I always appreciated Chomsky but he disappointed me when he sided with the Covid fascists and also promotes the idea that 9/11 narrative was fully truthful. Nothing to see here. Maybe he’s not as smart as he thinks or he’s part of the scam?
Chomsky is not running a cult or asking you to join one. He is asking you to use your brain and think critically. You are free to examine his statements and decide if you agree or not. In fact he encourages you to be examine and review everything, as your responsibility that you must exercise actively every day. Not to "follow" him personally.
His fans (I’m one) expect a lot more critical thinking from him. You don’t need a Phd in immunology to know that natural immunity is better than a vaccine. He fell for the LIE that the shot would prevent transmission and prevent getting it. In retrospect this was far from accurate. But even if you bought the line during the worst months, the answer was, offer a serology test to those concerned about the shot. If they have the Ab, no shot needed. He went along with the shot nazi approach. This was one of the biggest breaches of individual human rights in history! To coherence a medical intervention with money as the motivation for a disease caused by the same parties. People lost their livelihoods. The negative impact on the psyche of millions was immeasurable. Kids lost years in proper development and mental health. None of this was anticipated. He’s smarter than this
You don't have a Phd in immunology is what I can reasonably assume. And neither does he. So don't care what either of you think about it.
Furthermore critical thinking requires you to not "fan" anyone. It's your job to think and seek out insights from relevant experts where necessary. Not to fan a philosopher or "follow" them blindly.
I don’t understand your comment. Of course we care more about opinions of people we respect and admire on particular topic and of course we can be disappointed in them, especially when that opinion so damages your own basis for that admiration. His opinion on shelving human rights is absolutely relevant.
the question is not about vaccines. The philosophical question is around individual freedoms vs general and individual safety and the risk of corruption in balancing that decision. Chomsky is uniquely suited for that kind of conundrum.
Please also stop with the ‘I follow science’ narrative which was a clear tactic to shut down debate, which is inherently anti science. ‘The science’ should be challenged and critiqued as this leads to better outcomes. The science can be and has been wrong.
I didn't go along with many things Chomsky said during the Trump years, and he just fell into line not recognizing the consequences. Well, they certainly scared the hell out of you with covid, which was accompanied by a lot of misinformation. I thought from the beginning it escaped from the lab, and the main reason many scientists oppose such work. Building seven going down they say was from falling firery debris from the Twin Towers. I don't believe that is the reason at all. There were many things Chomsky said about Trump and his base I didn't appreciate, and thought extreme, however I remember him from years ago, and he really is smart, and insightful. It seems few people are willing to look at how autocratic the democrats were during the Trump years, and continue to be in regard to Trump.The lie of Russia-gate to remove a president is just one example, and what they are doing now is another, and no matter what you think of Trump democracy is at stake, well, what's ever left of it.
Trump is just a different flavor of the same fascist regime. In both camps, well meaning people have been fooled to believe their team is righteous. I can’t believe we’re pondering the question whether President should have absolute immunity. Of course the answer must be NO! I also can’t believe the broad and frivolous legal attacks on Trump that stink of political motivation. These will set an example for anyone wishing to damage a rival at every level of government. In both, the question is around intent and this is difficult to prove. In both extremes, democracy is in danger due to corrupt intent.
No one is saying he is righteous, all good, and that I endorsed all of his political positions on all issues, but with most of the 21st century bogged down in wars it was good to have 4 years without them. As Greenwald said those that preceded him caused far more death and destruction. You would never know that based on the commentary made by many on the left, who showed no sense of objectivity but picked up the democrats mantra that he is the worse thing that happened to us, and he has to go. He was their scapegoat. In fact during his 4 years there were few that you could actually say represented the left since their bias and hate blinded them to truth and even people like Amy Goodman believed and pushed the lie of Russia-gate, and no doubt like the democrats she supported the removal of an elected president from office which was the autocratic aim of the democrats and our government. Read Taibbi on this issue since he is quite up front about it and right on target. If another were in office and their was a January 6, it would be called by it's rightful name, a riot. Instead, those who voted for him, called deplorables, throughout his presidency were accused of instigating an insurrection and some are still rotting in jail.
