Comment: The story below has got to be a major embarrassment for the ISO, which has been fawning over Chomsky for years, endorsing Chomsky's views without criticism, even though Chomsky is an "anarchist," a member of the IWW (or he was in 2000-2001 )
 
Chomsky's name has been on the cover of ISR, the ISO's magazine, more often than the names of Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Trotsky, and even more often even than the name of Tony Cliff, the English ex-Trotskyist who invented the International Socialist (IS) tendency, and who, interestingly, did not oppose the expulsion of the ISO from the world IS tendency a few years ago.
 

 
Chomsky backs 'Bush-lite' Kerry
Matthew Tempest
Saturday March 20, 2004
The Guardian
Noam Chomsky, the political theorist and leftwing guru, yesterday gave his reluctant endorsement to the Democratic party's presidential contender, John Kerry, calling him "Bush-lite", but a "fraction" better than his rival.

Professor Chomsky - a linguist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as well as a renowned chronicler of American foreign policy - said there were "small differences" between Senator Kerry and the Republican president. But, in an interview on the Guardian's politics website, he added that those small differences "can translate into large outcomes".

He describes the choice facing US voters in November as "the choice between two factions of the business party". But the Bush administration was so "cruel and savage", it was important to replace it.

He said: "Kerry is sometimes described as 'Bush-lite', which is not inaccurate. But despite the limited differences both domestically and internationally, there are differences. In a system of immense power, small differences can translate into large outcomes" . . .

Johnnie Smoltz wrote about Chomsky's backing Kerry:

>> The story below has got to be a major embarrassment for the ISO, which has been fawning over Chomsky for years, endorsing Chomsky's views without criticism, even though Chomsky is an "anarchist,"<<

I don't know why the International Socialist Organization needs to be embarrassed. Many socialists recognize the need to engage in electoral politics as a strategy to increase democracy. It is the ANARCHISTS who generally reject that idea... and since I've heard nearly every anarchist under the sun praise Chomsky at one point or another... why wouldn't it be the ANARCHISTS who should now be DEEPLY EMBARRASED that Chomsky has now endorsed Kerry????!!!!

At any rate, Chomsky made the endorsement not because he's sold out to the powers that be... but because he recognizes how dire the situation is. Chomsky even called Kerry, "Bush-lite." Not exactly a ringing endorsement. Chomsky sees W as a very dangerous man who cares nothing for the constitution, the UN, international law, or world opinion. Kerry may care a little bit more about constitutional rights and perhaps the U.S. standing in the world community... so Chomsky... with great hesitation, has endorsed Kerry.

Noam Chomsky is one of the world's five dumbest men.

He's in there with Ralph Nader, Ramsey Clark, Alan Dershowitz, and Gore Vidal.

Trying to name someone dumber than those five would be near impossible. They are the the dumbest of the dumb.

Al Gore is a C student who got all his 'save the earth' bullshit from remedial science classes when he couldn't run with the big dogs. He flunked out of no less than 3 colleges.

Clinton the Felon never had an original thought in his life, always got caught and flunked out of Oxford. He was never a rhodes scholar.

Clinton to Monica: "You're a 21 year old intern Monica. Do you promise to keep this a secret and never tell any of your girlfriends?"

Monica to Clinton: "Oh sure Bill. I'm never going to tell anyone that I had sex with the President of the United States in the Oval Office. My lips are sealed (well not exactly)."

Incrediibly dumb on Clinton's part to think Monica wouldn't boast to her friends.

Fortunately, GW Bush is a whole lot smarter than Clinton and wouldn't make such incredibly stupid misjudgements.

That sure means a lot coming from you. I'll be sure to revise my opinion of all those people real soon. You sure know how to write a compelling argument.

I just had to look this up. Al Gore graduated from Harvard with honors at age 21 (or 22). That would be young for most. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes scholar and graduated from Yale Law School.

These are smart guys. Well, at least Clinton is. So's George Bush I. He seems to be a legit Yalie, though a rich one.

Gerald Ford was also a pretty smart guy, graduating from UMich with honors, and then later Yale Law. But, he's somewhat unique, in that, like Clinton, he was a working class guy. Yale and UMich were a lot easier back then, though. It's more competitive today.

The less smart cookies: GW Bush, clearly, faked his way through Yale. Ronald Reagan. Richard Nixon, perhaps - it's hard to tell with Whittier College. LBJ went to Southwest Texas Teachers State College.

Some of you conservatives will tell any lie to discredit anyone. LOL.

