Tuesday, January 13, 2004
I always enjoy a good Chomsky deconstruction. Norman Geras points to a new blog that looks to be worth keeping an eye on. Mick Hartley, among several interesting posts has a nice explanation of who Noam Chomsky is and where he's coming from. In part (read the whole thing), Hartley compares Chomsky to a cult leader (a comparison Hartley admits is not to be pushed too far) - a bearer of truth with nothing but raw contempt for those who refuse to acknowledge his revalations.
I've always thought of Chomsky in this way - as a sort of bearer of arcane information, a sort of Castanedian Don Juan, able to introduce his initiates through a gateway into an alternate reality that exists all around us but that only those who accept "the way" and follow their guide can experience.
That, I believe, is close to the experience that many a college freshman, discovering Chomsky for the first time, experiences. It's as though suddenly they've been let in on a big secret, and allowed access to some big truth that was withheld to them previously. It can make one feel smarter, enlightened...special. It allows one entry into new social groups wherein the members reinforce each other's egos by praising each other's moral sense while the moral cripples outside the group are vilified - all very seductive.
Most of us pass through this experience as little more than a stage on the way to maturation as we realize at some point that the Chomskyan view is a constructed reality that is less than satisfying for explaining the more real, consensual reality the rest of the world inhabits.
Sadly, some people never grow up.
Anyway, those are just a couple thoughts after reading Hartley's post, which I recommend.
Update: After reading this, are you confused as to whether I like or dislike Chomsky? Read here.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Explaining Chomsky.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.solomonia.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-renamedtb.cgi/1609
As a person who went to MIT, I can offer some perspectives on Chomsky.
First, I personally met him a few times, but I don't know him well.
Second, I know well a number of people who know him very well. They come in exactly two kinds:
(A) "They worship the man, like a god" (apologies to Apocalypse Now), and
(B) They consider him to be the most consistently and profoundly dishonest person they have ever met.
Of those who know him well, I've never met one who fell between these two extremes.
Just FYI.
Interesting, thanks. I find Chomsky to be a fascinating character. Love him or hate him, it can't be denied he's a brilliant person - and walking proof that being brilliant doesn't always make one right. (or honest)
I am not an intellectual by any standard of academic assessment but a keen observer of the World and how we live in it. I would therefore like to offer my opinion as objectively as I can. Those I think are really dishonest are the ones that vehemently hate to hear any criticisms of their beliefs and favored systems. But we all should remember that no one, not even one that ever lived on this planet, is perfectly honest. The two major ideological polarities of modern history, the so-called Capitalist Democracy and the erstwhile Maxist Socialism as used to be practised in the USSR all have horrific human flaws that the chief proponents arrogantly fail to admit.
We all gravitate one or the other depending on what we understand and appreciate overwhelmingly about it. We have never as a human race attempted to summon a concensus on how well we should manage our lives politically and hence, the never-ending episodes of conflicts among us.
Whilst the Marxist concepts are full of unrealistic ideals only probably achievable via a collective dictatorship, the evils of Capitalism are no heartwarming precepts for any fair-minded people. I think it would be an interesting work to undertake in finding out why, and what type of, people accept what they favor.
The US application of Capitalist tools vary with the kind of administration that is in power-- Democrats or Republicans, Conservatives or Liberals. The arrogant, parochial, pseudo-inclusive posturing of the current Bush administration for one takes the nation to the dangerous extreme where most of the evils of Capitalism are manifested. If that is how most people outside the US view US, then Capitalism suffers.
The demise of Soviet Union has long spelled the fate of the Marxist systems. We all know that now. The focus now is on how much of the evil in Capitalism is the World going to suffer under a pig-headed administration that takes its unique but transient relative superiority in arms and wealth for granted. The World is watching and History will judge Capitalism more harshly if some wisdom of balance and fairness is not introduced into the workings of Capitalism today to offset its harshness.