I always appreciated Chomsky but he disappointed me when he sided with the Covid fascists and also promotes the idea that 9/11 narrative was fully truthful. Nothing to see here. Maybe he’s not as smart as he thinks or he’s part of the scam?
Chomsky is not running a cult or asking you to join one. He is asking you to use your brain and think critically. You are free to examine his statements and decide if you agree or not. In fact he encourages you to be examine and review everything, as your responsibility that you must exercise actively every day. Not to "follow" him personally.
His fans (I’m one) expect a lot more critical thinking from him. You don’t need a Phd in immunology to know that natural immunity is better than a vaccine. He fell for the LIE that the shot would prevent transmission and prevent getting it. In retrospect this was far from accurate. But even if you bought the line during the worst months, the answer was, offer a serology test to those concerned about the shot. If they have the Ab, no shot needed. He went along with the shot nazi approach. This was one of the biggest breaches of individual human rights in history! To coherence a medical intervention with money as the motivation for a disease caused by the same parties. People lost their livelihoods. The negative impact on the psyche of millions was immeasurable. Kids lost years in proper development and mental health. None of this was anticipated. He’s smarter than this
You don't have a Phd in immunology is what I can reasonably assume. And neither does he. So don't care what either of you think about it.
Furthermore critical thinking requires you to not "fan" anyone. It's your job to think and seek out insights from relevant experts where necessary. Not to fan a philosopher or "follow" them blindly.
I don’t understand your comment. Of course we care more about opinions of people we respect and admire on particular topic and of course we can be disappointed in them, especially when that opinion so damages your own basis for that admiration. His opinion on shelving human rights is absolutely relevant.
Vaccines are scientific issues not philosophical opinion. First you must have a grasp of the science before any opining is relevant.
the question is not about vaccines. The philosophical question is around individual freedoms vs general and individual safety and the risk of corruption in balancing that decision. Chomsky is uniquely suited for that kind of conundrum.
Please also stop with the ‘I follow science’ narrative which was a clear tactic to shut down debate, which is inherently anti science. ‘The science’ should be challenged and critiqued as this leads to better outcomes. The science can be and has been wrong.
I didn't go along with many things Chomsky said during the Trump years, and he just fell into line not recognizing the consequences. Well, they certainly scared the hell out of you with covid, which was accompanied by a lot of misinformation. I thought from the beginning it escaped from the lab, and the main reason many scientists oppose such work. Building seven going down they say was from falling firery debris from the Twin Towers. I don't believe that is the reason at all. There were many things Chomsky said about Trump and his base I didn't appreciate, and thought extreme, however I remember him from years ago, and he really is smart, and insightful. It seems few people are willing to look at how autocratic the democrats were during the Trump years, and continue to be in regard to Trump.The lie of Russia-gate to remove a president is just one example, and what they are doing now is another, and no matter what you think of Trump democracy is at stake, well, what's ever left of it.
Trump is just a different flavor of the same fascist regime. In both camps, well meaning people have been fooled to believe their team is righteous. I can’t believe we’re pondering the question whether President should have absolute immunity. Of course the answer must be NO! I also can’t believe the broad and frivolous legal attacks on Trump that stink of political motivation. These will set an example for anyone wishing to damage a rival at every level of government. In both, the question is around intent and this is difficult to prove. In both extremes, democracy is in danger due to corrupt intent.
No one is saying he is righteous, all good, and that I endorsed all of his political positions on all issues, but with most of the 21st century bogged down in wars it was good to have 4 years without them. As Greenwald said those that preceded him caused far more death and destruction. You would never know that based on the commentary made by many on the left, who showed no sense of objectivity but picked up the democrats mantra that he is the worse thing that happened to us, and he has to go. He was their scapegoat. In fact during his 4 years there were few that you could actually say represented the left since their bias and hate blinded them to truth and even people like Amy Goodman believed and pushed the lie of Russia-gate, and no doubt like the democrats she supported the removal of an elected president from office which was the autocratic aim of the democrats and our government. Read Taibbi on this issue since he is quite up front about it and right on target. If another were in office and their was a January 6, it would be called by it's rightful name, a riot. Instead, those who voted for him, called deplorables, throughout his presidency were accused of instigating an insurrection and some are still rotting in jail.