Results tagged “Noam Chomsky” from onegoodmove

Chomsky on Healthcare

Chomsky on the Economy

Part 1

Part 2

tip to Roger

Chomsky Says Pick the Lesser of two Evils

(tip to Steve)

Chomsky on Iran

Quicktime Video 11.4 MB | Duration: 08'12
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Chomsky on 9-11 Conspiracies

Noam Chomsky explains why he doesn't believe there was a conspiracy.

Required reading for the nuts
note: nuts is a term of endearment.
The author is a native New Yorker who works as a physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California with a PhD Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering, from Princeton His technical interests are generally in fluid flow and energy, specifically in gas dynamics and plasma physics; and his working experience includes measurements on nuclear bomb tests, devising mathematical models of energetic physical effects, and trying to enlarge a union of weapons scientists.

Quicktime Video 11.3 MB | Duration: 07'59
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Links With Your Coffee - Monday


Links With Your Coffee - Friday

  • Please Never Find A Giant Squid
  • Audio: Urban Planning: Online Only: The New Yorker
  • From Smut to Adult Diapers: The Young Novelist's Life
  • The author and the Austen plot that exposed publishers' pride and prejudice
  • Imminent Crises: Threats and Opportunities by Noam Chomsky
    What has been central to planning is control, not access, an important distinction. The United States followed the same policies long before it relied on a drop of Middle East oil, and would continue to do so if it relied on solar energy. Such control gives the United States “veto power” over its industrial rivals, as explained in the early postwar period by influential planners, and reiterated recently with regard to Iraq: a successful conquest of Iraq would give the United States “critical leverage” over its industrial rivals, Europe and Asia, as pointed out by Zbigniew Brzezinski, an important figure in the planning community. Vice President Dick Cheney made the same point, describing control over petroleum supplies as “tools of intimidation and blackmail”—when used by others.

links for 2007-02-27

Links With Your Coffee - Sunday

Avoid waiting for your comments to be approved register using TypeKey if you choose not to use typekey I have to approve your comments. That may take only a few minutes but often takes several hours.

If you leave a comment please follow the rules. Criticize ideas. Do not criticize people. This means do not substitute criticism of the person for criticism of the idea. Do not make off-topic comments. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in your commenting privileges being revoked or your comments being deleted.

"All truth is simple." Is that not doubly a lie?—Nietzsche

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition We need more if this.

An Interview with Noam Chomsky "The strong do as they can"

Well look at that will you, a cheaper than a Dell oh and it's the one I'm saving my pennies for.

Juan Cole writes,

The US State Department will investigate whether Israeli deployment of these weapons in civilian areas violated secret agreements under which Washington supplied them to Israel.

Nothing will come of the investigation, given the clout of the Israel lobby in Washington, but someday the relative of an innocent maimed Lebanese may decide to take revenge on the country that supplied the cluster bombs. And the American public will ask in astonishment why anyone should hate us.

YouTube Why do atheists care about religion (tip to Jim)

Links With Your Coffee - Thursday

Avoid waiting for your comments to be approved register using TypeKey

If you leave a comment please follow the rules. Criticize ideas. Do not criticize people. Repeated abuse of the rule will result in your commenting privileges being revoked.

Did you know that if you click on the word Archives at the top of the list of monthly archives you'll see a list of all the posts at onegoodmove. There are two ways to search the site. The search box top right and the Google Search at the bottom of the page.

Skeptics Circle #39

Buckley - Chomsky debates from 1969 oh my goodness history repeats itself. (tip to James)

Trust an algorithm with your business?

Do you think your high-paid managers really know best? A Dutch sociology professor has doubts.

Animal House Summit Maureen Dowd (Times Select Registration Required)

The open-microphone incident at the G-8 lunch in St. Petersburg on Monday illustrated once more that W. never made any effort to adapt. The president has enshrined his immaturity and insularity, turning every environment he inhabits — no matter how decorous or serious — into a comfortable frat house.

