Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: The True Adonis on June 28, 2009, 01:33:26 PM
-
Questioner: Hello Mr. Chomsky. I’m assuming you know who Ron Paul is. And I’m also assuming you have a general idea about his positions. Here my summary of Mr. Paul’s positions:
- He values property rights, and contracts between people (defended by law enforcement and courts).
Noam Chomsky: Under all circumstances? Suppose someone facing starvation accepts a contract with General Electric that requires him to work 12 hours a day locked into a factory with no health-safety regulations, no security, no benefits, etc. And the person accepts it because the alternative is that his children will starve. Fortunately, that form of savagery was overcome by democratic politics long ago. Should all of those victories for poor and working people be dismantled, as we enter into a period of private tyranny (with contracts defended by law enforcement)? Not my cup of tea.
- He wants to take away the unfair advantage corporations have (via the dismantling of big government)
Noam Chomsky: “Dismantling of big government” sounds like a nice phrase. What does it mean? Does it mean that corporations go out of existence, because there will no longer be any guarantee of limited liability? Does it mean that all health, safety, workers rights, etc., go out the window because they were instituted by public pressures implemented through government, the only component of the governing system that is at least to some extent accountable to the public (corporations are unaccountable, apart from generally weak regulatory apparatus)? Does it mean that the economy should collapse, because basic R&D is typically publicly funded — like what we’re now using, computers and the internet? Should we eliminate roads, schools, public transportation, environmental regulation,….? Does it mean that we should be ruled by private tyrannies with no accountability to the general public, while all democratic forms are tossed out the window? Quite a few questions arise.
- He defends workers right to organize (so long as owners have the right to argue against it).
Noam Chomsky: Rights that are enforced by state police power, as you’ve already mentioned.
There are huge differences between workers and owners. Owners can fire and intimidate workers, not conversely. Just for starters. Putting them on a par is effectively supporting the rule of owners over workers, with the support of state power — itself largely under owner control, given concentration of resources.
- He proposes staying out of the foreign affairs of other nations (unless his home is directly attacked, and must respond to defend it).
Noam Chomsky: He is proposing a form of ultra-nationalism, in which we are concerned solely with our preserving our own wealth and extraordinary advantages, getting out of the UN, rejecting any international prosecution of US criminals (for aggressive war, for example), etc. Apart from being next to meaningless, the idea is morally unacceptable, in my view.
I really can’t find differences between your positions and his.
Noam Chomsky: There’s a lot more. Take Social Security. If he means what he says literally, then widows, orphans, the disabled who didn’t themselves pay into Social Security should not benefit (or of course those awful illegal aliens). His claims about SS being “broken” are just false. He also wants to dismantle it, by undermining the social bonds on which it is based — the real meaning of offering younger workers other options, instead of having them pay for those who are retired, on the basis of a communal decision based on the principle that we should have concern for others in need. He wants people to be able to run around freely with assault rifles, on the basis of a distorted reading of the Second Amendment (and while we’re at it, why not abolish the whole raft of constitutional provisions and amendments, since they were all enacted in ways he opposes?).
So I have these questions:
1) Can you please tell me the differences between your schools of “Libertarianism”?
Noam Chomsky: There are a few similarities here and there, but his form of libertarianism would be a nightmare, in my opinion — on the dubious assumption that it could even survive for more than a brief period without imploding.
2) Can you please tell me what role “private property” and “ownership” have in your school of “Libertarianism”?
Noam Chomsky: That would have to be worked out by free communities, and of course it is impossible to respond to what I would prefer in abstraction from circumstances, which make a great deal of difference, obviously.
3) Would you support Ron Paul, if he was the Republican presidential candidate…and Hilary Clinton was his Democratic opponent?
Noam Chomsky: No.
-
-
Did you handle Noam Chomsky "jackhammer" too?
-
Questioner: Hello Mr. Chomsky. I’m assuming you know who Ron Paul is. And I’m also assuming you have a general idea about his positions. Here my summary of Mr. Paul’s positions:
- He values property rights, and contracts between people (defended by law enforcement and courts).
Noam Chomsky: Under all circumstances? Suppose someone facing starvation accepts a contract with General Electric that requires him to work 12 hours a day locked into a factory with no health-safety regulations, no security, no benefits, etc. And the person accepts it because the alternative is that his children will starve. Fortunately, that form of savagery was overcome by democratic politics long ago. Should all of those victories for poor and working people be dismantled, as we enter into a period of private tyranny (with contracts defended by law enforcement)? Not my cup of tea.
- He wants to take away the unfair advantage corporations have (via the dismantling of big government)
Noam Chomsky: “Dismantling of big government” sounds like a nice phrase. What does it mean? Does it mean that corporations go out of existence, because there will no longer be any guarantee of limited liability? Does it mean that all health, safety, workers rights, etc., go out the window because they were instituted by public pressures implemented through government, the only component of the governing system that is at least to some extent accountable to the public (corporations are unaccountable, apart from generally weak regulatory apparatus)? Does it mean that the economy should collapse, because basic R&D is typically publicly funded — like what we’re now using, computers and the internet? Should we eliminate roads, schools, public transportation, environmental regulation,….? Does it mean that we should be ruled by private tyrannies with no accountability to the general public, while all democratic forms are tossed out the window? Quite a few questions arise.
- He defends workers right to organize (so long as owners have the right to argue against it).
Noam Chomsky: Rights that are enforced by state police power, as you’ve already mentioned.
There are huge differences between workers and owners. Owners can fire and intimidate workers, not conversely. Just for starters. Putting them on a par is effectively supporting the rule of owners over workers, with the support of state power — itself largely under owner control, given concentration of resources.
- He proposes staying out of the foreign affairs of other nations (unless his home is directly attacked, and must respond to defend it).
Noam Chomsky: He is proposing a form of ultra-nationalism, in which we are concerned solely with our preserving our own wealth and extraordinary advantages, getting out of the UN, rejecting any international prosecution of US criminals (for aggressive war, for example), etc. Apart from being next to meaningless, the idea is morally unacceptable, in my view.
