Are All Leftists Bad?

There has actually been a lot of work lately about how Chomsky was wrong in his major linguistics theories.

You won't find many Jews that defended Holocaust revisionist m8

>"A professor of French literature was suspended from teaching on grounds that he could not be protected from violence, after privately printing pamphlets questioning the existence of gas chambers. He was then brought to trial for "falsification of History," and later condemned for this crime, the first time that a modern Western state openly affirmed the Stalinist-Nazi doctrine that the state will determine historical truth and punish deviation from it. Later he was beaten practically to death by Jewish terrorists. As of now, the European and other intellectuals have not expressed any opposition to these scandals; rather, they have sought to disguise their profound commitment to Stalinist-Nazi doctrine by following the same models, trying to divert attention with a flood of outrageous lies."

This. The greater threat to freedom in the modern age are those who rest quite comfortably in control of the rest of us. Leftists are then useful tools at their worst, adopting a philosophy tailored to pander to them while mysteriously preserving and even strengthening the powers that be.

For example: scientificamerican.com/article/evidence-rebuts-chomsky-s-theory-of-language-learning/

People like Chomsky become "experts" and "foremost authorities" on something or other. And then they start talking about whatever the hell they want because people keep listening to them, because they have become Very Important. Sometimes it turns out they weren't even right about the original shit that made people care about them in the first place.

So screw that guy, basically.

As a man who grew up in a liberal echo chamber, that wouldn't surprise me.

People like him abuse the prestige awarded to them. His opinions on politics have nothing to do with his linguistics work. Why should anybody give a shit what Chomsky thinks? Being good at linguistics doesn't mean shit when it comes to something outside your field. He's a fancy shmancy "pedigreed" version of all the loudmouth Hollywood people who have no idea that they are idiots just like everyone else.

Chumpsky is an eternal fencesitter who does nto understand power vacuums.

He too thinks too to small for our species.

Jill is a fucking loon. A loon with a sense of integrity and sticks to her morals but she's still a loon.

No "side" has all the right answers so yes there are good ideas in the left, like living food stamps and government housing. But these people at the same time need to be put to work for what they're taking. 2-4 hours a day. Cleaning streets highways and their community.

You should be forced to add value to society for what you receive.

Remember one of the great illusions of life is thinking we are logical and others are stupid. Remember everyone is thinking that. We are all illogical and view life through different tinted glasses.

He is interesting to listen to at times but I hope he dies as soon as possible, in an embarrasing way.

Sowell discussed some of the problems with people like Chomsky in Intellectuals and Society:

"Intellectuals usually have thorough knowledge in their areas of expertise. Outside these fields, however, they may be as uninformed as the average person. Too often, Sowell argues, this does not stop them from attempting to influence public opinion in areas where they are not fully qualified"

Great Depressions of 1929 and 2016 weren't because of pro-worker economic policies, breh.

Bringing Mr. Sowell and you got trips.

Agreed. I don't know, I go back and forth on this. But in my mind I separate them into two different groups. One group just wants to subjugate people while the other are just loons, like you said. I actually think the first group makes up a large majority of leftists. But I guess I don't hate the loons and I consider them misguided countrymen instead of evil that has to be dealt with

A true liberal is someone like Cenk Uygur.

based sowell. too bad he doesn't like trump

He's the "if government can be done right" idealist. The problem is it's a slippery slope of "we don't have nearly enough control over X" and they keep taking power we can't get back later on. Everything but that is fine.

>Why should anybody give a shit what Chomsky thinks?

Because a broken clock is right twice a day? When it comes to government over-reach, he's spot-on. If he was a figurehead for the Left instead of those like Pocahontas or Shitlery, then they would at least agree us on some things.

I think Chomsky was right about many things, only his methodology can't be stretched to the nth degree. No doubt there are newer and better models than Chomsky's, and some of his die hard fans are close minded. That being said, he is like the Einstein of linguistics; wrong about a great deal, but revolutionized the field. Laymen should not try to diminish Chomsky's importance.

You are just a cunt who disagrees with him politically, so you try to discredit him in linguistics. Nobody gate's Chomsky's political thought more than I do, but I don't go around talking about what I don't know to one up him.

Read Roger Scruton's survey of leftist thinkers, Fools, Frauds and Firebrands. Yes, they are all bad. They are bad because they are all wrong, and are often simple liars. There's no case to deconstruct, they're just god damned three card monte boys who learned how to read. The one guy Scruton praises the most is not Chomsky but Foucault, almost the only genuine liberally-educated and cultured true intellectual in the entire mix, and sadly, mugged by reality late in life after years of literal bugchasing degeneracy. But even before his slight redpilling, Foucault wrote with sensitivity and intelligence about Western art.
Chomsky is a flippant sophist, not an intellectual. He is that guy in Animal House who demands to indict the entire educational and legal system because he is in trouble.
Inb4 one-booking a complex subject. I am a former leftist, am very well read, wasted years and eyesight I will never get back on those fakirs, and, while still leftist, noticed that almost all of Chomsky's books are shamelessly recycled material. If you must read Chomsky, try Letters From Lexington, Manufacturing Consent, and his first political book, the one on South East Asia. Seriously, apart from those, Chomsky re-publishes, re-titles and slightly updates material shamelessly. Scruton's book really is unparalleled and complete and the best treatment of the topic.

I thought Chumpsky was a lolbertarian?

>I know Cred Forums hates lefties in general, but can we agree that some are better than others?
In Russia we have an expression: "grades of shit".

lost a lot of respect for him because of that

Einstein stands tall to this day. Maybe you mean the Freud of Linguistics? Because Freud was one hell of a quack.

