|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chomsky on Ron Paul
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fu...ogID=326180908
Chomsky interesting as always. He is extremely critical of Paul, as expected. I can't say I disagree with many of his points, although his word choice is intentionally inflammatory as always. I am sure he isn't advocating the current administartion over Paul (maybe in rare instances), but I am unclear which politian he would support. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
Chomsky hopeless as always. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] (Ron Paul) wants people to be able to run around freely with assault rifles, on the basis of a distorted reading of the Second Amendment (and while we're at it, why not abolish the whole raft of constitutional provisions and amendments, since they were all enacted in ways he opposes?). [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Can you please tell me what role "private property" and "ownership" have in your school of thought? That would have to be worked out by free communities, and of course it is impossible to respond to what I would prefer in abstraction from circumstances, which make a great deal of difference, obviously. [/ QUOTE ] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Chomsky hopeless as always. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] (Ron Paul) wants people to be able to run around freely with assault rifles, on the basis of a distorted reading of the Second Amendment (and while we're at it, why not abolish the whole raft of constitutional provisions and amendments, since they were all enacted in ways he opposes?). [/ QUOTE ] Sounds good. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
Chumpsky reminds me of our very own Phil153. He uses his wild imagination to dream up "problems" that A.) would not be likely to happen in a free market and B.) become more likely to happen when you introduce state oppression and C.) would not necessarily be any sort of problem if they did happen, all in an odd attempt to lead the reader to believe he is actually making a sound point. He makes the general mistake of assuming solutions that come from his mind must be better than solutions other people come to when acting freely in their own best interest. And he uses the implied delusion that human life could possibly be without problems to justify it.
What I really wonder is if people like Chomsky actually believe in the logical merit of what they say, or if his interest is merely to represent the views of people who actually think like that. It just baffles me that a supposedly smart person could make so many theoretical gaffs. Also, I now rock the Jim Croce avatar, and (even dead) he is 10 times the man Chomsky will ever be. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
For the life of me I cannot understand how Chomsky ever passes for anything but a big statist. How he can say all these things and be considered a libertarian or anarcho anything really doesn't make any sense at all.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
For the life of me I cannot understand how Chomsky ever passes for anything but a big statist. How he can say all these things and be considered a libertarian or anarcho anything really doesn't make any sense at all. [/ QUOTE ] The same can be said of Bill Maher. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
Can you please tell me what role "private property" and "ownership" have in your school of thought? That would have to be worked out by free communities, and of course it is impossible to respond to what I would prefer in abstraction from circumstances, which make a great deal of difference, obviously. [/ QUOTE ] Yet again he is on record saying that free societies should be able to define property as they wish. And then he turns around and bashes them because the don't choose this dimwitted version of property that he likes. What a D-bag |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] For the life of me I cannot understand how Chomsky ever passes for anything but a big statist. How he can say all these things and be considered a libertarian or anarcho anything really doesn't make any sense at all. [/ QUOTE ] The same can be said of Bill Maher. [/ QUOTE ] Bill Maher calls himself a libertarian because he's for the legalization of marijuana. That seems to be his only "libertarian" virtue. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] For the life of me I cannot understand how Chomsky ever passes for anything but a big statist. How he can say all these things and be considered a libertarian or anarcho anything really doesn't make any sense at all. [/ QUOTE ] The same can be said of Bill Maher. [/ QUOTE ] Bill Maher calls himself a libertarian because he's for the legalization of marijuana. That seems to be his only "libertarian" virtue. [/ QUOTE ] Don't forget the prostitutes! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Chomsky on Ron Paul
Chomsky is a Stalinesque uberstatist.
|
|
|