clocker bob wrote:our electoral process is perfect- you have your choice of several well-connected millionaires.

The tradition of a two party system has been in existence for a long time and that isn't going to change any time soon. People either vote Republican or Democrat and the out come is the same and people will continue to complain about the same redundant issues. I don't see Chomsky, you or myself doing anything to change that so it makes the whole notion kind of pointless. If you can't work to alter that the other option is to move.

clocker bob wrote: See, Exxon/Mobil made 36 billion in the 4th quarter- what more proof do you need that the system is healthier than ever?

The actual state of affairs sucks. The TRUTHTM is where it's at.

Do you drive a car? I do. I'm sure Chomsky has a limousine. I don't see any true strides being made to change anything on the fundamental level. As for your "They Live" comment goes, fun movie as satire but kind of extreme. I enjoy capitalism with limits. I like material possessions if they give me pleasure. I enjoy living in a free thinking, free trade society where I can do that. Wouldn't have it any other way.

Hour_of_the_Wolf wrote:

clocker bob wrote:our electoral process is perfect- you have your choice of several well-connected millionaires.

The tradition of a two party system has been in existence for a long time and that isn't going to chance any time soon. People either vote Republican or Democrat and the out come is the same and people will continue to complain about the same redundant issues. I don't see Chomsky, you or myself doing anything to change that so it makes the whole notion kind of pointless. If you can't work to alter that the other option is to move.

By this line of thought you are proposing that nothing will ever change (or has ever changed) and that ideas have no bearing on history.

How could this be?

Also, you seem to be saying if you don't like the way things are you should emmigrate.

Is this right?

If so, you seem to be trying to close the debate.

EatingPanCakesOnHerGrave wrote:
No but I like my opinions to be relatively unbiased and not fit a specific agenda or broad mindset.

Oh, come on. What is an opinion but a raging display of bias? I like this band, I like this film, I like this political theorist, etc. And what is an agenda but a plan to improve society that is derived from your valued opinions?

You're all mixed up.

According to you, an opinion

can't show bias

OR

fit a specific agenda

OR

fit a broad mindset ( two opposites, by the way )?

What is left?

Golf would be a great game, but I hate when people think they're all cool with their variety of clubs and hit the ball a long way when all I will allow myself to use is this plastic mallet that I carefully selected to offend nobody and will only move the ball five feet at a time?!?

Strong controversial opinions are the only ones that affect anything! Give me my Soma if we have to eradicate those- short of violence, they're the only agents of change.

EatingPanCakesOnHerGrave wrote: I happen to love my country, faults and everything and that doesn't make me blind. Your condescending attitude once again full of incorrect assumptions.

Can you define the threshold of faults that would have to be reached before you would separate yourself from mob patriotism?

The bar will go higher, and you will go nowhere.

I know you.

EatingPanCakesOnHerGrave wrote:

nihil wrote:

EatingPanCakesOnHerGrave wrote:Number 3: If you can find anything Chomsky has said about American society in a positive way, I will buy you a stack of pancakes.

What would be the point? There are plenty of people tooting America's horn.

But if it would make you happy:

Noam Chomsky:
"We are lucky that we are in a very free country, the freest country in the world. That means we have more information about what our government does, thinks and plans, than any other country in the world. On the other hand, we are unlucky to be in a highly indoctrinated society. That means to find out the facts about this you have to carry out…. Virtually carry out an individual research project, very much like trying to find out what public opinion is."

"Tooting America's horn" those words again seem to foster a condescending tone with the America vs. world mentality and America should loose. Maybe I am reading into it different but that is what I see. Also, that Chomsky quote doesn't count since he included the indoctrination remark. We can't have our cake and eat it to. I don't know what glorious utopia Chomsky is trying to illustrate.

I left the indoctrination remark in the quote to illustrate a point. And yes, it does count.

I'll try again:

"We are lucky that we are in a very free country, the freest country in the world. "
Noam Chomsky

I'm only doing this so bob can get his pancakes. Don't cheat.

If by "loose" you mean "lose", no one is talking about winning or losing. That's just retarded.