A lot of Chomsky's statements are backed up by complete bullshit sources if you read his stuff. He gets away with it because he's considered an "intellectual" but if you objectively look at what he's saying and his source, it's often complete nonsense.

He's a linguistics professor who pretends that he has all the answers to mankind's problems, because his students don't question anything that comes from his mouth.

Based Chomsky is based

>Intellectually, the only good that Chomsky had contributed to the world is his work in linguistics.

"Manufactured consent" is really quite spot on even today....

Chomsky is certainly not near the quack of Freud. Although if we want to make a comparison, both influenced the direction of their respective fields while being wrong about a lot (although chomsky never made dicks his principle study). Only an idiot would call Chomsky a quack though. His philosophy of science is shit though, and he can be uselessly obtuse at times. The more he focused on politics, the less useful his linguistics became.

he's "anarcho syndicalist"

which tells you all you need to know about what a fucking bullshit artist he is

his theories on linguistics have been proven to be bullshit too

He supports Trump now.

Chomsky is biggest turd. It's amazing that anyone reads him and can't spot his selective application of critique.

paulbogdanor.com/200chomskylies.pdf

The two biggest problems with Chomsky and Lefties in general is their failure to accept that intentions matter and their arrogance in assuming that their knowledge and status in one field (in Chomsky's case a linguist) counts for something in another unrelated field, they fancy themselves the intelligentsia.

For example, Chomsky once famously said that the U.S. is the biggest and worst terrorist organisation in the world. To believe this, Chomsky would have to be of the belief that any collateral damage done by U.S. in an armed conflict during Iraq and Afghanistan is akin to the indiscriminate murders of civilians that occurred on 9/11. This ignores the intentions of each side, which in this case is (a) America actively trying to reduce the collateral damage as close to 0 as possible and (b) Actively trying to kill as many innocent people as possible. Chomsky argues that the mere act of instigating a war by an army with the capabilities of the U.S. will make the loss of innocent life inevitable and hence evil. What he doesn't seem to comprehend is that if both sides had a perfect weapon that, when used, would only kill enemy combatants, the U.S. would use it 100% of the time. The same could not be said of ISIS, Al-Qaeda etc.

This sort of thinking can be observed in a lot of lefty thinking. A cop killing a black kid is just a cop killing a black kid to the left, the intentions of the cop or the kid do not matter, just the result.

Sam Harris is OK.

If you're still a Leftist and you want to honestly challenge your assumptive framework, this is really all you need. If your belief system withstands all these, then you're either batshit insane, or far more intelligent than the rest of us.

>The European Grammar of Self-Intolerance
youtu.be/aR4MvD9IEAE
>A. James Gregor - Mussolini's Intellectuals
press.princeton.edu/chapters/s7870.html
>Politically Incorrect Books Archive:
mega.nz/#F!B4dB2SzQ!h_pMC30v2a_y31iD0dy0sg
>Antimony Group Right-Wing Archive
laraj.ca/AGwiki/

Jason Unruhe is also pretty based.
youtube.com/watch?v=m8p9t22HI0o

youtube.com/watch?v=okg6C99a7do

Daily reminder that leftists are not liberals.

Liberalism is a bourgeois ideology that has literally nothing to do with the teachings of Marx or Bakunin.

Please read a fucking book.

>Are All Leftists Bad?

No. Only the ones who are still breathing.

Yes.

Chomsky is a really smart guy who builds his political arguments around a value system I don't share. I don't agree with most of his conclusions, but it's obvious that he's thinking harder and more efficiently than the braindead NEETs of Cred Forums who think political debates are won by whoever posts the most obnoxious tweet

yes. they will all be first onto the trains and into the camps after god-emporer is crowned

>far more intelligent than the rest of us.

thank you.

muh national identity is a failed notion that is truly the root of much evil...its an ancient concept that does not promote human progress in today's World- just the opposite- its reactionary, anachronistic effect is just continued war and misery. The sooner humans get past it the better.

Leftist doesn't exclusively mean Marxists and socialists, retard. Anybody opposed to social stratification is on some level a leftist, regardless of their preferred economic system. Similarly, liberal does not exclusively refer to supporters of economic liberalism, but also supporters of social liberalism.

Read a fucking book outside your incredibly narrow and immature ideological lens, mongoloid

chomsky is an anti white kike

I don't hate leftists per say. I hate their attitude, particularly because it requires a foundation of arrogance combined with self-perpetuated ignorance. I've been described as a classical liberal by my friends and colleagues, yet I support Trump.

Boy is this world ever fucked up.

>self-perpetuated ignorance
> I support Trump

leaf...wtf?

Sophistry, everybody.

Only reason Chomsky is revered is because he sits perfectly on a fence of his nonsense written out in the most convoluted, and dizzying way so nobody can actually make meaning of what he is arguing.

nope- nothing fallacious about it. Its the truth.

clinging to failed concepts and whinging all the while is a sign of mental midgetry

He made some retarded points on Stefan Molymeme.

"Hurr durr homeowners buy houses without checking if there is a basement"

Most of the really really intelligent leftists are awful at politics.

I respect the fuck out of Chomsky for his other work, but just not his political beliefs.

No argument, huh?

>A cop killing a black kid is just a cop killing a black kid to the left, the intentions of the cop or the kid do not matter, just the result.

It's never "just" a cop killing a black kid to the left. Since minorities are sacred cows, not only must they ignore rational intentions or motives, they also have to project evil and depraved intentions onto said cop.

Leftists are evil cunts. Kill em all.

The question is "are all the jews bad?"

the Truth requires no rebuttal

Chomsky is untouchable. Guy is a genius.