I really can’t find differences between your positions and his.
Noam Chomsky: There’s a lot more. Take Social Security. If he means what he says literally, then widows, orphans, the disabled who didn’t themselves pay into Social Security should not benefit (or of course those awful illegal aliens). His claims about SS being “broken” are just false. He also wants to dismantle it, by undermining the social bonds on which it is based — the real meaning of offering younger workers other options, instead of having them pay for those who are retired, on the basis of a communal decision based on the principle that we should have concern for others in need. He wants people to be able to run around freely with assault rifles, on the basis of a distorted reading of the Second Amendment (and while we’re at it, why not abolish the whole raft of constitutional provisions and amendments, since they were all enacted in ways he opposes?).
So I have these questions:
1) Can you please tell me the differences between your schools of “Libertarianism”?
Noam Chomsky: There are a few similarities here and there, but his form of libertarianism would be a nightmare, in my opinion — on the dubious assumption that it could even survive for more than a brief period without imploding.
2) Can you please tell me what role “private property” and “ownership” have in your school of “Libertarianism”?
Noam Chomsky: That would have to be worked out by free communities, and of course it is impossible to respond to what I would prefer in abstraction from circumstances, which make a great deal of difference, obviously.
3) Would you support Ron Paul, if he was the Republican presidential candidate…and Hilary Clinton was his Democratic opponent?
Noam Chomsky: No.
You are just years late on all this stuff Adam...if you were more punctual, it would be more impressive. :-\
-
-
You are just years late on all this stuff Adam...if you were more punctual, it would be more impressive. :-\
I always knew this. I figured I would post it as there hasn`t been a thread addressing this as of yet. So here it is.
-
I always knew this. I figured I would post it as there hasn`t been a thread addressing this as of yet. So here it is.
::)
-
::)
Why the rolling of the eyes? You do realize Chomsky has been assaying politics with his essays for decades and decades or do you not?
-
You are just years late on all this stuff Adam...if you were more punctual, it would be more impressive. :-\
So where do the majority of your chips fall? With Chomsky or Paul. This was my intent of the post.
-
So where do the majority of your chips fall? With Chomsky or Paul. This was my intent of the post.
Depends. I agree with a lot of them on many issues. Just not everything. I am a fan of Chomsky though and find his position on foreign policy to be spot on usually. I find his domestic politics more questionable though.
-
Noam Chomsky...worthless piece of liberal shit. But u idiots keep right on going.
-
Noam Chomsky...worthless piece of liberal shit. But u idiots keep right on going.
You really have no idea sometimes HH6. The man is a genius and has done much to further humanity's understanding.
-
Understanding of what. Dude I have a pretty good friggen idea. This guy is a piece of shit. He should stick to linguistics. U claim ur a libertarian...this guy is so far from that its not funny. I love some of u guys. Oh I used to be a republican but I voted Obama or I love Obama but voted Ron Paul.....u people have no idea what u believe.
-
Understanding of what. Dude I have a pretty good friggen idea. This guy is a piece of shit. He should stick to linguistics. U claim ur a libertarian...this guy is so far from that its not funny. I love some of u guys. Oh I used to be a republican but I voted Obama or I love Obama but voted Ron Paul.....u people have no idea what u believe.
I was in part referring to his linguistic contributions; it is my subject after all. However, I agree with much of his foreign policy positions as well. Domestically it is a different story. I am libertarian.
-
Well, that explains a lot. Noam Chomsky is a delusional left wing creep whose lust for self aggrandizing arrogance is surpassed only by the restrained jubilation he exudes concerning his prominent placement on the summer reading lists of every vile despot on the planet, as well as most Freshman or whacked out Philosophy/ Humanities majors enrolled at an American Liberal Arts Universities.
Decide Im not surprised you think he's a genius or that language is your area. Please lead us into the mind numbingly boring, hypocritically artificial, and at long last useless deconstruction of language. Sign, Signer, Signified etc.-- Deconstructionalist, Post Deconstructionalist. Foucault, Derrida and the rest. You can be getbigs first perscription strength sleep aid that can be ingested visually.
-
Well, that explains a lot. Noam Chomsky is a delusional left wing creep whose lust for self aggrandizing arrogance is surpassed only by the restrained jubilation he exudes concerning his prominent placement on the summer reading lists of every vile despot on the planet, as well as most Freshman or whacked out Philosophy/ Humanities majors enrolled at an American Liberal Arts Universities.
Decide Im not surprised you think he's a genius or that language is your area. Please lead us into the mind numbingly boring, hypocritically artificial, and at long last useless deconstruction of language. Sign, Signer, Signified etc.-- Deconstructionalist, Post Deconstructionalist. Foucault, Derrida and the rest. You can be getbigs first perscription strength sleep aid that can be ingested visually.
Uhmm...Chomsky is an inveterate foe of the meaningless mumbojumbo of people like Foucault and Derrida. I can cite something if you would like?
Linguistics has nothing to do with that crap. It is much more similar to mathematics.
Linguistics is not a Humanities subject.
-
Dismantling of big government = doing away with the Federal reserve.
Those are the thing Ron Paul advocates. As usual people like Chomsky try to play on emotions and feelings rather than common sense and the Constitution.
-
Is this supposed to be a shocking revelation TA? ::) If you think so, i find it hard to believe you've been politically involved for very long.
-
Is this supposed to be a shocking revelation TA? ::) If you think so, i find it hard to believe you've been politically involved for very long.
No its not. Scroll up for my intention and to whom it was directed towards.
-
TA, you're such an idiot. ::) but by all means, keep bringing us "No shit Shirlock" material... gives us something to laugh at...
-
TA, you're such an idiot. ::) but by all means, keep bringing us "No shit Shirlock" material... gives us something to laugh at...
I hope one day you stop being so consumed with anger. I imagine you are stressed beyond belief. That goes for others on here as well. Its simply not healthy as I am sure it carries over in all aspects of your life.