No matter what the trappings or the ceremonies require of the leader of the free world, he brings the same DKE bearing and cadences, the same insouciance and smart-alecky attitude, the same simplistic approach — swearing, swaggering, talking to Tony Blair with his mouth full of buttered roll, and giving a startled Angela Merkel an impromptu shoulder rub. He can make even a global summit meeting seem like a kegger.

Catching W. off-guard, the really weird thing is his sense of victimization. He’s strangely resentful about the actual core of his job. Even after the debacles of Iraq and Katrina, he continues to treat the presidency as a colossal interference with his desire to mountain bike and clear brush.
In snippets of overheard conversation, Mr. Bush says he has not bothered to prepare any closing remarks and grouses about having to listen to other world leaders talk too long. What did he think being president was about?

Pentagon Develops New Tank To Defend Marriage

Dobbs: Not so smart when it comes to the Middle East

We Americans like to think we're a pretty smart people, even when evidence to the contrary is overwhelming. And nowhere is that evidence more overwhelming than in the Middle East. History in the Middle East is everything, and we Americans seem to learn nothing from it.

Mad Kane's Ode to the Groper

Links With Your Coffee - Wednesday

Avoid waiting for your comments to be approved register using TypeKey

Did you know that if you click on the word Archives at the top of the list of monthly archives you'll see a list of all the posts at onegoodmove. There are two ways to search the site. The search box top right and the Google Search at the bottom of the page.

And so we rant

The bizarre US diplomatic practice of backing oddball losers and megalomaniac lunatics has again paid off. We got a boy in Iran who is spoiling for a fight just when we need one.

I’d like to suggest that it’s a Republican practice. The elephant crowd were the bunch who supported Hitler in the 30’s. Pinochet certainly owed his ascendance and survival to the mad power-mongers of the corporate right (and fuck you Dita Beard). Noriega couldn’t have done it without the Torrijos plane crash, a Republican political technique both offshore and on, those plane crashes, and I know this because the BAD GUYS DO NOT DIE IN PLANE CRASHES, ONLY THE GOOD GUYS DO. Hussein must have been baffled when the US Republicans who empowered him turned on him. The guys who had him killing Kurds like Miz Muffet putting away a jug of whey turned on him like jackals and invaded, and tore down the very statues of him they had paid to erect. There are dozens of these globally powerful goons, enabled by the corporate right, supported by the full faith and credit of the US, then torn from power when it becomes expedient. . .

Do you know what Nascar means? 

The collapse of reason

Noam Chomsky: Why it's over for America

South Dakota has responded to this with this.

Gore: Bush is 'renegade rightwing extremist'

Al Gore has made his sharpest attack yet on the George Bush presidency, describing the current US administration as "a renegade band of rightwing extremists".

Links With Your Coffee Sunday

Latin America and Asia are at last breaking free of Washington's grip Noam Chomsky
The US-dominated world order is being challenged by a new spirit of independence in the global south
On Scene: How Operation Swarmer Fizzled
Not a shot was fired, or a leader nabbed, in a major offensive that failed to live up to its advance billing
al Sistani relaxing at home.

South Park Wars Andrew Sullivan has something to say.

Issac Hayes and South Park.

Trey and Matt on Issac (video)

Links With Your Coffee - Monday


Quicktime Video 656K '39


Quicktime Video 1'25 1MB

Avery Ant The president, a coming out.

Nothin's More Revoltin' Than Dub's Nominee John Bolton Mad Kane's parody song on the nomination of John Bolton sung to Carolina in the Morning.

An SAT Without Analogies is Like: (A) A Confused Citizenry...

When Grover Norquist, a leading conservative activist, was on the NPR program "Fresh Air" a while back, he casually made a comparison that left the host, Terry Gross, sputtering in disbelief. "Excuse me," she said. "Did you just ... compare the estate tax with the Holocaust?" Yes, he did.

We are living in the age of the false, and often shameless, analogy. A slick advertising campaign compares the politicians working to dismantle Social Security to Franklin D. Roosevelt. In a new documentary, "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," Kenneth Lay compares attacks on his company to the terrorist attacks on the United States.

