41–50 of 183 posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_%28book%29
Btw in Lost why did sayd was nice guy in the beginning and died as an evil torturer ? And why does every action series and movies, event toy story 3 promotes torture ?
Given the chance to sit in on a random lunch with Chomsky or a captain of industry (Buffett, Gates, etc.) I'd pick Chomsky without pause.
The extent to which Chomsky has remained relevant in both political and scientific arenas never ceases to amaze me.
Uh, didn't he criticise scientific epistemologies in relation to so-called scientism? I read briefly about some of his remarks on the matter, and he just seemed like most of his fellow sociologists: ignorant of the relevance of science to sanity, probably caused by not having been trained in physico-mathematical rigour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although I cannot site specific examples from Chomsky right now (wish I had books other than programmin ones at work, but it may freak out my colleagues) I find that belief in a "secret coalition" is as common in the left as it is in the right. This is understandable, because people don't want to believe the alternate (and, I think, much more correct) idea that you have mentioned, i.e. "This really is just how people…
I suggest reading _Understanding Power_ (the book Aaron Swartz recommended). He's against conspiracy theories, and instead uses institutional analysis. Sorry for the wall of text: "It’s precisely the opposite of conspiracy theory, actually—in fact, in general this analysis tends to downplay the role of individuals: they’re just replaceable pieces. "Look, part of the structure of corporate capitalism is that the playe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any updated source for the statistics he gives in the first couple chapters? They are about 30 years out of date now, so the book is much less useful from that perspective. The Wikipedia page on media consolidation isn't very detailed, nor do I know of any updates sources for the military/pentagon propaganda budget.
I really hate google on some days. More days as of late. Anyway, if you google "the herman chomsky propaganda model twenty years on" and then click the pdf link you may find what you want. I can't post the link here because google is so paranoid about being crawled that they obfuscate links to the point where you can't get easily get a link to a pdf without going through the search manually.
I found the following review of the book interesting. I always like to read the "negative" reviews of something because I find it easier to make a decision whether to read something or buy something (books, software, food, etc...) based on whether I can identify with the negative comments or not. If someone has recommended something to me, and the negative comments are inconsequential to me (or absurd, etc...), I'm m…
What do you find interesting about this review?
Maybe I'm a bit too simple or pragmatic but I sincerely hope that this was simply hyperbole. If not, I think we might have an early glimpse into a special, yet troubled, mind. From a lot of things I've read about Mr. Swartz since his suicide, it doesn't seem like he was all that mentally stable.
I found the following review of the book interesting. I always like to read the "negative" reviews of something because I find it easier to make a decision whether to read something or buy something (books, software, food, etc...) based on whether I can identify with the negative comments or not. If someone has recommended something to me, and the negative comments are inconsequential to me (or absurd, etc...), I'm m…
First, It is not the US's fault it got attacked, Gandhi changed British foreign policy with peaceful protests. The terrorists chose murder and the attacks are their fault. Having said that.
We have Bin Laden on video tape explicitly explaining why they attacked the US. And why they did not attack Sweden for example. And it is because of the US foreign policy in the middle east. Supporting the regime in Saudi Arabia, etc. Straight from the hose's mouth.
If you are going to claim Chomsky is just plain wrong, please provide supporting evidence.
And please try to stay away from equating critique of US foreign policy as "demonizing the USA."
And "we may soon lose our nation." is just plain baseless fear mongering.
And the fact that Chomsky is an "avowed atheist" has nothing to do with anything.
I found the following review of the book interesting. I always like to read the "negative" reviews of something because I find it easier to make a decision whether to read something or buy something (books, software, food, etc...) based on whether I can identify with the negative comments or not. If someone has recommended something to me, and the negative comments are inconsequential to me (or absurd, etc...), I'm m…
The spread is a debating tactic where you present a set of supporting arguments so wide and particular your opponents are unable to rebut them all because 1) they have day jobs and 2) they have limited space or time to address them in any particular forum. A champion spreader is Noam Chomsky, who selectively recites facts of world history from Indonesia, Russia, to El Salvadore and 200 places in between, which no one but a professional in Comparative Economic Systems would be familiar with (indeed, comparative economic systems was a flourishing economic subdiscipline precisely because it couldn't be easily refuted because those communist countries didn't have a free press and made up their production data, but after 1989 it was obvious this field was simple wishful thinking dominated by deluded Marxists-note:of the ones I knew!).
http://falkenblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/economists-love-sprea...