-
I hope one day you stop being so consumed with anger. I imagine you are stressed beyond belief. That goes for others on here as well. Its simply not healthy as I am sure it carries over in all aspects of your life.
could be a lot worse. I could have nazi fantasies and spend hours cutting swastika stencils to spray paint my shirts. Now that's being consumed with anger. How'd that conversation go? Something like this?
Mom, Dad, I have to tell you something...
What is it True Adonis, you can tell us anything honey...
Well, I've decided to become a nazi! and nobody can stop me. I've painted all my t-shirts! SEE, (TA does superman rip of his shirt revealing his proud swastika undergarments)
But honey, didn't you know, you're part Jewish? :-\
Oh shit....
-
Noam Chomsky...worthless piece of liberal shit. But u idiots keep right on going.
Noam Chomsky is another liberal dreamer who has never produced a damn thing, never run a business, never met a payroll, never created a job, never been accountable for the results of his idiotic ideas, etc.
No thanks.
-
Noam Chomsky is another liberal dreamer who has never produced a damn thing, never run a business, never met a payroll, never created a job, never been accountable for the results of his idiotic ideas, etc.
No thanks.
The man is insanely intelligent. He has produced amazing books, literally dozens and is possibly the most important intellectual alive today.
-
The man is insanely intelligent. He has produced amazing books, literally dozens and is possibly the most important intellectual alive today.
Again, its easy to sit an opine about things when you are not accountable for the results of said thoughts and opinions.
I have far more respect for a Michael Bloomberg than a Noam Chimsky.
Those who can do, do. Those who cant . . Teach and work in colleges.
-
Again, its easy to sit an opine about things when you are not accountable for the results of said thoughts and opinions.
I have far more respect for a Michael Bloomberg than a Noam Chimsky.
Those who can do, do. Those who cant . . Teach and work in colleges.
You have an awful attitude towards intellectuals. Without scientists and thinkers we wouldn't even have the internet to post on. Mobile phones, all of it. Making money is not the be all and end all of all existence. No offence, but you seem to make for a very shallow impression.
-
You have an awful attitude towards intellectuals. Without scientists and thinkers we wouldn't even have the internet to post on. Mobile phones, all of it. Making money is not the be all and end all of all existence. No offence, but you seem to make for a very shallow impression.
I admire Bloomberg because he started from nothing and built an amazing business and now has been a great mayor.
And please, dont compare Chiomsky to a scientist. You insult real scientists when you do that.
-
I admire Bloomberg because he started from nothing and built an amazing business and now has been a great mayor.
And please, dont compare Chiomsky to a scientist. You insult real scientists when you do that.
He is. He created the science of linguistics. It is an amazing accomplishment.
-
He is. He created the science of linguistics. It is an amazing accomplishment.
I MEAN A REAL SCIENCE LIKE PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, ETC.
-
I MEAN A REAL SCIENCE LIKE PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, ETC.
Linguistics is a real science. Do you know anything about it so as to claim it isn't? It is extremely precise and mathematical in nature.
-
Linguistics is a real science. Do you know anything about it so as to claim it isn't? It is extremely precise and mathematical in nature.
Ill look into it, but you cant be RP supporter and NC supporter at the same time.
NC is radical marxist and in favor of govt controll over your life whereas RP is the opposite fo that.
-
Ill look into it, but you cant be RP supporter and NC supporter at the same time.
NC is radical marxist and in favor of govt controll over your life whereas RP is the opposite fo that.
You never asked. The only political thing I support about Noam is his foreign policy which is very similar to RP's. I know that is the one are you don't agree with RP about but there he and Noam are quite similar and it is a key issue for me. Domestically, no I don't like his ideas but as a grad student in linguistics, it would be difficult for me to discount his intellectual influence in that field and many others. Things are rarely black and white...
-
You never asked. The only political thing I support about Noam is his foreign policy which is very similar to RP's. I know that is the one are you don't agree with RP about but there he and Noam are quite similar and it is a key issue for me. Domestically, no I don't like his ideas but as a grad student in linguistics, it would be difficult for me to discount his intellectual influence in that field and many others. Things are rarely black and white...
That's fine, but on politics RP and NC are polar opposites.
-
Ill look into it, but you cant be RP supporter and NC supporter at the same time.
NC is radical marxist and in favor of govt controll over your life whereas RP is the opposite fo that.
that's nonsence. I supported Ron Paul when he was running because I thought he was the best person to balance against the series of steps seen for years by government in a direction that didn't look very promising. I don't totally agree with Ron Paul on everything for sure but he would have been a very good counterweight to some major directions I didn't like. Yet I like a lot of what Chomsky says. People can have their reasons for liking people even if they have ideologies that run counter.
Now TA is just a lunatic about it. He comes in with the harshest words for RP and then turns around and starts posting things he likes from the guy. Most normal people wouldn't do that. They would say something like, I disagree with him on this and that but like this. Not completely berate the guy then favor him on something the next day.
-
That's fine, but on politics RP and NC are polar opposites.
-
You never asked. The only political thing I support about Noam is his foreign policy which is very similar to RP's. I know that is the one are you don't agree with RP about but there he and Noam are quite similar and it is a key issue for me. Domestically, no I don't like his ideas but as a grad student in linguistics, it would be difficult for me to discount his intellectual influence in that field and many others. Things are rarely black and white...
That is definitely the biggest thing that Noam is right on the money with and you're right, you're going to find some alignment with things said there and what Ron Paul says. And that's a huge political issue right there. One of the most important imo because it ties into so much shit politically.
-
That is definitely the biggest thing that Noam is right on the money with and you're right, you're going to find some alignment with things said there and what Ron Paul says. And that's a huge political issue right there. One of the most important imo because it ties into so much shit politically.
Exactly. Ironically enough the one thing 333 doesn't support about RP is his foreign policy which I think is too tightly linked to his other stuff so as to ignore it.
-
Ill look into it, but you cant be RP supporter and NC supporter at the same time.
NC is radical marxist and in favor of govt controll over your life whereas RP is the opposite fo that.
Chomsky is most certainly not in favour of governmental control...To chomsky all power over other human beings is inherently illegitimate, thus unless if can justify itself, it must be dismantled. I guess you could call him an anarcho-socialist (wierd term i know) in that he believes in collective ownership with no government getting in the way.
