Who Owns the World? - A lecture by Noam Chomsky (September 2012)

page: 1
8

log in

join

posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...


If you don't know about him, shame on you. Noam Chomsky is widely regarded as one of the most important contemporary intellectuals.
en.wikipedia.org...

The actual lecture starts at 10:55 min.




posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Xenoglossy
 


Thanks for the link I haven't listened to Chomsky for a while



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Sounds like a commie to me

jk btw.


Cheers never heard of him before so I will listen to him and report back on my thoughts



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Chomsky is tough to listen to. It would be nice if there was a transcript.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 05:16 PM
link   
If his guess is anyone other than the folks who have owned the central banks of nearly every country in the world for the past century or two, I'll be surprised.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


Transcript


Originally posted by boymonkey74
Sounds like a commie to me

jk btw.

Cheers never heard of him before so I will listen to him and report back on my thoughts


Required reading/listening for a better understanding of Capitalist Imperialism - probably the furthest academia would reach to a globalist agenda...Not quite commie, but anarchist.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


Sounds like a commie to me

Sounds like a drivelling political oaf whose cultural prominence has probably done more to make Americans confuse socialism with liberalism than anyone else currently living.

Chomsky is, I understand, a great linguist; he revolutionised that field with his ideas and brought it into the twentieth century. However, like many academics, he is a political naif; in his case, his nitwitted political ideas have actually ruined him as a scientist. For example, I recently read an essay of his, dating back to the Sixties, in which he attacks Darwinism on the basis that it is incompatible with Socialist theory. I kid you not.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Xenoglossy
 


The masons own the world



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucifer6
reply to post by Xenoglossy
 


The masons own the world

Ha. No.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Ear-Responsible
 


HAHA. Yes. They do.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucifer6
reply to post by Ear-Responsible
 


HAHA. Yes. They do.

You think brick layers run the world? Yea, ok.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xenoglossy
Noam Chomsky is widely regarded as one of the most important contemporary intellectuals.

That all depends on who you ask. Yes he's educated and has written books. But that doesn't mean he's a smart guy. He's an anarchist. A lot of people disagree with what he spews about politics and about what is right and wrong in society (according to him).



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 





For example, I recently read an essay of his, dating back to the Sixties, in which he attacks Darwinism on the basis that it is incompatible with Socialist theory.


Can this essay be found online?



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Xenoglossy
Noam Chomsky is widely regarded as one of the most important contemporary intellectuals.

That all depends on who you ask. Yes he's educated and has written books. But that doesn't mean he's a smart guy. He's an anarchist. A lot of people disagree with what he spews about politics and about what is right and wrong in society (according to him).




Did you even bother to read the first paragraph of the wikipedia article?

"According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar from 1980 to 1992, and was the eighth most cited source overall. He has been described as a prominent cultural figure, and he was voted the "world's top public intellectual" in a 2005 poll."

Regardless of whether a lot of people disagree or agree with what he says, he is taken seriously. And you don't get to this stage in academia just by being a regular educated guy who has written some books.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Chomsky is very knowledgeable about human nature as applied to history and the present. I see what he says as mostly real, not really speculation. I understand that what he says has a direct influence on our lives throughout the world. Someone has always wanted to control the world, that will not change. I have no desire to control the world, I would just want to retain control of my own little world. This is getting harder and harder to do, seems like there are so many people trying to weasel me out of my little share. Seems like our government is not adequately punishing those who con or steal from others nowadays, they are allowing this practice to occur to try to keep us under their thumb. Many governments have fallen because of this practice. I do not understand why they are trying this. History has to be observed, we are paying them to keep us safe, not to make us fear not having complete government control. I want government to oversee the people and to get rid of those who try to steal what we have worked hard to earn. Everyone wants our money nowadays, the healthcare industry, the insurance industries, the overpowering corrupt businesses, and the heads of our local social classes. Seems like the socialites want us to fund projects that they think are good for the community when in essense they are not necessary. They waste our money to make themselves look good. Most communities are in debt now instead of having funding balances. They waste too much money on unneeded projects then let the needed projects go so they can use the crumbling to ask for more money.

Sorry for getting off topic.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


Can this essay be found online?

Possibly. Here are the details; go take a look.

Chomsky, N., 'The Fallacy of Richard Herrenstein's IQ', Cognition, I (1973), pp. 285–298. Reproduced in Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition (2nd ed.) by Philip Appleman, 1979, W.W. Norton & Co.

edit on 25/6/13 by Astyanax because: of chmosky.



posted on Jun, 25 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Cool. Thanks for that. I can see the train of thought he is following. If you look at the Darwinian "axiom" of Survival of the Fittest, it seems to contradict socialism which is more of a hive like mentality. Or in the words of SPOCK: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

But I would still like to read it.



posted on Jun, 25 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xenoglossy
Did you even bother to read the first paragraph of the wikipedia article?

Did you even bother to read what I posted, or did you go straight to knee-jerk reaction?

I agreed that he's well educated. But as I said ... well educated doesn't equate to being correct.
Some intellectuals trip over their own bias' and agendas. Hawking for example.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Xenoglossy
Did you even bother to read the first paragraph of the wikipedia article?

Did you even bother to read what I posted, or did you go straight to knee-jerk reaction?

I agreed that he's well educated. But as I said ... well educated doesn't equate to being correct.
Some intellectuals trip over their own bias' and agendas. Hawking for example.


No that's not what you said. Here let me help you. That's what you said.


Originally posted by FlyersFan
Yes he's educated and has written books. But that doesn't mean he's a smart guy.


I bet you will find the difference eventually.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Xenoglossy
 


I have to honestly say I've never heard of him in any prominent matter, and I read extensively. In his own words "He describes his views as "fairly traditional anarchist ones, with origins in the Enlightenment and classical liberalism,"[26] and often identifies with anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism."
Link

So as that as a self proclaimed discription of oneself, his views, writings, opinions are filtered by this outlook on life. He is totally entitled to believe, say, write what he wants.

I just did a very brief read up on him and his beliefs, speculations, and pseudo-substantiated claims on world and cultural affairs. Fair enough, he can articulate and form reasonable discussions for debate and endless bantering. At the end of the day, he is 84, won't be around much longer, and like most so-called intellectuals will simply blow away in the wind. Followers will follow, but they will fade soon enough.

So, smart, intelligent, Yes. Personal Agenda, Yes. Any real accomplishments that have changed anyone living on the face of the earth? NO!! Ho-hum, just another perspective, yes nice to peruse, but really of no consequence to anything that applies in the real world that the rest of the 7 Billion of us live in. Am I harsh, skeptical, Yes! Do I find some of his writing thought provoking? Yes, but at the end of the day......hasn't changed a bloody thing that affects my life. Peace!!





top topics
 
8

log in

join