Intentionally misleading comparisons are becoming the dominant mode of public discourse. The ability to tell true analogies from false ones has never been more important. But to make room for the new essay portion of the SAT that was rolled out this weekend with much fanfare, the College Board has unceremoniously dropped the test's analogy questions, saying blandly that analogical reasoning will still be assessed "in the short and long reading passages."
Replacing logic questions with writing is perfectly in keeping with these instant-messaging, 500-cable-channel times, when the emphasis is on communicating for the sake of communicating rather than on having something meaningful to say. Obviously, every American should be able to write, and write well. But if forced to choose between a citizenry that can produce a good 25-minute writing sample or spot a bad analogy, we would be better off with a nation of analogists.

False Analogy defined, just thought you should know.

Elections Run by Same Guys Who Sell Toothpaste by Noam Chomsky

The elections are run by the same guys who sell toothpaste. They show you an image of a sports hero, or a sexy model, or a car going up a sheer cliff or something, which has nothing to do with the commodity, but it�s intended to delude you into picking this one rather than another one. Same when they run elections. But they�re assigned that task in order to marginalize the public, and furthermore, people are pretty well aware of it.

For many years, election campaigns here have been run by the public relations industry and each time it�s with increasing sophistication. Quite naturally, the industry uses the same technique to sell candidates that it uses to sell toothpaste or lifestyle drugs. The point is to undermine markets by projecting imagery to delude and suppressing information�and similarly, to undermine democracy by the same method.

What Now

Looking Back, Looking Forward

This article is about the election, what went wrong and what to do about it. The Nation asked some of the country's leading political activists and intellectuals for their thoughts, the result some twenty short essays on the subject. Here are the offerings of two of may favorite intellectuals, Richard Rorty and Noam Chomsky. Rorty echoed some of the same points as in this recent post While Chomsky ever the optimist sees it as an opportunity to educate. There is much of interest in the other essays too, so don't be lazy. Read the whole damn thing.


MOST AMERICANS FIND IT INTOLERABLE to think that our soldiers were sent abroad to die for no sufficient reason. They are still unwilling to admit that those who fell in Vietnam lost their lives in vain. So half the electorate managed to keep on believing both that Saddam Hussein was preparing to use weapons of mass destruction and that he was somehow linked to 9/11. They did so because, in their minds, to abandon those beliefs would be to withdraw support from our troops. So Senator Kerry did himself little good with the voters by demonstrating that President Bush had deceived the nation in order to invade Iraq. But he was boxed in. He could not ignore the issue without alienating his own base, and could not speak frankly about it without further alienating his opponent's.

The sort of people who make up Bush's base cannot be won over by insisting that Christianity mandates concern for the poor, and that Bush has shown none. For most fundamentalist evangelicals think that poverty is a punishment either for insufficient gumption or for failure to establish the sort of personal relationship to Jesus that insures worldly success. So it would be a mistake for Democrats to start sounding more pious. They cannot give up on abortion rights and gay rights without alienating many blue voters, but if they do not do so they cannot hope to win over any red ones. Once again, Democratic candidates are boxed in.

As far as I can see, the only recourse Democrats have is to reverse the drift toward the center that began after McGovern's defeat in 1972, and once again put themselves forward as the Party of the Poor. This may not work, but it is the only card they have left to play. They should beat the drum about the widening gap between haves and have-nots, about the humiliation and misery of families without health insurance, about the scandal of disappearing pensions and about outrageous corporate tax dodges, about fabulously overpaid corporate executives, about Halliburton and Enron. If they adopt this strategy, at least they will be positioned to take advantage of any future economic downturn, and can hope for something like a reprise of the 1932 election. If they instead edge still further to the right, the Republicans will simply shift the goal posts by doing the same.

