsky and the end of "America bad"

by obiefernandez on 6/19/24, 6:32 PM with 22 comments

• by faeriechangling on 6/19/24, 7:05 PM

  I never took Chomsky’s foreign policy views that seriously or knew them to be taken that seriously. He just had at most a refreshingly contrarian perspective that didn’t normalize the American Imperialism so many take for granted.

• by BenFranklin100 on 6/19/24, 7:48 PM

  Chomsky, along with Morris Halle, founded the modern field of linguistics at MIT. He’s a towering intellect whose theory of Universal Grammar places him alongside Einstein in the 20th century pantheon of science. He is a case study of how a person’s brilliance in one field does not transfer to another.

• by locallost on 6/19/24, 10:40 PM

  Chomsky's position has never been "America bad". This article is atrocious. His position has always been that it doesn't matter who did it, it only matters what was in fact done. For some reason this is very difficult for most people to accept. This sentence is telling:

  "And yet when Chomsky discusses the Gulf War, he dismisses the notion that American foreign policy became more idealistic after the Soviet threat receded"

  It's a better question why the author is considering that argument. It might be true, it might not, but is there any proof?

  But with all that said, I don't understand why this was flagged. I feel like people flag articles a lot more than they used to, just because they don't like it. Maybe people that flag should be forced to write a comment why they flagged it or at least that everyone sees they did.

• by consumer451 on 6/19/24, 6:47 PM

  When I read the ideas in his book "Manufacturing Consent" during the build-up to the invasion of Iraq, I elevated him to hero status in my mind. This was exactly what I was seeing happening all around me, and he nailed it.

  In more recent years, it became obvious to me that the man was a "tankie." He was somehow able to convince himself that only the USA could have been guilty of imperial ambitions, while the CCP, Moscow, and others could never be accused of such malfeasance, clear evidence to the contrary be damned.

  I still have great respect for Chomsky due to his contributions, even though we disagree on so much. I have met a few people online who have had personal/professional relationships with him, and this seems to be a somewhat common refrain.

  This was yet another lesson in the pitfalls of hero worship for me. Since then, I have fallen into the hero worship trap a couple more times, as if I had learned nothing.

• by paulpauper on 6/19/24, 6:43 PM

  He became popular for his foreign policy views at a time or era when the mainstream media acted as a giant funnel to a credulous public , as well as students and academics. This meant it was hard to debate or refute his ideas outside of televised debates or by other academics. How does one go about debating Chomsky or refuting him in the 90s unless you are already well-connected in academia, in which it's too late and the lie has already circled the earth many times? The barriers to refuting propaganda or bad ideas in academia was much higher back then compared to now, in which anyone can do so with a Substack post or a tweet that goes viral. It was like this for all public intellectuals at the time, not just him or for the left-wing. These people used the media and academia as pulpits to the public and policy-makers and dissent was minimal and belated. It was good work if you could get it. You went on national TV to field softballs, did campus 'debates' in which the audience asked pre-screened questions, signed books, etc.