• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Noam Chomsky on Media Control and the Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here is a quote from Chomsky from his book "Media Control"

"The role of the media in contemporary politics forces us to ask what kind of a world and what kind of a society we want to live in, and in particular what sense of democracy do we want this to be democratic society? Let me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy. One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free. If you look up democracy in the dictionary you'll get a definition something like that.

An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception."

It seems to me what Chomsky is saying in this writing of his is that the media and the control of information controls the thoughts and perceptions of people like ourselves. And because the media controls our thoughts and perceptions, our thoughts and perceptions might be incorrect and serving powerful interests and people of the country. Powerful people and powerful interests use the media to get everybody else in support of their agenda by controlling our thoughts through information control.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
TimmyBoy said:
Here is a quote from Chomsky from his book "Media Control"

"The role of the media in contemporary politics forces us to ask what kind of a world and what kind of a society we want to live in, and in particular what sense of democracy do we want this to be democratic society? Let me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy. One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free. If you look up democracy in the dictionary you'll get a definition something like that.

An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception."

It seems to me what Chomsky is saying in this writing of his is that the media and the control of information controls the thoughts and perceptions of people like ourselves. And because the media controls our thoughts and perceptions, our thoughts and perceptions might be incorrect and serving powerful interests and people of the country. Powerful people and powerful interests use the media to get everybody else in support of their agenda by controlling our thoughts through information control.
Of course, this presupposes that all the media are in cahoots with each other, that ratings/competition have no influence, that no reporter has a spine exceeding that of a jellyfish, and that the orchestrators are all smart enough to pull it off.
Not saying here that the power mongers are not trying to do it, just that there are too many individuals in the herd of media types, and they can't cull them all. Some of them end up getting Nobel prizes for going against the herd instinct, and those are the ones whose writings you want to read.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
UtahBill said:
Of course, this presupposes that all the media are in cahoots with each other, that ratings/competition have no influence, that no reporter has a spine exceeding that of a jellyfish, and that the orchestrators are all smart enough to pull it off.
Not saying here that the power mongers are not trying to do it, just that there are too many individuals in the herd of media types, and they can't cull them all. Some of them end up getting Nobel prizes for going against the herd instinct, and those are the ones whose writings you want to read.

Chomsky argues the media serves the interests of the business establishment. That our thoughts and perceptions are controlled by the media and the media will only print or say such things that serve the interests of the business establishment. Their doesn't necessarily have to be a conspiracy or powerful figuires or institutions in cahoots with each other to achieve that. Though at times institutions and powerful figuires are in cahoots with each other when it is in their self interests to do so. I would also like to say their are alot of pressures on reporters to report a certain way or not to report certain facts at all.
 
Last edited:
H

hipsterdufus

TimmyBoy said:
Here is a quote from Chomsky from his book "Media Control"

"The role of the media in contemporary politics forces us to ask what kind of a world and what kind of a society we want to live in, and in particular what sense of democracy do we want this to be democratic society? Let me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy. One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free. If you look up democracy in the dictionary you'll get a definition something like that.

An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception."

It seems to me what Chomsky is saying in this writing of his is that the media and the control of information controls the thoughts and perceptions of people like ourselves. And because the media controls our thoughts and perceptions, our thoughts and perceptions might be incorrect and serving powerful interests and people of the country. Powerful people and powerful interests use the media to get everybody else in support of their agenda by controlling our thoughts through information control.
Great post. If you want someone actually representatice of the left in this country, Chomsky is it, along with Howard Zinn. I wish the MSM would interview these guys occasionally.

Pat Tillman was a Chomsky fan, and wanted to meet him after returning from the war. That's just too much!
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1007-22.htm
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
hipsterdufus said:
Great post. If you want someone actually representatice of the left in this country, Chomsky is it, along with Howard Zinn. I wish the MSM would interview these guys occasionally.

Pat Tillman was a Chomsky fan, and wanted to meet him after returning from the war. That's just too much!
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1007-22.htm
I feel really bad for Tillman. When he joined I was thinking to myself "don't join, you don't know what you are doing, you don't understand what you are getting yourself into. It's not what you think it is." But I was also proud that he was willing to sacrafice himself selflessly on the same token. I too, after my return from Bosnia became a fan of Chomsky. I would listen to Chomsky and I was like "Damn, this guy is hitting alot of things on the head."