He is a fantastic scientist by the way, his work is truly based on the scientific method, he comes across as a bit old fashioned nowadays but I still love hearing his opinions on the philosophy of science.
One last thing social science is still science as long as it is scientific in its approaches, it just faces a lot more problems than natural science in its application. The study of humans by humans is theoretically and philosophically far more complex.
-
Smart man, that Chomsky. ;) Good job, TA.
-
Chomsky is most certainly not in favour of governmental control...To chomsky all power over other human beings is inherently illegitimate, thus unless if can justify itself, it must be dismantled. I guess you could call him an anarcho-socialist (wierd term i know) in that he believes in collective ownership with no government getting in the way.
He is a fantastic scientist by the way, his work is truly based on the scientific method, he comes across as a bit old fashioned nowadays but I still love hearing his opinions on the philosophy of science.
One last thing social science is still science as long as it is scientific in its approaches, it just faces a lot more problems than natural science in its application. The study of humans by humans is theoretically and philosophically far more complex.
Syntax and Semantics are not social sciences and are much more akin to hard sciences.
-
Smart man, that Chomsky. ;) Good job, TA.
good job of what? Telling us what we could have figured without hearing Noam or RP discuss? Yea, good job TA, epic no shit you brought us...
-
good job of what? Telling us what we could have figured without hearing Noam or RP discuss? Yea, good job TA, epic no shit you brought us...
Stop whining. ::) I don't care about your issues with TA. There are 500 "no shit" threads on this board. However, not everyone knows what you think you know. The idea is to foment discussion.
-
Stop whining. ::) I don't care about your issues with TA. There are 500 "no shit" threads on this board. However, not everyone knows what you think you know. The idea is to foment discussion.
I expected another one of your angry or threating outbursts. You must be in a good mood today.
-
I expected another one of your angry or threating outbursts. You must be in a good mood today.
LOL
I don't recall threatening anyone. Maybe my low tolerance for crybabies is what you are referring to.
-
I don't know why anyone is spending this much time on TA and this issue? There are video's of Chomsky being equally critical of Obama, if anyone wants to bother to look. You'd think TA and would be proud to post Chomsky's assessment of Obama considering he thinks his opinion means so much and the fact that Obama is President.That he ignores those facts while jerking off to Obama should be enough to end this stupid thread.
-
I don't know why anyone is spending this much time on TA and this issue? There are video's of Chomsky being equally critical of Obama, if anyone wants to bother to look. You'd think TA and would be proud to post Chomsky's assessment of Obama considering he thinks his opinion means so much and the fact that Obama is President.That he ignores those facts while jerking off to Obama should be enough to end this stupid thread.
Another butthurt Paul Ron fella. :D
-
So much hate... :-\ :'(
-
Another butthurt Paul Ron fella. :D
Did I say anything that wasn't true, you old fart?
-
Did I say anything that wasn't true, you old fart?
If I'm an old fart, you must be 15. :P
-
I don't know why anyone is spending this much time on TA and this issue? There are video's of Chomsky being equally critical of Obama, if anyone wants to bother to look. You'd think TA and would be proud to post Chomsky's assessment of Obama considering he thinks his opinion means so much and the fact that Obama is President.That he ignores those facts while jerking off to Obama should be enough to end this stupid thread.
good point!
-
There needs to be more love.
;D
-
Benny is a funny guy. If something sets him off in the slightest he comes unglued on you. But oppose him in the slightest and you're a whiner lol... Comedy hour on political ;D
-
Benny is a funny guy. If something sets him off in the slightest he comes unglued on you. But oppose him in the slightest and you're a whiner lol... Comedy hour on political ;D
He is a man filled with hate, no doubt about it.
-
Benny is a funny guy. If something sets him off in the slightest he comes unglued on you. But oppose him in the slightest and you're a whiner lol... Comedy hour on political ;D
I'm regular laugh riot.
I would say your tear filled meltdown regarding my response to one of your posts, followed by creating a lame thread about me would be an example of someone becoming "unglued." ;D
He is a man filled with hate, no doubt about it.
:-*
-
I'm regular laugh riot.
I would say your tear filled meltdown regarding my response to one of your posts, followed by creating a lame thread about me would be an example of someone becoming "unglued." ;D
:-*
lol... We won't mention that at that point I had ignored at least a dozen or more of your crybabish panic fits against me before I said hey WTF asshole.... It's so funny Benny, do you really think you can pass yourself off as the guy who doesn't come unglued here? you've had way to many tirades here to pass that one off lol.
-
lol... We won't mention that at that point I had ignored at least a dozen or more of your crybabish panic fits against me before I said hey WTF asshole.... It's so funny Benny, do you really think you can pass yourself off as the guy who doesn't come unglued here? you've had way to many tirades here to pass that one off lol.
Wait till Benny actually reads a few news stories as of late and realizes that messiah he has so praised is nothing more than GWB with dark skin.
-
lol... We won't mention that at that point I had ignored at least a dozen or more of your crybabish panic fits against me before I said hey WTF asshole.... It's so funny Benny, do you really think you can pass yourself off as the guy who doesn't come unglued here? you've had way to many tirades here to pass that one off lol.
lol
You're delusional, son. I've never had anything close to a "crybabyish panic fit" as it relates to you, and you know it. I rarely even read or acknowledge the majority of your posts. So in other words, you're full of shit. ::)
You just haven't been the same since we broke up. :'(
-
lol
You're delusional, son. I've never had anything close to a "crybabyish panic fit" as it relates to you, and you know it. I rarely even read or acknowledge the majority of your posts. So in other words, you're full of shit. ::)
You just haven't been the same since we broke up. :'(
Hey Benny:
How does it feel knowing your messiah Obama is the same as GWB on 95% of the issues????