Continue reading "What Now" »

Noam Chomsky

Last night Bill Maher's program was a wild one. Noam Chomsky's remote appearance put guest Andrew Sullivan in a tizzy. Sullivan who patiently explained earlier in the show how we had to reach out to the fundamentalist nut-jobs was not ready to allow Chomsky to have an opinion. The hypocrisy was obvious to all. Here is the Chomsky interview as well as the aftermath. You're going to enjoy this. Quicktime Video 6.2MB 10'19

Patriot boy is correct the Alan Simpson segment was simply strange. Here take a peek and let me know what you think is going on here. Quicktime Video 6.7 MB 7'37

And finally 4 seconds of butt funny quicktime video courtesy of Andrew Sullivan

Touchy Feely
Posted by James Wolcott

I was about to post a semi-sincere apology to Andrew Sullivan. In my book, I argued that however much he flirted with abandoning Bush, he would never unlash himself from the Marlboro Man, having invested so much in this tender masochistic relationship. I was wrong. After much agon, Sullivan did cast his vote for Kerry, which caused him no end of grief from fellow conservatives who probably never liked gays anyway and now had an excuse to vent their Disillusionment with Andrew for defecting.

As I say, an apology seemed in order.

But after watching Sullivan make an ass of himself (in more ways than one) on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, forget it.

Continue reading "Noam Chomsky" »

Pirates and Emperors

Noam Chomsky once wrote that Pirates and Emperors have a thing or two in common. Check out this amusing animation It makes the point well via Moving The Goalposts

update: more video for your weekend enjoyment.

Brian Duffy has video on Springsteen, Jon Stewart on Crossfire, and more go check them out. The newer videos are at the bottom of the page.

Cowardice and Corruption

Moral cowardice and intellectual corruption are the natural concomitants of unchallenged privilege.
��� - Noam Chomsky

The Price of Arrogance

Richard Clarke just gets better and better at responding to the attacks on his character and in sticking it to Bush and his cohorts. The issue of how to fight the terrorists is an important one. I've written before that winning the battle for hearts and minds is just as important as catching bad guys. Many of us predicted that the war in Iraq would be counterproductive and the truth of matter is becoming more obvious every day. Here is the portion of the Russert Clarke interview dealing with this topic.

MR. RUSSERT:� Why do you think the Iraq war has undermined the war on terrorism?

MR. CLARKE:� Well, I think it's obvious, but there are three major reasons. Who are we fighting in the war on terrorism?� We're fighting Islamic radicals and they are drawing people from the youth of the Islamic world into hating us.� Now, after September 11, people in the Islamic world said, "Wait a minute.� Maybe we've gone too far here.� Maybe this Islamic movement, this radical movement, has to be suppressed," and we had a moment, we had a window of opportunity, where we could change the ideology in the Islamic world. Instead, we've inflamed the ideology.� We've played right into the hands of al-Qaeda and others.� We've done what Osama bin Laden said we would do.

Ninety percent of the Islamic people in Morocco, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, allied countries to the United States--90 percent in polls taken last month hate the United States.� It's very hard when that's the game where 90 percent of the Arab people hate us.� It's very hard for us to win the battle of ideas.� We can arrest them.� We can kill them.� But as Don Rumsfeld said in the memo that leaked from the Pentagon, I'm afraid that they're generating more ideological radicals against us than we are arresting them and killing them.� They're producing more faster than we are.

The president of Egypt said, "If you invade Iraq, you will create a hundred bin Ladens."� He lives in the Arab world.� He knows.� It's turned out to be true.� It is now much more difficult for us to win the battle of ideas as well as arresting and killing them, and we're going to face a second generation of al-Qaeda. �We're going to catch bin Laden.� I have no doubt about that.� In the next few months, he'll be found dead or alive.� But it's two years too late because during those two years, al-Qaeda has morphed into a hydra-headed organization, independent cells like the organization that did the attack in Madrid.

And that's the second reason.� The attack in Madrid showed the vulnerabilities of the rails in Spain.� We have all sorts of vulnerabilities in our country, chemical plants, railroads.� We've done a very good job on passenger aircraft now, but there are all these other vulnerabilities that require enormous amount of money to reduce those vulnerabilities, and we're not doing that.