I read some of his views on Bosnia, he made some comments that were accurate but I could tell that he did not know the whole story, but he never claimed to know the whole story either. Very articulate and intelligent man. I wrote to him an email explaining the whole story of Bosnia.
 

Connecticutter

Active member
Joined
Jun 25, 2005
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
Location
New Haven, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception.
The prevailing conception - that's nonsense.

When Chomsky says that the public is "barred" from managing their own affairs, what is he saying? He's saying that he doesn't like what the free market provides in terms of media, and therefore he wants "the public" to use force to control information flow.

Right now, there's absolutely nothing stopping me from getting any opinion I want, when I want it. I can read Chomsky's papers, I can read columns, and I can read anything from the millions of bloggers that are out there. There is absolutely no control over our information.

Chomsky interprets little control as "strict control" because he doesn't like the outcome. It's as simple as that.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Chomsky is a proponent of anarchism..simple as that. Many people in the media lash out at buisiness...his use of generalization is testimony to how he makes an argument. He always leaves out vital details and information..I pointed it out clearly in the International Politics thread.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
Chomsky is a proponent of anarchism..simple as that. Many people in the media lash out at buisiness...his use of generalization is testimony to how he makes an argument. He always leaves out vital details and information..I pointed it out clearly in the International Politics thread.
You didn't point out anything in any thread concerning Chomsky, all you did was try to discredit him since he says things you don't like. I just ignored your posts because their was little sense in debating with you, since, first you really don't know what you are talkign about and next, their is little sense in debating somebody who is entrenched in their position. I am not going to change my position, because I know I am right. And you are not going to change your position either because you simply don't want to accept reality the way it really is or falsely believe you are right. Either way, it's stupid to debate when you or I are unwilling to budge from our positions. You even denied outright facts, claiming these proven facts were "false." I don't see why I should take you seriously.

So what if he has anarchist beliefs? I have a friend who has socialist/anarchist convictions (stand corrected). They are entitled to their convictions and it doesn't mean they are un-intelligent or that their political views have no validity. I personally do not have anarchist or communist convictions but I learn alot from those who do. You probably don't even know what anarchism is or any famous anarchists, some of which who brought you the 8 hour work day.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
TimmyBoy said:
You didn't point out anything in any thread concerning Chomsky, all you did was try to discredit him since he says things you don't like. I just ignored your posts because their was little sense in debating with you, since, first you really don't know what you are talkign about and next, their is little sense in debating somebody who is entrenched in their position. I am not going to change my position, because I know I am right. And you are not going to change your position either because you simply don't want to accept reality the way it really is or falsely believe you are right. Either way, it's stupid to debate when you or I are unwilling to budge from our positions. You even denied outright facts, claiming these proven facts were "false." I don't see why I should take you seriously.
The quotes you used from Chomsky were FALSE. I proved it by stating the historical and well known facts.

TimmyBoy said:
So what if he has anarchist beliefs? I have a friend who has socialist/anarchist convictions (stand corrected). They are entitled to their convictions and it doesn't mean they are un-intelligent or that their political views have no validity.
It means they don't know history. Anarchism has never worked..it's nothing but chaos. Chomsky is for individuals regulating themselves..no government..nothing. Oddly enough he also makes a bizzare case for a marxist government and the exclusion and persecution of republicans.

TimmyBoy said:
I personally do not have anarchist or communist convictions but I learn alot from those who do.
Somone should tell them that it doesn't work in real life.

TimmyBoy said:
You probably don't even know what anarchism is or any famous anarchists, some of which who brought you the 8 hour work day.
Acctually I do. Anarchism is the elimination of all social structures and the self regulation of the individual rather than an organized government. I also know of a famous anarchist; William Godwin.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
The quotes you used from Chomsky were FALSE. I proved it by stating the historical and well known facts.



