| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-11 21:00:51 |
|
|
|
|
not talking about hte content of their books, speeches...
but i'm under the impression that these two and others like them don't want change, they just created a niche market for liberals to buy.
They line their pockets while they rant against the very system that allows them the luxury to be important and wealthy.
instead of working for change, they sell books, charge fees for speaking and otherwise present a false sense of revolt......while calling on those that would listen to act where they are unwilling or too afraid. They're in the position financially to foster change, they are in the position to get the word spread and to put their money where the mouth is.
furthermore they preach to the choir to avoid direct conflict maybe?
they just write books to sell and travel to give speeches for a fee and travel expenses.
let's discuss.........
ok....GO! |
 |
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-11 22:32:30 |
|
|
|
|
you might be right, but (I´ve never read zinn) chomsky seems to be honest scientist and as such I dont think he´s "preaching" much. just saying his oppinnion. he´s trying to be an counterforce, which is a way of doing socialscience, to see what happens with the elite, when you say certain things and announce certain defects. and he, as a part of the world seems also as a person (not as a scientist) to be concerned about the way of the world and future. he is clearly liberal (democrat as the americans might say about him), but scientists of politics, history, social sciences, whatever are always people with own views and that shouldn´t be attacked (which you really werent =D)
about the money; it´s his job to give lectures and write books so why wouldn´t he get money out of it? you get money for the work you do, don´t you?
this might have been sorta not what you were after, but this is what came to my mind when I read your post. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-11 23:07:43 |
|
|
| Kosinus |
| that summer had its charm |
|
 |
|
>They line their pockets while they rant against the very system that allows them the luxury to be important and wealthy.
See, this is why this system is so great! You can make money out of critisizing it. If they were doing the same in socialism (which they sympathise with LOL) they'd be shot (or at least deported to a happy camp if they were lucky) very soon. They are the proof that this system is friendlier than any other. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-11 23:34:40 |
|
|
|
|
|
>They line their pockets while they rant against the very system that allows them the luxury to be important and wealthy.
See, this is why this system is so great! You can make money out of critisizing it. If they were doing the same in socialism (which they sympathise with LOL) they'd be shot (or at least deported to a happy camp if they were lucky) very soon. They are the proof that this system is friendlier than any other. |
yeah...but you know when people say a new system is needed....it doesn't automatically mean that instead of capitalism the only option is socialism or communism etc. . . .
new means.....well exactly that NEW. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-12 00:26:24 |
|
|
| laaran |
|
 |
|
Capitalism has some qualities.
The strange point is that those who support capitalism are not able to describe its qualities...
And I don't know why those who don't support it should help... |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-12 01:29:38 |
|
|
| Realphilip747 |
|
 |
|
The two guys are out to make moolah and lots of it, specially Chomsky, as I mentioned before in a previous post a while back.
Do as I Say (Not as I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy
[edit] 2. Noam Chomsky — Social Parasite, Economic Protectionist, Amoral Defense Contractor
One of the premiere anti-capitalists and anti-militarists in academia today, Chomsky, a self-described "anarchist-socialist," has been paid millions by the Pentagon—which he once called "the most hideous institution on this earth"—over the last 40 years, as well as various corporations, which he has described as "just as totalitarian as Bolshevism and fascism." When asked by Schweizer about his seeming contradiction, Chomsky responded (via email), "I think we should be responsible for what we do, not for the bureaucratic question of who stamps the paycheck." Chomsky then went on to rationalize his wealth achieved via Pentagon contacts by stating that anyone who uses the Internet, which was created by the U.S. military, is guilty of working for the Pentagon. Though he has lectured that other university professors should wean themselves of Pentagon funding in the form of grants and scholarships, he has yet to do so himself.
Chomsky's public condemnations of capitalism, which he calls a "grotesque catastrophe," are similarly contradicted by his private lifestyle. Mr. Chomsky lives in an $850,000 house and has a $1.2 million vacation home, both in Massachusetts. A critic of the "massive use of tax havens to shift the burden to the general population and away from the rich," he has called tax rebates "equivalent to a welfare payment," yet has set up trusts in his children's and tax attorney's names in order to avoid future payment of inheritance taxes. His loathing of copyrights and patents has also not stopped him from copyrighting his lectures, speeches and articles over the years (which can be downloaded—for a fee—off the Internet). After speaking at a benefit sponsored by the Greater Philadelphia Democratic Left where Chomsky stated, "A democracy requires a free, independent and inquiring media," a reporter named Deborah Bolling was told that she would have to pay $35 to interview him. Perhaps most damning is his impressive stock portfolio, which includes shares in oil companies, military contractors and pharmaceuticals.
While Chomsky has championed free speech and denounced what he sees as a lack thereof in the United States, he has often visited Communist nations completely devoid of free speech and given speeches celebrating the sociopolitical systems of Laos, Cambodia, China, North Vietnam and Cuba.
here is the link to wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...ntractor
Have fun reading about their hypocrisy |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-12 21:01:20 |
|
|
|
|
hypocrisy isn't the problem. The problem is that they have the ability to do something they are in a position to do it.....but they choose not to. out of inherrent laziness and the desire for other people to do the work if they spread the rhetoric.