-
lol
You're delusional, son. I've never had anything close to a "crybabyish panic fit" as it relates to you, and you know it. I rarely even read or acknowledge the majority of your posts. So in other words, you're full of shit. ::)
You just haven't been the same since we broke up. :'(
no, you're full of shit. I know I have meltdowns. You trying to pass yourself off as not is what's fucking delusional SON. In fact I've had to listen to PMs from people here you've pissed off a few times. You've crossed the line many times here, the very least with me. Some of the shit you've said to others has been pretty fucked up. So fucked up I've received pm's from people saying they're going to hunt you down. No I'm NOT lying. I have my meltdowns, but I doubt many are ready to go on a search and destroy over anything I've said....
-
no, you're full of shit. I know I have meltdowns. You trying to pass yourself off as not is what's fucking delusional SON. In fact I've had to listen to PMs from people here you've pissed off a few times. You've crossed the line many times here, the very least with me. Some of the shit you've said to others has been pretty fucked up. So fucked up I've received pm's from people saying they're going to hunt you down. No I'm NOT lying. I have my meltdowns, but I doubt many are ready to go on a search and destroy over anything I've said....
Hugo:
I think Benny is just suffering from an internal meltdown realizing how Obama and the Dem Congress are pursuing the same agenda as Bush, but worse, on a lot of issues. Remember, there is no greater shill on Getbig than her/him/it. He has to resort to personal attacks because he simply cant defend that which he shills for. No one can.
The guy/girl is simply a person who refuses to have any debate or discussion with anyone over anything and only attacks individual posters.
Attacking ones' position is fine and fair game, but Benny does not do that.
-
no, you're full of shit. I know I have meltdowns. You trying to pass yourself off as not is what's fucking delusional SON. In fact I've had to listen to PMs from people here you've pissed off a few times. You've crossed the line many times here, the very least with me. Some of the shit you've said to others has been pretty fucked up. So fucked up I've received pm's from people saying they're going to hunt you down. No I'm NOT lying. I have my meltdowns, but I doubt many are ready to go on a search and destroy over anything I've said....
(http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/denial-and-the-coming-data-meltdown.jpg)
;D
-
Hugo:
I think Benny is just suffering from an internal meltdown realizing how Obama and the Dem Congress are pursuing the same agenda as Bush, but worse, on a lot of issues. Remember, there is no greater shill on Getbig than her/him/it. He has to resort to personal attacks because he simply cant defend that which he shills for. No one can.
The guy/girl is simply a person who refuses to have any debate or discussion with anyone over anything and only attacks individual posters.
Attacking ones' position is fine and fair game, but Benny does not do that.
I was the same before you Obama was elected...before you started posting here.
Nothing has changed but the game, fatso.
-
I was the same before you Obama was elected...before you started posting here.
Nothing has changed but the game, fatso.
Ok sancho panza. Keep following windmills with your Don Quixote messiah.
-
I was the same before you Obama was elected...before you started posting here.
Nothing has changed but the game, fatso.
"Life is at the start a chaos in which one is lost. The individual suspects this, but he is frightened at finding himself face to face with this terrible reality, and tries to cover it up with a curtain of fantasy, where everything is clear. It does not worry him that his ideas are not true, he uses them as trenches for the defense of his existence, as scarecrows to frighten away reality."
-Jose Ortega Gasset
-
"Life is at the start a chaos in which one is lost. The individual suspects this, but he is frightened at finding himself face to face with this terrible reality, and tries to cover it up with a curtain of fantasy, where everything is clear. It does not worry him that his ideas are not true, he uses them as trenches for the defense of his existence, as scarecrows to frighten away reality."
-Jose Ortega Gasset
daaaaaamn
-
Yeah I've seen stuff where Chomsky is down on Obama, but I've also seen stuff where he says that really there is not that much difference between the two parties but for the small people the Democrats are generally better.
-
Yeah I've seen stuff where Chomsky is down on Obama, but I've also seen stuff where he says that really there is not that much difference between the two parties but for the small people the Democrats are generally better.
"Small" people get free stuff from Democrats.
Or they are, at the very least, promised it during election time.
-
"Small" people get free stuff from Democrats.
Or they are, at the very least, promised it during election time.
Socialism doesn't only benefit the "welfare" recipients.
-
Socialism doesn't only benefit the "welfare" recipients.
It also benefits the politicians that buy off whole constituencies.
-
It also benefits the politicians that buy off whole constituencies.
mmmm - that is kind of the point - the people are voting for the things they want. They pay their taxes and with the buying power of big government can invest in infrastructure that benefits the whole community.
-
mmmm - that is kind of the point - the people are voting for the things they want. They pay their taxes and with the buying power of big government can invest in infrastructure that benefits the whole community.
Socialism breeds mediocrity. The government has plenty of tax revenue, it's what they decide to spend it on that is suspect.
-
Socialism breeds mediocrity. The government has plenty of tax revenue, it's what they decide to spend it on that is suspect.
Mmmm - Yes those US car manufacturers were just excellent at their work when the government wasn't interfering with them.
-
mmmm - that is kind of the point - the people are voting for the things they want. They pay their taxes and with the buying power of big government can invest in infrastructure that benefits the whole community.
No one thinks about as such, though. "Whole community"? How about, "What can give me?"
or
"Gimmie Gimmie Gimmie"
-
No one thinks about as such, though. "Whole community"? How about, "What can give me?"
or
"Gimmie Gimmie Gimmie"
Yeah, maybe the mindset is wrong. I mean those people who want to pay less taxes are thinking the same thing - give me back as much of my money as possible.
-
Mmmm - Yes those US car manufacturers were just excellent at their work when the government wasn't interfering with them.
The unions have a big hand in the destruction of the US auto industry, you do realize that there are union members that haven't worked in years, who job is to go to the mailbox and get their check. GM has still gone bankrupt even after government "interference". You don't see the Toyotas or Nissans going belly up( they don't use union labor) and make a good product that people actually want.
-
Yeah, maybe the mindset is wrong. I mean those people who want to pay less taxes are thinking the same thing - give me back as much of my money as possible.
Really? Maybe the people that want to pay less taxes thinks the government pisses away the money like America is their own personal piggy bank.
-
Really? Maybe the people that want to pay less taxes thinks the government pisses away the money like America is their own personal piggy bank.