It means they don't know history. Anarchism has never worked..it's nothing but chaos. Chomsky is for individuals regulating themselves..no government..nothing. Oddly enough he also makes a bizzare case for a marxist government and the exclusion and persecution of republicans.



Somone should tell them that it doesn't work in real life.



Acctually I do. Anarchism is the elimination of all social structures and the self regulation of the individual rather than an organized government. I also know of a famous anarchist; William Godwin.
Just about every statement you made here, is completely and totally false. You DIDN'T "prove" anything at all. Maybe in your mind you "proved" something but in fact you did not. You deny the US aiding Nazi war criminals to Latin America in return for services in their field of expertise and you also deny that the US used Nazi scientists to put a man on the moon. You also deny the vast war crimes that the US supported in South Korea prior to the Korean War. All of this is pretty much common knowledge with the experts in this field. You simply have no credibility nor do you know what you are talking about. And besides, who I should I listen to? Noam Chomsky, a respected professor at MIT who has done extensive research for the Pentagon or some bimbo who doesn't first thing about what he is talking about on the internet? Your assertions of what anarchism is, is completely and totally false as well. You assertion that anarchism is chaos is completely and totally wrong. The only person who is spouting falsehoods is YOU. You are just a "know it all" who thinks they know everything, but knows nothing. Educate yourself, grow a brain, then come back and talk to me. You don't know anything about Missle Defense from reading your posts and you don't know anything about this topic either. And you continue to make claims that facts are "false" which you know, if you can't even acknowledge the facts, then we can't even have a conversation on the topic.
 
Last edited:

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
The quotes you used from Chomsky were FALSE. I proved it by stating the historical and well known facts.



It means they don't know history. Anarchism has never worked..it's nothing but chaos. Chomsky is for individuals regulating themselves..no government..nothing. Oddly enough he also makes a bizzare case for a marxist government and the exclusion and persecution of republicans.



Somone should tell them that it doesn't work in real life.



Acctually I do. Anarchism is the elimination of all social structures and the self regulation of the individual rather than an organized government. I also know of a famous anarchist; William Godwin.

Timmyboy is quite right, you have absolutely no idea, whatsover, what you're talking about.

"Anarchism has never worked...it's nothing but chaos"??

How limited you are. How dull and contrived. And so, you dare reflect on such things in which, you have such a poor understanding of and have the effrontery to speak on others understanding of history.

.Acctually I do. Anarchism is the elimination of all social structures and the self regulation of the individual rather than an organized government. I also know of a famous anarchist; William Godwin.




Why don't you try actually reading some of Chomsky's literature.

Let me help you, shallow man:

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/19961223.htm
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Brigand said:
Timmyboy is quite right, you have absolutely no idea, whatsover, what you're talking about.
I know precisely what I'm talking about.

Brigand said:
How limited you are. How dull and contrived. And so, you dare reflect on such things in which, you have such a poor understanding of and have the effrontery to speak on others understanding of history.
Is that so? Provide an example of 1 successful anarchist society. I'll provide you with one that didn't work..France during the revolution.


Brigand said:
Why don't you try actually reading some of Chomsky's literature.
Why don't you try reading your sources before you post them.

"...they anticipate he will lay out his goals and strategy with similar precision and clarity, only to be disappointed with his generalized statements of libertarian socialist values." That is precisely my point. Chomsky never offers solutions to the problems, often takes historical events out of context and distorts them, and generalizes to an insane degree. Obviously Chomsky has never studied history or he'd know that anarchism has never worked in real life. Anarchism looks good on paper but when its applied to real life it always results in mass murder, total chaos, and the inability of the state to protect itself from outside threats.
 
Last edited:

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
Here is a quote from Chomsky from his book "Media Control"

"The role of the media in contemporary politics forces us to ask what kind of a world and what kind of a society we want to live in, and in particular what sense of democracy do we want this to be democratic society? Let me begin by counter-posing two different conceptions of democracy. One conception of democracy has it that a democratic society is one in which the public has the means to participate in some meaningful way in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free. If you look up democracy in the dictionary you'll get a definition something like that.