Americans are too comfortable and therefore no change will come about unless the level of discomfort is amplified.
The message isn't nullified due to the actions of the messenger. However, i think if these guys cared about what they write and speak about they wouldn't have just created this niche market to rake in bucks for themselves, those bucks would be funnelled into a movement. Not everybody can be Ghandi. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-12 21:39:35 |
|
|
| Realphilip747 |
|
|
|
Hi Mishto,
I would disagree that if one doesn't practice what they preach then regardless of their message, the words are hollow and carry no weight to them if the messenger themselves doesnt practice or believe what they say.
For example if someone says that racism is wrong and we shouldn't use slurs against anyone and then you find out they are a member of the Ku Klux Klan and enjoys lynching minorities.
I also found out some new things about Ghandi, even though he used his wife's money to pay for his education he did not allow his wife to go to school, nor would he allow his sons to be educated.
He also took the christian scientist's beliefs with medicine when it came to his wife's illness (which is you shouldn't use medicine to interfere with nature, more or less). He refused medical care for her when she was deathly ill. He basically said "If God wills it she will live," she died shortly after being stricken by her illness, yet when he was stricken by malaria, he immediately took action and medication to ensure his good health. Strange, if what I read was indeed true. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-13 19:18:30 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Mishto,
I would disagree that if one doesn't practice what they preach then regardless of their message, the words are hollow and carry no weight to them if the messenger themselves doesnt practice or believe what they say.
For example if someone says that racism is wrong and we shouldn't use slurs against anyone and then you find out they are a member of the Ku Klux Klan and enjoys lynching minorities.
I also found out some new things about Ghandi, even though he used his wife's money to pay for his education he did not allow his wife to go to school, nor would he allow his sons to be educated.
He also took the christian scientist's beliefs with medicine when it came to his wife's illness (which is you shouldn't use medicine to interfere with nature, more or less). He refused medical care for her when she was deathly ill. He basically said "If God wills it she will live," she died shortly after being stricken by her illness, yet when he was stricken by malaria, he immediately took action and medication to ensure his good health. Strange, if what I read was indeed true. |
yeah well i see it differently.
Racism is wrong. and if someone says racism is wrong but turns out to be racist ..... it doesn't mean that the statement Racism is wrong is any less true or valid a statement.
it just means the guy who said it is a doucheling. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-13 19:20:11 |
|
|
|
|
speaking of which.....apparently rosie o'donnel made a joke about asians or essentially just going "CHING CHING CHONG CHONG" on the air....but only a few weeks ago was all up some other celebs arsehole because she interpretted something as being anti-gay/homophobic.
wtf. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-13 19:40:13 |
|
|
| laaran |
|
|
|
Mishto, I think your last word was not necessary... |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-13 20:45:40 |
|
|
|
|
last word or words?
i'm under the impression nothing i do on the internerd is necessary...it's just to pass the time. Sort of like waiting to die.......you fill the time between with things to do like stamp collecting and sports and marriage. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-14 00:53:43 |
|
|
| laaran |
|
|
|
The three last words.
If you tell that to me, about any subject, whichever your sex, and if you are above 13 and below hum let's say 65, you take my hand in the face. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-14 03:09:24 |
|
|
| Realphilip747 |
|
|
|
Mishto
Rosie is a weasel. Rails against Kelly Ripa, according to Rosie everything is homophobia.
Rosie's spokesperson said rather coldly after Asian group's complained "Maybe one they they will get her sense of humor."
Rosie was being racist and the show was being racist by playinga loud gong noise after rosie made her statement.
But then again where is the surprise? Rosie made a slanderous statement against Christians a few weeks back. She is nothing but a hater. She is a hypocrite, plain and simple.
But Asians and Christians are the last remaining groups that people will make fun of or slander and not get in trouble for. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-14 07:16:41 |
|
|
| t.rex |
| travis rex |
|
 |
|
okay. rosie o'donnell. hypocrite? not exactly. objecting to what she perceived as homophobia and then following it up by making stupid jokes about chinese people isn't hypocritical. it isn't exactly consistent with what her projected liberal bent would make you expect of her, but the two issues are unique, and one does not imagine that everyone who feels one way about one issue should naturally be equally sensitive about the other.
i'm not defending her remarks (about either case) but hypocrisy isn't exactly the right charge to level against her.
"purveyor of mixed messages" might be more appropriate. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-14 08:22:35 |
|
|
|
|
|
The three last words.
If you tell that to me, about any subject, whichever your sex, and if you are above 13 and below hum let's say 65, you take my hand in the face. |
but you are french yes? i wouldn't expect that hand to be much of a threat. |
|
|
|
| Author |
| Posted on 2006-12-14 09:48:54 |
|
|
| t.rex |
| travis rex |
|
|
|
laaran makes a smart-ass comment, mishto replies with a boring and snarky comment. can we put this thread to bed now? |
|
|
|