RONNIE... just discovered who Chomsky is.

[mburbank]

I was going to insist on a whole new thread for this, something along the lines of "Chomsky discussion for those who actually know who he is" But I started this thread, so what the hell.

Shach. You should know better than to hand me a single quote and expect a reaction to your reaction.What is the source? A lecture, and article? I would absolutely need to read the whole thing before responding. As I've already said (and it was critcism) I find Chomsky purposefully inflammatory, almsot as if he disred people to do what you just did. I'm not sure I understand why, I think it's an academic habbit (and an ugly one) for roping people and dragging them in angry for an intellectual thumping. Its a functional tactic in question and answer if you're an intellectual bully (and I think he is), but it doesn't really play as sound bites. So. Without conext, I've nothing to say.

His blurbing of a book without a thourough (or quite possibly any) reading is absolutely shameful and a habbit, like his signing of petitions without reading them, that gets him into lots of trouble. It's lazy, it's irresponsible, it muddies the water and it reflects very badly on him as a person. He's a very strange guy and frankly his growing celebrity status baffles me. If you're looking for an apologist in me, you've got the wrong guy.

BUT. Like lots of folks on the very outside on the envelope he can be very useful in forcing things into the middles discussion that would not be there otherwise. I think people who like him AND people who hate him tend to read his work far too lightly and I think calling him a 'psuedo' intellectual is an unfair charge. A mean intellectual, a hasty or vendictive intellectual, slippery, bossy, aloof, egomaniacal, all arguable. Calling him Psuedo, though, strikes me as short shrift.