An alternative conception of democracy is that the public must be barred from managing their own affairs and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. That may sound like an odd conception of democracy but it's important to understand that it is the prevailing conception."

It seems to me what Chomsky is saying in this writing of his is that the media and the control of information controls the thoughts and perceptions of people like ourselves. And because the media controls our thoughts and perceptions, our thoughts and perceptions might be incorrect and serving powerful interests and people of the country. Powerful people and powerful interests use the media to get everybody else in support of their agenda by controlling our thoughts through information control.

:confused:

This makes absolutely no sense at all, for an educated person anyway. Noam often talks down to everyone, that is his way of growing a larger dick, then the one he now, unfortunately for him, has to live with everyday. The day of this rhetoric is long gone, we have the internet Noam, your crap holds no water, nor weight, give it up! He is a dying breed, and is struggling to keep his sheep in line, how very sad so many still kneel at the alter.:roll:
 

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
I know precisely what I'm talking about.



Is that so? Provide an example of 1 successful anarchist society. I'll provide you with one that didn't work..France during the revolution.




Why don't you try reading your sources before you post them.

"...they anticipate he will lay out his goals and strategy with similar precision and clarity, only to be disappointed with his generalized statements of libertarian socialist values." That is precisely my point. Chomsky never offers solutions to the problems, often takes historical events out of context and distorts them, and generalizes to an insane degree. Obviously Chomsky has never studied history or he'd know that anarchism has never worked in real life. Anarchism looks good on paper but when its applied to real life it always results in mass murder, total chaos, and the inability of the state to protect itself from outside threats.
"...they anticipate he will lay out his goals and strategy with similar precision and clarity, only to be disappointed with his generalized statements of libertarian socialist values." That is precisely my point.


No, it's not! You said nothing, of such sorts!! You spoke of Chomsky's absolute and catergorical convictions on Anarchy, when this article 'explains' he doens't have any! THAT'S the point, you blockheaded, daft little man.

You're one of those that takes snippets of information, and hoovers them up to suit your own tiny little bunch of prejudices.

Obviously Chomsky has never studied history!


OH, LOOK! HERE WE GO AGAIN!! So, NOW it's not only the others that you commented on as having no historical learning...it's now Chomsky!

No, you're far too doltish, for this to even remotely progress beyond the realms of your tiny little province, and you've made it, altogether, clear that debating and talking with you is an utter waste of time!
 

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Deegan said:
:confused:

This makes absolutely no sense at all, for an educated person anyway. Noam often talks down to everyone, that is his way of growing a larger dick, then the one he now, unfortunately for him, has to live with everyday. The day of this rhetoric is long gone, we have the internet Noam, your crap holds no water, nor weight, give it up! He is a dying breed, and is struggling to keep his sheep in line, how very sad so many still kneel at the alter.:roll:
As for you!, your display of being confused is rebounded out of your own stupidity...and not that the quote/post made no-sense.

your crap holds no water"?

Needless to say, your laughable mix of metaphor's, shows your own standards of education. Is it really any wonder that you didn't make any sense of it?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Brigand said:
No, it's not! You said nothing, of such sorts!! You spoke of Chomsky's absolute and catergorical convictions on Anarchy, when this article 'explains' he doens't have any! THAT'S the point, you blockheaded, daft little man.
I clearly stated it in the thread about Chomsky in the Internation Politics section. You're a real fool...why don't you acctually read the source you provided me. Here are some quotes from Chomsky:

"The currents of anarchist thought that interest me (there are many)....."

"I should add, however, that I find myself in substantial agreement with people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of issues..."

Brigand said:
You're one of those that takes snippets of information, and hoovers them up to suit your own tiny little bunch of prejudices.
Baaaaah baaaaah sheepy sheep..better hope your shephard doesn't lead you into the jaws of a wolf.


Brigand said:
OH, LOOK! HERE WE GO AGAIN!! So, NOW it's not only the others that you commented on as having no historical learning...it's now Chomsky!
Aside from criticizing the current government system he also claims that we don't know enough about governments to know which is best..an oxymoron at the very least. If more than 3000 years of recorded history isn't enough for Chomsky to make his choice then no amount of time will be sufficient for him. There hasn't been a single instance in which anarchism works. I also find it humorous that when Chomsky was asked where he got a quote that he used in one of books he responded..."I read it somewhere."

