r/worldnews • u/DownWithAssad • 5d ago

Russia sentences 15-year-old schoolboy to 5 years for criticizing Putin regime and war against Ukraine Russia/Ukraine

https://khpg.org/en/1608813775
34.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

92

u/Neoliberal_Boogeyman 5d ago

Chomsky: look, I just like a good old fashioned genocide, okay?

51

u/TeddyBridgecollapse 5d ago

Everyone's daily reminder that that dickweed is a celebrated genocide denier and apologist for brutal regimes, as long as they're nominally socialist.

6

u/dumptruckacomin 5d ago

This is news to me. Got the details?

15

u/Kiwi_In_Europe 5d ago

Obligatory fuck Gnomespy

-12

u/fiduciary420 5d ago

Why are uneducated conservatives so weak and easy to manipulate?

16

u/TOO_MUCH_BRAVERY 5d ago

known uneducated, conservative chomsky

-9

u/fiduciary420 5d ago

Why would you say something so ridiculous in front of all of these people dude

14

u/TeddyBridgecollapse 5d ago

I like to think that kind answers itself. An educated populace is less susceptible to manipulation because it has the knowledge to think for itself and reject bad ideas.

I don't think that has much to do with my comment above, though. Most people I know who are vocal supporters of Chomsky are college educated liberals.

10

u/Any-Book-4990 5d ago

IMO and in my experience, Chomsky is mostly for people either mildly but not extensively educated in philosophy and/or any social science. No one who has actually read and understood any decent philosopher since and after Nietzsche would do anything else than laugh or shake their head when listening to him speak, and that's coming from someone immensely anti-capitalist and anti-state.

1

u/zeranos 4d ago

I don't disagree with you, but I would like your opinion on the following fact:

The official philosophy Discord (that I am a member of) strongly simps for Chomsky. In fact, he is the only(!) philosopher(?) who has his own channel and dedicated weekly seminars. This philosophy Discord has members who have PhDs and master's degrees in philosophy and they all simp for Chomsky.

1

u/tehfink 5d ago

Chompster went tête à tête with my man Foucault. Love him or hate him, that’s street cred

2

u/Any-Book-4990 4d ago edited 4d ago

If you think that debate went somewhat tied, it's because you don't understand yet how flawed most of his arguments were, and what Foucault was trying to say to show that. Of that I was faulty too when I was getting into those lines of philosophy, and many friends who are well versed in psychology even leaned in favor or Chomsky; just to mention something, some of his major flaws come from observations and analysis based on material conditions that we've been used to see throughout most of western modern history, sometimes mistaking learned axioms and mental structures for innate nature. It's very easy to take those words as truth, since it doesn't go against anything we observe. The problem resides more in the abstract. Well, even Lacan and Freud fall for this trap, since it's not easy to know for certain what aspects are innate when some learned mechanics have been deeply ingrained for centuries.

That alone heavily drifts his conclusions about human nature. I don't ask for him to be that perfect about it, Nietzsche would've discredited most if not all of his speech and he hasn't read anything after 1900~. Regarding politics and geopolitics, that's a long talk.

For learning about most of the topics he touches on I recommend Anti-Oedipus, though it doesn't really try to be readable without a considerable background; I don't know yours.

I do think that F was quite ineffective at communicating and conveying his ideas in such a way that it would be well explained and understood to someone not so familiar with his literature, though. It seems understandable to someone who would be able to rebate Chomsky without Foucault's interventions. In that sense it could be said that yes, he didn't convincingly win the debate/argument.

Just a reminder and incentive to keep reading! Sorry if I couldn't choose the right tone, I'm not native

2

u/MoonDoggoTheThird 5d ago

Because they want to be.

-6

u/fiduciary420 5d ago

They’re very deeply enslaved, aren’t they? Trained to obey.

1

u/TastyFennel540 4d ago

yes, Chomsky the rightwing socialist. The uneducated professor

0

u/Accomplished-Cat3996 5d ago

The nicest thing I can say about Chomsky is he probably doesn't even believe some of the BS he spews. He says he "just likes to stir the pot". Because hey, why be an academic who has made some modest progress in their field when you can spout lies in a totally other field to manipulate people for your own personal fame, right?

If it wasn't clear that he was is an asshole after his 9/11 Apologism then his Holocaust denial sure as heck should've been the last piece of evidence we need to not listen to this piece of work.

-2

u/No_Introduction9065 5d ago

The United States supported Indonesia's actions in East Timor, particularly through diplomatic and military assistance. Noam Chomsky has criticized the U.S. for its role in enabling the atrocities committed by Indonesian forces against the East Timorese population. He highlights that the U.S. provided crucial support, including arms used illegally but with covert authorization from Washington, which significantly contributed to the violent suppression of East Timor's bid for independence. Chomsky condemns this support as part of a broader pattern of prioritizing strategic and economic interests over human rights and ethical considerations.

Chomsky is vocally against genocide and the complicity of powerful nations in such acts. He calls for a reevaluation of international responsibilities and urges the U.S. and its allies to acknowledge their roles in the suffering of the East Timorese people. By doing so, he challenges the intentional ignorance of the international community and advocates for moral accountability and reparations for the victims. His critique is aimed not only at bringing awareness to the specific situation in East Timor but also at challenging the global patterns of behavior that allow such tragedies to occur without adequate intervention.

13

u/stilljustacatinacage 5d ago

Cool. Now would you like to write a response yourself, or shall we just give your seat to ChatGPT?

0

u/No_Introduction9065 4d ago

Do you want to suck me? It sounds like you want to suck me. I'll let you, but you have to wear a wig.

14

u/Neoliberal_Boogeyman 5d ago

Man that's a long essay just to try to white wash the Cambodian genocide denial done by chomsky

0

u/No_Introduction9065 4d ago

It is very telling that this is the only criticism that has stuck to Chomsky, and it is so easily refuted. You guys are brainwashed, you believe what you want to believe, and ignore evidence and logic.

Noam Chomsky has consistently refuted accusations that he denied or covered up the genocide in Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge. He and his co-author Edward Herman have been criticized for their portrayal of the situation in Cambodia during the late 1970s, where they questioned high death toll estimates and emphasized the context of U.S. bombing and its aftermath as significant factors in the devastation that followed. In their works, they argued that while the Khmer Rouge regime was oppressive and brutal, it was important to understand the full picture, including external influences that exacerbated internal issues.

Chomsky has stated that their intent was to provide a balanced view, critiquing both the U.S. role in Southeast Asia and the actions of the Khmer Rouge, without exaggerating or downplaying the atrocities committed. He pointed out the contrast in media coverage and international response to similar atrocities in different contexts, such as East Timor, which he argued was largely ignored due to U.S. involvement. Chomsky believes that his critiques were among the most accurate of the time, based on the evidence available, and vetted by experts before publication.

-4

u/No_Introduction9065 5d ago

Trump loves Putin, Chomsky does not.

8

u/Nice-Firefighter5684 5d ago

He sure did ride russian dick. So same thing

1

u/No_Introduction9065 4d ago

He is a massive critic of Russia and the Soviet Union. You're just talking out your ass.