Cranius wrote:

sparky wrote:

Champion Rabbit wrote:

sparky wrote:Having read this thread, I'd like to read some Chomsky. He seems to upset people in the right sort of way. But I have no idea where to start. Any recommendations for a starter?

Hegemony or Survival : America's Quest for Global Dominance

Cheers!

Sparky,

There's some Chomsky lectures(audio/video)in the MIT lecture archive:

MIT World

Well worth checking.

Cheers again!

Crainus,

Since you are from the U.K. perhaps you see things in a different light. The political system of Republican vs. Demorcrat is a mainstay and has caused me not to vote because it hasn't adapted to any change in progress. The broad spectrum of Americans are only going to vote for one or the other. This has gone on since the inception of America as an indepedent country. If you think some radical deconstruction is going to happen at the fundamental level, I think we are going to be waiting a while on that one.

clocker bob wrote: Can you define the threshold of faults that would have to be reached before you would separate yourself from mob patriotism?

The bar will go higher, and you will go nowhere.

I know you.

Your argument seems to indicate that if you aren't on the side of Chomsky then you are against. I would rather adopt a more centrist view of things. Where will YOU define mob patrotism? What elected body is going to decide where that bar will be set and can you get the whole of the country to agree with you on it? Tough call.

EatingPanCakesOnHerGrave wrote: I like my opinions to be relatively unbiased and not fit a specific agenda or broad mindset.

I'm curious about this kind of opinion. Please give me an opinion that:

a)does not fit a specific agenda

b)does not fit a broad mindset

and

c)does not appeal to the status quo


You like things as they are. You love your America. Congratulations on that original achievement and service to humankind.

Guess what: everything you say here adheres to a "broad" mindset and agenda.

The difference between someone like Chomsky and you is that Chomsky is conscious of an agenda that you don't recognize, while you believe your opinions don't fit into a "specific" or "broad" agenda. This appeal to neutrality is the hallmark of someone who hasn't found a way to pull his head out of his ass.

Chomsky's work has leveraged a lot of heads from internment in the rapturous asshole of the ruling class.

Every conservative or right-leaning user on this board believes he is "neutral." This is the neutrality of a dog so accustomed to eating whatever shit comes down the pike, it doesn't realize there's a reason it lives on a diet of <ta da> shit.

Andrew L. wrote:

EatingPanCakesOnHerGrave wrote: I like my opinions to be relatively unbiased and not fit a specific agenda or broad mindset.

I'm curious about this kind of opinion. Please give me an opinion that:

a)does not fit a specific agenda

b)does not fit a broad mindset

and

c)does not appeal to the status quo

I wanted to chime in. I think the question is what opinion is going to be deemed worthy by the masses in order to affect change. Since Noam Chomsky and his views are written off as far too extreme, he isn't going to be very palatable to a wide audience.


[quote= "Andrew"]You like things as they are. You love your America. Congratulations on that original achievement and service to humankind.

Guess what: everything you say here adheres to a "broad" mindset and agenda. [/quote] You sound kind of bitter.

Andrew wrote:The difference between someone like Chomsky and you is that Chomsky is conscious of an agenda that you don't recognize, while you believe your opinions don't fit into a "specific" or "broad" agenda. This appeal to neutrality is the hallmark of someone who hasn't found a way to pull his head out of his ass.

Or isn't the opposite a nutty conspiracy guru?

Andrew wrote:Chomsky's work has leveraged a lot of heads from internment in the rapturous asshole of the ruling class.

Every conservative or right-leaning user on this board believes he is "neutral." This is the neutrality of a dog so accustomed to eating whatever shit comes down the pike, it doesn't realize there's a reason it lives on a diet of <ta da> shit.

Why does everything have to be politicized, right and left, black & white. As a whole, the world isn't that bad. Just be glad you weren't born in the Middle Ages.

"As a whole, the world isn't that bad. Just be glad you weren't born in the Middle Ages."

You don't seriously believe this do you? Take a trip to Iraq. You don't even need a passport. Go on...you'll have a great time! They now have a democracy! And maybe....just maybe....they'll have fruit pies!