Brigand said:
No, you're far too doltish, for this to even remotely progress beyond the realms of your tiny little province, and you've made it, altogether, clear that debating and talking with you is an utter waste of time!
HAHA. I'm still waiting for you to name 1 society in which anarchism worked.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Brigand said:
As for you!, your display of being confused is rebounded out of your own stupidity...and not that the quote/post made no-sense.

your crap holds no water"?

Needless to say, your laughable mix of metaphor's, shows your own standards of education. Is it really any wonder that you didn't make any sense of it?

I made my own way through my education, I didn't allow some confused professor to make my decisions for me, you have obviously decided to just trust someone else to direct you, how very sad for you.:2wave:
 

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
I clearly stated it in the thread about Chomsky in the Internation Politics section. You're a real fool...why don't you acctually read the source you provided me. Here are some quotes from Chomsky:

"The currents of anarchist thought that interest me (there are many)....."

"I should add, however, that I find myself in substantial agreement with people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of issues..."



Baaaaah baaaaah sheepy sheep..better hope your shephard doesn't lead you into the jaws of a wolf.




Aside from criticizing the current government system he also claims that we don't know enough about governments to know which is best..an oxymoron at the very least. If more than 3000 years of recorded history isn't enough for Chomsky to make his choice then no amount of time will be sufficient for him. There hasn't been a single instance in which anarchism works. I also find it humorous that when Chomsky was asked where he got a quote that he used in one of books he responded..."I read it somewhere."



HAHA. I'm still waiting for you to name 1 society in which anarchism worked.
No, you're not getting it. I've told you, you're far too daft to get into this kind of debate with and that's exactly what my standing is.

And on that final note, essentially proving my point, you should include ALL of the paragraph, and not the snippet's of information, that suits you.

For the matter of others to see, the full paragraph says:

-I should add, however, that I find myself in substantial agreement with people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of issues; and for some years, was able to write only in their journals. And I also admire their commitment to rationality -- which is rare -- though I do not think they see the consequences of the doctrines they espouse, or their profound moral failings.
 

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Deegan said:
I made my own way through my education, I didn't allow some confused professor to make my decisions for me, you have obviously decided to just trust someone else to direct you, how very sad for you.:2wave:
Hmm...Boring, typical and pig-headed. Yes, you did, indeed, make YOUR own way through YOUR education, I'm perplexed on how you think that lends you any crendence, when you don't do a good job of manifesting this self-taught wisdom of yours! How strange, that 'professors' become confused and stupid, when they publish things that people like you, simply don't understand or disagree with . And let's face it, fella. You've no desire to see over your wall, but you're fine, throwing your garbage over it.

I really ****ing despise people like you, more and more with each post I read.
 
Last edited:

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, I would like to refer to my new signature below ;)
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Brigand said:
Hmm...Boring, typical and pig-headed. Yes, you did, indeed, make YOUR own way through YOUR education, I'm perplexed on how you think that lends you any crendence, when you don't do a good job of manifesting this self-taught wisdom of yours! How strange, that 'professors' become confused and stupid, when they publish things that people like you, simply don't understand or disagree with . And let's face it, fella. You've no desire to see over your wall, but you're fine, throwing your garbage over it.

I really ****ing despise people like you, more and more with each post I read.
Well don't cry about fella, I just don't buy in to the mans rhetoric, it is my right. Despise me all you like, I am sure it helps you to rationalize your own position, by attempting to disregard mine as irrelevant, or not worthy, Chomsky has taught you well. The facts are.......well, that facts are indeed there, no matter what "corporate news agency" you happen to be watching. This man is trying to create a paranoia, and inventing situations that just don't exist, there is no conspiracy. There are spins, there are left leaning, right leaning news sources, but a conspiracy, please, you sound as paranoid as the professor. There are folks out there that can be easily swayed, or manipulated......funny, that is starting to sound a lot like the Chomsky fans, or should I say sheep, that I know.;)
 

