| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
weebil
Joined: 24 May 2009
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:01 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| rollo wrote: |
Yeah!!! What University poli sci classes list Chomsky's books on reading lists??? A lot of serious people consider him a one trick pony, a lot of serious people consider him a crack pot who has found a niche preaching to the choir so to speak.
He focuses entirely on the U.S. seems to never place things in context with what is taking place in the world. Often tells big fat lies.
But as long as impressionable undergraduates will buy his books, I guess it does not matter.
Personally I find him dull and a bit of a second rater. |
OH U |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lichtarbeiter
Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It is just I dislike Chomsky's biased, simplistic writings and its too U.S. centric focus. |
Chomsky practices research in history and international relations insofar as it holds moral relevance to him and his audience. His recurring theme throughout all his work is that we are responsible for what we do. That's why his emphasis is on his own country's actions. He could have talked about the China's destructive role in Pol Pot's Cambodia, and he likely would've been correct, but it would have zero moral value to us whatsoever since we can't control what China does.
Your attitudes seem to suggest you would have been qualified to be a top-notch Soviet Commissar: "Why are you only pointing the finger at us? Look at what the Afghans are doing to each other!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh now I see. He does it for moral reasons. he actually isnt a one trick pony with limited insight to offer, he is spreading morality. A saint I think
oR HE JUST KNOWS HIS AUDIENCE AND PLAYS TO THEM. Anyway he treats non European states and peoples as if they are static, that nothing ive. occurs until the European imperialist arrive. He never tries to show the flux and changes that go on in the societies. This in itself is a type of imperialism. Said has touched on this in his criticisms of Western history of the "other".
One more time; he just is not a heavy weight, his writing just has too many flaws and biases. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lichtarbeiter
Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Anyway he treats non European states and peoples as if they are static, that nothing ive. occurs until the European imperialist arrive. |
No he doesn't. He just doesn't examine it in detail, and I've already told you exactly why he doesn't focus on what happens in third-world countries before the Europeans arrived. Propagating absurd, empty strawmen isn't going to help you at all.
You're honestly telling me you can't understand the value in focusing on events that we in the West can control rather than events that we can't control? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lichtarbeiter wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Anyway he treats non European states and peoples as if they are static, that nothing ive. occurs until the European imperialist arrive. |
No he doesn't. He just doesn't examine it in detail, and I've already told you exactly why he doesn't focus on what happens in third-world countries before the Europeans arrived. Propagating absurd, empty strawmen isn't going to help you at all.
You're honestly telling me you can't understand the value in focusing on events that we in the West can control rather than events that we can't control? |
It's rather pointless from a political science standpoint (which is why he's not commonly read in political science classes). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| northway wrote: |
| I just think he views the States in an exceptionalist light that doesn't really fit within the political science discipline. He spends entirely too much time trying to show how the US is somehow completely different than the rest of the world, which doesn't really contribute anything towards furthering political theory. He's interesting airplane reading, but I'd be a bit peeved if I got him in a class unless we were reading him for the sake of historiographical analysis. |
He actually states repeatedly that the US in its pursuit of power and its self-justifications is exactly like every other state in history.
He does say the US is unique in being the only country explicitly founded as an empire (which I don't think is particularly relevant to anything but it doesn't detract from his main points); and he says the US is exceptional in the degree to which it is business-run and in the degree to which the population is afraid of enemies, both of which are true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Only 'true "in the Chomsky universe. Just impossible to prove statements founded on his judgements alone!! Only country founded as an empire. Hmmm!! What basis is that statement made and does he compare the founding of America with the founding of other nation states such as the people's Republic of China or perhaps with Mexico. Surely an intellectually honest writer would put that into context, not just make a blanket statement based on his or her opinion.
There are just so many better writers and they bring in so much more interesting ideas and are not so concerned with selling books. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
creeper1
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimchi_pizza
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Location: "Get back on the bus! Here it comes!"
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ha~ I haven't read the thread, but everytime I hear "Chomsky"
I think, "overrated"~ hahaha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