He is yet another gate keeper ( like SO many others as the stakes get more dire ) in that his views or analysis never take into consideration the violence of the shadow estate. We see it again and again in the massacres right here in the land of the freedumbs.
Pine Ridge
MOVE
Waco
and the people never mobilized. The media did its job with mis information, spectacle and blackouts. Outrage was managed and contained becase they had the only keys to public information.
We have a power right here to change all that.
This forced choice between one phony S&B dickwad and another, smirking, stupid, spineless S&B dickwad is no choice at all. It's still early and there are many ways to slap the reality of the situation into general and common resonance with the ones who don't follow these slinking, stinking programs of criminality.
The forth riech is very vulnerable to information which is a reason for these dedicated negative, miss informed, racist, evil right wing and beyond campers that park here like crows on a telephone wire.

:>)

I think Chomsky's point is that the elections matter little since there is no real choice. If they don't matter much, the little that they do matter might make some difference. That difference shouldn't be viewed as our salvation, but only as a small difference.

He's proven this time and agian by publishing stupid naive biased views in his books.

they don't come more stupid than ol' Noamie.

*** This comment was posted from an IP associated with a disruptive poster. The MD5 hash of their IP is beffacffec. This value is the same even if the user uses another name. Only posters deemed disruptive by the editorial collective will have this text appended to their posts. We apologize for any erroneous misidentifications.

Fact: GW Bush is much smarter than Bill Clinton

Fact: Gomer Pyle is much smarter than Noam Chomsky

Who is Gomer Pyle? What school does he teach at?

I can only guess from the mistaken assertion about GW, that professor Pyle is not very as smart as Chomsky.

Very telling analogy from bushblower...one the one end of the spectrum is Noam and Bill....at the other is Gomer and da shrub....but I guess that makes sense if you want to keep the metric on the same scale....

Denial doesn't make your point.

GWB is considerably more intelligent than Bill Clinton. I draw that conclusion by observing the decisions made by the two of them. Clinton stumbled and bumbled for eight long years. America somehow managed to skate through those years without a major international crisis like 9/11. Thank God!!! GWB, on the other hand, has proven himself to be a strong and able leader. No stumbling and bumbling by GWB.

In the case of Noam Chomksy there isn't anyone to compare with. Perhaps Twiddle Dee and Twiddle Dumb. The guy is completely brain dead and an utter embarrassment to the university that hired him. The phrase, "dumber than dirt," comes to mind.

So, as to Chomsky being "dumb," none of you has actually bothered to make an argument. You all just assert that he IS. Which makes you look like fucking fools, but apparently you're so stupid that you don't even mind it, since you've got so much company.

Someone said in passing that "whatever school hired him" must look stupid for employing him. That school is MIT, the top technical school in the world, where he has worked for decades. Yeah. They had better be worried some internet losers think they look stupid.

Especially since any school would be lucky to have Chomsky, as he is one of very few living scientists who SINGLE-HANDEDLY revolutionized their field. Chomsky is universally recognized by linguists (those who scientifically study language) as having revolutionized their discipline.

Some of you mentioned his writings as being "dumb," but didn't bother to quote him. You didn't even quote a title and paraphrase. I'll take that as evidence that you've never read anything he has written. Which just demonstrates how moronic you are.

Being an anarchist, I disagree with his "lesser of two evils" argument. I do not think the minor differences between Bush and Kerry make a vote for either worthwhile. Unlike you people, I don't characterize everyone I disagree with as "stupid," because that isn't the only tool in my intellectual toolbox. I'm able to respect Chomsky's intelligence and still disagree with him. This is also because anarchist political culture is not homogenously, rigidly, dogmatically uniform, like yours obviously is.

In fact, "the lesser of two evils" is the SAME logic used by both the mainstream left and right in America, which would include you stupid fucking yahoo's bashing Chomsky. In fact, the only reason you're bashing him is because he's not on your "team."

I've seen the same logic employed on "conservative" web sites where people say they will "hold their nose" (those exact words used by both the conservatives and Chomsky) and vote for Bush, even though he isn't conservative enough for their tastes.

So, riddle me this, geniuses, if Chomsky is "one of the world's dumbest men" for using the same logic as millions of American voters - that voting is a choice of the "lesser of two evils" with minimal difference between them - then what does that make all those millions of Americans?

Millions more of the top five dumbest people?

Oh, right, you're fucking morons who can't count. Never mind. There's no real communication possible with functional illiterates.

Bush Admirer's only recourse is to call someone 'dumb'.
My conflict with Noam is his aversion to mention the real avenues
of power in the shadow policies that use murder to direct politics.
He seems to have a problem with what he calls 'conspiracy s' such
as the JFK, RFK, MLK, Welstone etc. elite methods of containing
progressive change.