Replies

It was a reply over in one of the google groups, I forgot to put the chomskyite's claims in there. Dammit. Well at least some of it is on record.

I read your lengthy post, and, aside from the lack of paragraphs, found it very interesting. Bravo to Leonard Magruder for ramming it up CBS's backside.

It was a reply over in one of the google groups, I forgot to put the chomskyite's claims in there. Dammit. Well at least some of it is on record.

I really can't imagine that Chomsky matters much however you slice it. The American Left is virtually dead as a political force and Chomsky is in decline and headed for the boneyard in any event.

Unlike most writers on the Left, he did offer a relatively comprehensive analysis of Western foreign policy and history, however flawed. The problem with other writers on the Left is that their views are obviously self-contradictory or very narrowly focused. Chomsky has, over the course of decades, presented an extensive body of work that can be analyzed. Though he would be loath to read such a description of his own writing, Chomsky has presented the Standard Total View of the American Left in history and foreign policy. He articulated the Left's views in much the same way that Washington think tanks articulate the views of the usual foreign policy and business organizations.

Chomsky is probably also the last charismatic voice on the Left, something any conservative should try to be aware of if we know the history of charismatic intellectuals and their historical influence. After all, some of the most substantial victories of European and American leaders of the radical Left were posthumous. I doubt we need to spend much time worrying Chomsky's life-after-death. His views are so toxicly anti-American as to repel most readers. It's very difficult to make it palatable because, regardless of whether his work contains any truth or not, most people simply don't want to believe such things about their own country.