Yeah there is a bit of that too - but then maybe pay no taxes, have then have no police, firemen, schools, roads, public libraries, etc...
-
The unions have a big hand in the destruction of the US auto industry, you do realize that there are union members that haven't worked in years, who job is to go to the mailbox and get their check. GM has still gone bankrupt even after government "interference". You don't see the Toyotas or Nissans going belly up( they don't use union labor) and make a good product that people actually want.
They use union labour in Germany I think and their auto-industry is much healthier.
-
Ok sancho panza. Keep following windmills with your Don Quixote messiah.
You're not even making sense, son. All the Mexican references... ??? I don't get it, sorry. "Don Quixote" is a great book though. Ranked as the greatest all time work of fiction on many lists. You should read it, 33344567.
The messiah stuff though? I think you might want to lay off using messiah in this context. We Christians that believe Jesus was the Messiah? See, we consider this blasphemy. Now if you sincerely believe President Obama is the messiah 33344567, I am willing to respect your religious beliefs...because I am tolerant of unusual religious beliefs. But others on this board? Not too sure how they'll take it. :-\
-
Yeah there is a bit of that too - but then maybe pay no taxes, have then have no police, firemen, schools, roads, public libraries, etc...
That is not the point, we all understand that we have to pay taxes for our society to function. The problem arises when government takes advantege of the tax payer and wastes the money, instead of using it for the things listed above. I get up and go to work everyday to provide for my family, I pay my bills, I earn the money not the government. Why am I expected to live within my means when the government doesn't?
-
They use union labour in Germany I think and their auto-industry is much healthier.
Yeah but it isn't the UAW, the unions in America are as corrupt as the politicians, hell the teamsters were run by the mafia for most of it's existance.
-
Yeah but it isn't the UAW, the unions in America are as corrupt as the politicians, hell the teamsters were run by the mafia for most of it's existance.
All these things lead back to American inadequacy - are you telling me that the US is inferior to Germany in this regard?
-
All these things lead back to American inadequacy - are you telling me that the US is inferior to Germany in this regard?
Many unions, especially the UAW, operated and demanded with no regard for the business that was paying writing their checks. It wasn't what was fair, reasonable and mutually productive. No, it was what was the best for the UAW and who gives a damn about the Golden Goose. Insane job classification systems, work rules, forcing the auto-companies to even sign contracts stating that only certain product could be built in certain factories....why do you think it took so long for the Camaro to begin production? And a 1st class, world class pension, pay and benefit package....that made it impossible to make profit on small cars.
If that's what you mean by "inadequate" then yes, the American Unions fucking suck.
-
Ideology always fails...at the end of the day.
-
All these things lead back to American inadequacy - are you telling me that the US is inferior to Germany in this regard?
No, we have strayed very far from what made the USA the greatest economic power on the earth. Its our own fault.
The UAW in the USA does not work with the companies like they do in Germany. The UAW, and almost all unions in America are worthless and infested with scumbags.
-
Noam Chomsky is another liberal dreamer who has never produced a damn thing, never run a business, never met a payroll, never created a job, never been accountable for the results of his idiotic ideas, etc.
No thanks.
You just described true adonis ;D
-
You just described true adonis ;D
Unlike TA - I have been through all levels of education (B.A.,J.D.), been employed as a laborer mixing cement and digging holes for a fence company from 12 y/o through 22 y/o, been employed at a major corporation (UST), been unemployed for a year, worked for a mid sized firm, small firm, deal with clients all day from all sorts of economicx positions, started my own business with $700.00 to my name. Im not saying I am better or worse off, but will say I have a far greater band of experiences than he does when it comes to how things work in the business and real world.
I have seen the "brilliant" academic types, and the rough blue collar plumbers and electricians. I have dealt with organized crime people and corporate people (although they are probably the same). most of the professors I had probably could not even handle a basic real estate closing or will signing, let alone anything complex.
That is why I value someone like Michael Bloomberg more than Chomsky. Its not $$$$ per se, but just basic overall accomplshment.
Sitting in a chair all day and spewing ones' theories and philosophies is easy to do, starting a corporation, becoming mayor, and doing an amzing job at both is, to me at least, truly something to be admired.
-
Its funny how the lib douchbags look down at ditch diggers while pretending to be their champions.
-
Its funny how the lib douchbags look down at ditch diggers while pretending to be their champions.
At 2 am when the main water pipe goes, who are you calling - a plumber or Noam Chomsky?
When your taxes need to be handled - do you call your account or Chomsky?
When your kid gets arrested and you need to get him out of jail - do you call the lawyer or Chomsky?
When you need to get treatment for a broken bone, do you call your Doctor or Chomsky?
Im not saying that Chomsky is not a smart guy, but lets be honest, he is really not the useful other than giving his views to a captive audience of students who are not going to challenge his views.
BTW here is the difference between a guy like Chomsky and the electrician - The electrician can be as well read and smart on his views on the world as Chomsky.
BUT
Chomsky cant change the light bulb.
-
Sitting in a chair all day and spewing ones' theories and philosophies is easy to do, starting a corporation, becoming mayor, and doing an amzing job at both is, to me at least, truly something to be admired.
I do understand what your saying, there is nothing worse than theory that is not empirical, it's a very European tradition to sit in the ivory tower and come up with grand theories of the world. US social science is quite different in that respect, it is mostly quantitative (though that has its limits) and extremely empirical, which is why I like the way chomsky does things actually since he grew up in that tradition. The work is relevant and useful to people trying to make sense of who societies/organisations/human interactions work. Sometimes Social scientists overstate how important they are, but they do play an important role...take for instance Israel where sociologists were essentially employed for thirty years to 'build' the state, which they did fairly successfully. They essentially built a country.
So there's swings and roundabouts, in my mind, philosophy and theory are important because they inform the way people see the world and how institutions of governance are created and shaped. The fact that 95% of people working in those institutions have no idea what theory is or how it affects their lives does not denigrate it's importance.
Bare in mind you can only build a business, run for office, or whatever within certain paradigms that have been created that allow you to work in that particular way. I respect people who run their own businesses and work their arses off as well, but I also respect those who work hard to understand how the whole thing fits together in order to inform better policy choices.