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Deegan said:
Well don't cry about fella, I just don't buy in to the mans rhetoric, it is my right. Despise me all you like, I am sure it helps you to rationalize your own position, by attempting to disregard mine as irrelevant, or not worthy, Chomsky has taught you well. The facts are.......well, that facts are indeed there, no matter what "corporate news agency" you happen to be watching. This man is trying to create a paranoia, and inventing situations that just don't exist, there is no conspiracy. There are spins, there are left leaning, right leaning news sources, but a conspiracy, please, you sound as paranoid as the professor. There are folks out there that can be easily swayed, or manipulated......funny, that is starting to sound a lot like the Chomsky fans, or should I say sheep, that I know.;)
What paranoia? who said anything about being paranoid? Who, on earth, questioned the existence of spin? What conspiracy, are you ****ing talking about?? For petes sakes, what Inventions??!!!

Listen, you complete jackass! The thread has nothing, to do at all, with any of this bollocks! This post went from Chomsky's views on media discussion to the views of Anarchy.

There is nothing, whatsovever! suprising about the ideas passed and made about the Media! And there is nothing in the previous post about Chomsky 'ideas' about anarchy, that should be even dismissed!

There is NO catergorical points made by Chomsky, about the idea of Anarchy!! It's discussion and thoughts, possibilities, problems and worries, mistakes... there's nothing more to be read out of it! THATS the point, you moronic idiot!

The reason I despise people like you is because, you're the kind of fella, that I would like to either move and shift promptly from, if say, we're at the pub... or want to punch you in the nose, at the very notion of hearing you. You're a dull little man, with nothing new to offer! You call people sheep and slaves to those that even remotely speak of alternatives.

You fondly support your politics, so what does that mean? It doesn't make you a sheep. It makes you a bloke with a view and a few ideas, on what you think works, like the rest of us, here.

The ones that have something different to offer. The ones we 'should' be paying close attention to are the those that see improvements.

I see people like Chomsky trailblazing the way for people like me and you and the following generations after we're long gone.

Now, **** off! you stupid twat and think about it!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Brigand said:
I see people like Chomsky trailblazing the way for people like me and you and the following generations after we're long gone.
:rofl Maybe you forgot that John Kerry lost. Chomsky can criticize all he wants but without offering solutions his opinions are just a flee fart in a hurricane. As I said earlier, if 3000 years of recorded history isn't enough for Chomsky to make his choice then no amount of time will be sufficient for him.

Brigand said:
The ones that have something different to offer. The ones we 'should' be paying close attention to are the those that see improvements.
Then Chomsky isn't your man. All he does is criticize x, y, and z but never says what he thinks should have been done differently. The man has nothing different to offer..they're the same criticisms over and over again and he never offers solutions.
 
Last edited:

Brigand

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
:rofl Maybe you forgot that John Kerry lost. Chomsky can criticize all he wants but without offering solutions his opinions are just a flee fart in a hurricane. As I said earlier, if 3000 years of recorded history isn't enough for Chomsky to make his choice then no amount of time will be sufficient for him.




Then Chomsky isn't your man. All he does is criticize x, y, and z but never says what he thinks should have been done differently. The man has nothing different to offer..they're the same criticisms over and over again and he never offers solutions.
John kerry? JOHN KERRY? What the hell, has that got to do with, anything I said?

Seriously, just go away and learn to play with those building blocks, you obviously didn't get your small mind around the first time, you stupid little man! You've never bothered to read Chomsky in any detail and you've made that absolutely clear, from you cack '3000 year' repeat.
 
Last edited:

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Errr, what are you doing here sir?

You seem to just be throwing your weight around, like we can even judge this over the internet. You have to this point, done nothing but belittle others who have posted here, and distracted the conversation with empty verbage, and insults. If you were any good at it, I might even have become frustrated, and possibly responded in the same manner, but I have self control, you should try to find yours! I am not a fan of Chomsky, this is more then clear, but you have done nothing to change my mind on the subject. I have given a explanation for my distrust, why don't you try and counter that with some real debate, and leave pettiness at the stoop.:roll:
 
Top Bottom