• Soot [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m not gonna stand by everything the guy ever said. But he is 97 years old for lord’s sake. chomsky-yes-honey He was born just a decade after the fall of Tsarist Russia.

      Nobody stays the same over 100 years. Chomsky’s been getting noticeably more inconsistent in his actions and statements since like… the year 2000, which is when basically all these criticisms are from.

      I’m not saying ‘ignore all old people’, but I am saying people change enormously over half a century and we shouldn’t judge them as if they are exactly the same person they were. To start picking apart the consistency of the ramblings or actions of a ninety-seven year old as if he’s still an on-the-ball scholar just feels a bit unnecessary.

        • Soot [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Howso? A lot of his work and speeches pre-turning 70 seem to focus on how the US (and the west more generally) has no justification for any of its wars and criticising its other forms of imperialism.

      • ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        Nobody stays the same over 100 years. Chomsky’s been getting noticeably more inconsistent in his actions and statements since like… the year 2000, which is when basically all these criticisms are from.

        Not really, people have been calling him out since the early 90s for hanging out with the head of the CIA and being a warhawk shitlib

        • Soot [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well, yes really, almost all the shared criticisms are of post-2000 events.

          And I agree that stuff is bad. I’m not saying he is completely defensible pre-2000, but he was much more politically consistent then than now.

          • ghost_of_faso3@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            I mean even before the 90s I could mention how most of his sociological output is just re framing already existing sociology in a manner that defangs its revolutionary potential - hes been ribbing on Steven Lukes and shit his entire career.

    • MarmiteLover123 [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 months ago

      Cambodian genocide denial and Khmer Rouge apologia was also very bad, but unfortunately a lot of big leftist figures at the time engaged in it. It was one of those events where a lot of respected left wing figures got it extremely wrong in real time.