-
One last thing, creating a theory from scratch is NOT easy...it takes years of work and hard thought.
-
I do understand what your saying, there is nothing worse than theory that is not empirical, it's a very European tradition to sit in the ivory tower and come up with grand theories of the world. US social science is quite different in that respect, it is mostly quantitative (though that has its limits) and extremely empirical, which is why I like the way chomsky does things actually since he grew up in that tradition. The work is relevant and useful to people trying to make sense of who societies/organisations/human interactions work. Sometimes Social scientists overstate how important they are, but they do play an important role...take for instance Israel where sociologists were essentially employed for thirty years to 'build' the state, which they did fairly successfully. They essentially built a country.
So there's swings and roundabouts, in my mind, philosophy and theory are important because they inform the way people see the world and how institutions of governance are created and shaped. The fact that 95% of people working in those institutions have no idea what theory is or how it affects their lives does not denigrate it's importance.
Bare in mind you can only build a business, run for office, or whatever within certain paradigms that have been created that allow you to work in that particular way. I respect people who run their own businesses and work their arses off as well, but I also respect those who work hard to understand how the whole thing fits together in order to inform better policy choices.
Syntax is NOT a social science. It is much closer to a mathematical science than social is. There are fixed rules. Remember that Linguistics (syntax) is a young science as well.
-
At 2 am when the main water pipe goes, who are you calling - a plumber or Noam Chomsky?
When your taxes need to be handled - do you call your account or Chomsky?
When your kid gets arrested and you need to get him out of jail - do you call the lawyer or Chomsky?
When you need to get treatment for a broken bone, do you call your Doctor or Chomsky?
Im not saying that Chomsky is not a smart guy, but lets be honest, he is really not the useful other than giving his views to a captive audience of students who are not going to challenge his views.
BTW here is the difference between a guy like Chomsky and the electrician - The electrician can be as well read and smart on his views on the world as Chomsky.
BUT
Chomsky cant change the light bulb.
Plenty of people challenge Chomsky's views. I think it is important to be pragmatic but a world devoid of intellectual learning would be poor indeed. You don't know anything about what Chomsky has done for say, computational science as well as the understanding of human cognition in general. Chomsky is not simply 'well read'. It is people like him who have forwarded human knowledge.
-
Unlike TA - I have been through all levels of education (B.A.,J.D.), been employed as a laborer mixing cement and digging holes for a fence company from 12 y/o through 22 y/o, been employed at a major corporation (UST), been unemployed for a year, worked for a mid sized firm, small firm, deal with clients all day from all sorts of economicx positions, started my own business with $700.00 to my name. Im not saying I am better or worse off, but will say I have a far greater band of experiences than he does when it comes to how things work in the business and real world.
I have seen the "brilliant" academic types, and the rough blue collar plumbers and electricians. I have dealt with organized crime people and corporate people (although they are probably the same). most of the professors I had probably could not even handle a basic real estate closing or will signing, let alone anything complex.
That is why I value someone like Michael Bloomberg more than Chomsky. Its not $$$$ per se, but just basic overall accomplshment.
Sitting in a chair all day and spewing ones' theories and philosophies is easy to do, starting a corporation, becoming mayor, and doing an amzing job at both is, to me at least, truly something to be admired.
Do you think physicists pursuing String Theory are wasting their time?
-
Syntax is NOT a social science. It is much closer to a mathematical science than social is. There are fixed rules. Remember that Linguistics (syntax) is a young science as well.
I wasnt really referring to Chomsky as such...more 33864's point that theory is easy and not very useful
-
I wasnt really referring to Chomsky as such...more 33864's point that theory is easy and not very useful
Steevie UK G-homey in da mutha fuckin house!
-
Do you think physicists pursuing String Theory are wasting their time?
I specifically told you that this did not apply to people in hard sciences like physics and chemistry, etc. If what you are saying about linguistics is true, fine, but my point was more to the utility and importance of his "social commentary" versus many other things that in my mind have far more utility that get largely ignored.
-
I specifically told you that this did not apply to people in hard sciences like physics and chemistry, etc. If what you are saying about linguistics is true, fine, but my point was more to the utility and importance of his "social commentary" versus many other things that in my mind have far more utility that get largely ignored.
Linguistics is the science of how language works with different subfields, speech production and description, cognitive. Yeah, it is much closer to a hard science than a humanities subject.
Nevertheless, you can't claim that humanities are completely useless? Or is that your position.
-
Linguistics is the science of how language works with different subfields, speech production and description, cognitive. Yeah, it is much closer to a hard science than a humanities subject.
Nevertheless, you can't claim that humanities are completely useless? Or is that your position.
I didnt say they are useless, but they are not, at least in my mind, something to elevate to very high status.
-
I didnt say they are useless, but they are not, at least in my mind, something to elevate to very high status.
Then money is king?
-
Then money is king?
Nobody is king.
But the economy is the most important issue because without a good economy, people like Chomsky dont have a job.
People, and their ability and freedom to make a living, pay their bills, and have dignitiy doing so comes first for me.
-
Nobody is king.
But the economy is the most important issue because without a good economy, people like Chomsky dont have a job.
People, and their ability and freedom to make a living, pay their bills, and have dignitiy doing so comes first for me.
I agree with this.
-
I agree with this.
What people like Chomsky refuse to understand is that when you have a horrible economy, that is when most abuses occur.
That is what makes me laugh at "left wing" people who claim to be in favor of civil liberties and against capitilism.
The worst abuses of civil liberties always seem to happen in those places with the worst economies.
-
What people like Chomsky refuse to understand is that when you have a horrible economy, that is when most abuses occur.
That is what makes me laugh at "left wing" people who claim to be in favor of civil liberties and against capitilism.
The worst abuses of civil liberties always seem to happen in those places with the worst economies.
If you're going to criticise one of the most read and quoted people on this planet, past and present, you should start with your own orthography.
You people have no shame whatsoever.