MR. RUSSERT:� And three?

MR. CLARKE:� And three is that we actually diverted military resources and intelligence resources from Afghanistan and from the hunt for bin Laden to the war in Iraq.

MR. RUSSERT:� But Saddam is gone and that's a good thing?

MR. CLARKE:� Saddam is gone is a good thing.� If Fidel were gone, it would be a good thing.� If Kim Il Sung were gone, it would be a good thing.� And let's just make clear, our military performed admirably and they are heroes, but what price are we paying for this war on Iraq?

Noam Chomsky has an interesting take on the subject. The Invasion of Iraqfrom the new Chomsky blog "Turning the Tide"

Richard Rorty Interview

From the October/November 2003 issue of Philosophy Now

Richard Rorty is perhaps the best-known living philosopher in the Pragmatic tradition, and one of the most talked-about thinkers of the present day. He is a philosophy professor at Stanford University. Giancarlo Marchetti chatted with him about his ideas and his hopes.

How did you come to study philosophy?

When I was a teenager, I read Plato and Nietzsche, and thought about the issues between them. I think this is a fairly common way in which people come to take an interest in philosophy. And I happened to go to a university where philosophy was very popular. It was taught in all the courses so it was a sort of natural career to go into.

Who in particular influenced you during your early studies?

Various teachers at the University of Chicago: Leo Strauss, Charles Hartshorne, who was a student of Whitehead, Rudolph Carnap, quite a few different people.

Which philosopher do you especially admire and why?

I think the one I admire most is William James. He never lost a sense of humor about his own writing. He wrote because he enjoyed it. There's a kind of joyful exuberance to his work that I wish I could imitate.

May I ask you how your write? Do you revise frequently/

Oh, probably not as frequently as I should. I usually write a draft and then write a second draft and then polish that draft up in the course of a few weeks or months.

Let's turn to philosophy. Could you say what characterizes your own version of pragmatism?

I think that what I get out of reading the classical pragmatists is just the idea that there are no privileged descriptions and therefore there is not much point in asking. ":Is our way of taking about things objective or subjective?" I think of pragmatists as the people who did the best job of getting rid of the subject/object distinction.

Continue reading "Richard Rorty Interview" »

They Hate America

How many times have you heard it. You criticize Bush's policies and the you hate America crowd starts its little chant. You never criticize bin Laden, you never criticize Arafat you never mention 9/11 you never blah blah blah. There must be an entry in the conservative rule book for whenever we criticize a Bush policy thats says just accuse them of being un-American. It's tiresome responding to the same tired argument over and over again. They think each new example is proof positive of our hate for America. We probably should just ignore them, but they are loud and obnoxious and it is sometimes difficult. So here is a solution, a generalized one, a paragraph you can use and reuse that will accommodate 99% of the you hate America posts and comments directed your way. Here it is in its general form X represents what they claim you are leaving out, what you failing to do, what you've neglected to say. What in their minds proves you are un-American. So just replace the X's with the villain du jour and you're done. The villain doesn't even have to be a person it can be a catastrophic event, even an idea, it all works the same.

What you are saying is that I have criticized US policies more than X, that's because I take for granted, like everyone else, that X is bad, and I don't see any point reiterating what 100% of us believe about X. But I'm a citizen of the United States, and therefore share responsibility for US government policies, and assume one of the duties of citizenship is to live up to that responsibility - by criticizing policies I think are wrong for example.

Here is an example by Noam Chomsky that I generalized from.

"If what you mean is that I have criticized Bush's policies more than Osama's, that's because I take for granted, like everyone else, that Osama bin Laden is a murderous thug, who the current incumbents in Washington should never have supported through the 1980s, and who should be apprehended and tried for his crimes right now - as I've written - and don't see any point reiterating what 100% of us believe about him. But I am a citizen of the US, and therefore share responsibility for US government policies, and assume that one of the duties of citizenship is to live up to that responsibility - by criticizing policies one thinks are wrong, for example."

So try it you'll like it and when you do send me examples of the ways you found to use it.