-
If you're going to criticise one of the most read and quoted people on this planet, past and present, you may as well start with your orthography.
You people have no shame whatsoever.
He is quoted by people who agree with his world view. That's news?????
Do you want me to review all of your posts and point out your "orthography" ?"
-
He is quoted by people who agree with his world view. That's news?????
Do you want me to review all of your posts and point out your "orthography" ?"
No, he is one of the most quoted human beings in history. P-E-R-I-O-D.
As far as my orthography goes... it may very well be worst that yours, I'm not touching that, but I'm not the one walking around criticising someone who is obviously a "few" notches beyond your reach, brain power-wise.
The Little Engine that Could is a nice book and all... but it's good to know thy limits.
Cheers mate.
-
No, he is one of the most quoted human beings in history. P-E-R-I-O-D.
As far as my orthography goes... it may very well be worst that yours, I'm not touching that, but I'm not the one walking around criticising someone who is obviously a "few" notches beyond your reach, brain power-wise.
The Little Engine that Could is a nice book and all... but it's good to know thy limits.
Cheers mate.
So by your logic, because he is a linguist and often quoted, then we should all just listen to him and not question anything he says because of his "brain power"? Let me explain something to you, I worked at Fermi Lab for several years, and had to work/deal with physicst. These guys had the "brain power" that could solve an equation that would fill 3 black boards. The other side of the coin, they all lived on site, one guys wife had to make sure he got dressed in the morning or he would wander into work with what ever he had on when he went to bed. They all wore sandals, wanna guess why? They couldn't even tie their own fucking shoe's. Being an expert in one field doesn not make one an expert in all.
-
So by your logic, because he is a linguist and often quoted, then we should all just listen to him and not question anything he says because of his "brain power"? Let me explain something to you, I worked at Fermi Lab for several years, and had to work/deal with physicst. These guys had the "brain power" that could solve an equation that would fill 3 black boards. The other side of the coin, they all lived on site, one guys wife had to make sure he got dressed in the morning or he would wander into work with what ever he had on when he went to bed. They all wore sandals, wanna guess why? They couldn't even tie their own fucking shoe's. Being an expert in one field doesn not make one an expert in all.
Physicists are impressive people.
-
Slapper= The most heavily quoted sex offender on get big.
Nobody should question a 37 year old unemployed elementary school teachers aid who lives with his parents.
-
Slapper= The most heavily quoted sex offender on get big.
Nobody should question a 37 year old unemployed elementary school teachers aid who lives with his parents.
?
To my knowledge Slapper is none of those things. Why are you writing libel?
-
?
To my knowledge Slapper is none of those things. Why are you writing libel?
Quick, call Onlyme and see what legal action should be taken.
-
So by your logic, because he is a linguist and often quoted, then we should all just listen to him and not question anything he says because of his "brain power"? Let me explain something to you, I worked at Fermi Lab for several years, and had to work/deal with physicst. These guys had the "brain power" that could solve an equation that would fill 3 black boards. The other side of the coin, they all lived on site, one guys wife had to make sure he got dressed in the morning or he would wander into work with what ever he had on when he went to bed. They all wore sandals, wanna guess why? They couldn't even tie their own fucking shoe's. Being an expert in one field doesn not make one an expert in all.
I'm speaking from Chomsky's intellectual perspective here. Whether Noam is able to fry an egg or wipe his ass while tying his shoes is irrelevant because none of them get people killed. Like I said on previous occasions, while at graduate school, one of the requisites I had to take was this political science class in which, on the first day, the professor handed out a text by Chomsky and told us that if we found any lies in his writings he would give us a straight A and need not take any exams. I spent months looking for the lie and found none. This guy's got a tight case. He's got a brilliant mind and has many people working with him analyzing many things. By contrast, everything that is said on TV is, in most cases, easily proved to be incorrect, at worst, or misinformed, at best, with a simple google search. Again, and as usual, you do not have to trust my word and I do commend you investigate it yourself.
I wish I could say "CNN is right, Kim Jong-Il is threatening unwarranted action against mainland USA"... but that just isn't the case.
That is what separates facts from opinion: Opinions can be right or wrong. Facts are ALWAYS right.
So, if we're going to war based on something, and that something is unwarranted threats from another nation with nuclear capacity then let's make sure that 1) The nation does own nukes, which NK does; and 2) that the representatives of that nation have made repeated unwarranted threats to The People of the USA. That way we'll be able to spare ourselves from the "we didn't know" bullshit campaign that we get bombarded with after the usual MIC money-driven escapade. Unless # 1 AND # 2 are true then maybe we should stay home watching them lame-ass TV shows that we now have here in the Land-o-Plenty.
-
Slapper= The most heavily quoted sex offender on get big.
Nobody should question a 37 year old unemployed elementary school teachers aid who lives with his parents.
Don't forget Muslim.
ADD is a bitch... ain't it?
-
Physicists are impressive people.
Anyone who looks for another dimension, another, better, way of doing what we humans do best, which is to live, gets a thumbs up from me dude. Let's face it, without brilliant minds (and a little "acid") our ancestors probably would've never climbed down the branch and would've never started walking upright and on two limbs.
Sometimes those things that we seem to believe define us as humans are not really positive, from an evolutionary point of view, but hurdles that we, in due time, learn to leap over. Like walking upright. We need more people that think about that stuff (physicists, doctors, psychologists, etc) and not people who constantly tell us that we need to cling to the past and not leave the proverbial branch (pastors, imams, rabbis, etc).
-
Anyone who looks for another dimension, another, better, way of doing what we humans do best, which is to live, gets a thumbs up from me dude. Let's face it, without brilliant minds (and a little "acid") our ancestors probably would've never climbed down the branch and would've never started walking upright and on two limbs.
Sometimes those things that we seem to believe define us as humans are not really positive, from an evolutionary point of view, but hurdles that we, in due time, learn to leap over. Like walking upright.we need more people that think about that stuff (physicists, doctors, psychologists, etc) and not people who constantly tell us that we need to cling to the past and not leave the proverbial branch (pastors, imams, rabbis, etc).
Nah, physicists are still most impressive to me.