How do you debunk Chomsky's argument?

[lysol5555]

Hey all
Chomsky's argument comes across as ridiculous to me. Yet many youtubers seem to find arguments convincing. I just watched this:
Noam Chomsky: Is State Capitalism Making Life Better?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFxYyXGMfZM&lc=3k92JccA84wGT8roH9zA4zZc8hqfXsBKYKH1tm5D9Lw&feature=inbox

Chomsky compares our current society to slave society, and based on that, continued to disregard the economic progress so many hardworking Americans have made.

Ridiculous! How do you effectively debunk this fallacy?
Thanks!

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

Chomsky is a socialist libertarian so he agrees with us on everything but capitalism (wage slavery, blah blah blah) but there is no debunking. He and those who agree with him will continue to feel the way he does and has felt for the past 30 years.

 

[lysol5555]

Chomsky is a socialist libertarian so he agrees with us on everything but capitalism (wage slavery, blah blah blah) but there is no debunking. He and those who agree with him will continue to feel the way he does and has felt for the past 30 years.

the key word here is "feel", isn't it? Politics is not some touchy feeling matter that depends your taste, Mr. chomsky! It is about liberty, it is life and death matter. A man who has worked in university all his life has no rights to say on behalf of workers and any people for that matter.

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

the key word here is "feel", isn't it? Politics is not some touchy feeling matter that depends your taste, Mr. chomsky! It is about liberty, it is life and death matter. A man who has worked in university all his life has no rights to say on behalf of workers and any people for that matter.

Noam Chomsky is one of the most intelligent men in history and he is deeply set in his beliefs so I don't think that we will be able to change his mind.

 

[lysol5555]

Noam Chomsky is one of the most intelligent men in history and he is deeply set in his beliefs so I don't think that we will be able to change his mind.

He is definitely not one of the most intelligent men in history, not even close. He has an exceptional memory and a above average intelligence. He is deeply incompetent in economics and political theory. The greatest economic and political mind is probably Milton Friedman. Friedman is much more eloquent and much sharper than Chomsky.

 

[culvereric]

Chomsky is a punk

 

[hells_unicorn]

Chomsky's crowd are a bunch of brainwashed zombies who have mastered a few synonymous terms out of their pocket thesaurus, they're basically a slightly more verbose version of your typical brainless Obama supporter. A small handful of them are supporting Paul just based on his foreign policy but utterly oppose the idea of economic liberty because they can't get out of the notion that the term has to be associated with corporatism. I spent 4 years banging my head against a wall trying to get these people to listen to reason, and honestly, you'll have more luck convincing a Neocon to knock off the warmongering than you will convincing one of these drones to think outside of their dogmatic boxes.

 

[The Northbreather]

Chomsky is a punk

good argument.... uh no

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

Yeah, anybody here a Professor at MIT? Didn't think so.

 

[Voluntary Man]

Hey all
Chomsky's argument comes across as ridiculous to me. Yet many youtubers seem to find arguments convincing. I just watched this:
Noam Chomsky: Is State Capitalism Making Life Better?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFxYyXGMfZM&lc=3k92JccA84wGT8roH9zA4zZc8hqfXsBKYKH1tm5D9Lw&feature=inbox

Chomsky compares our current society to slave society, and based on that, continued to disregard the economic progress so many hardworking Americans have made.

Ridiculous! How do you effectively debunk this fallacy?
Thanks!

It's neither ridiculous nor a fallacy.

He is arguing against the Marxist materialist standard. Chomsky is saying, "liberty > prosperity." In other words, he is saying that the fact that you wear expensive uniforms, sleep in comfortable quarters, and are transported to your duties in pretty conveyances neither makes you free nor justifies your enslavement.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Goethe

 

[hells_unicorn]

Yeah, anybody here a Professor at MIT? Didn't think so.

Take your appeal to authority fallacies and shove them up where the sun don't shine. The guy is a linguist, he has absolutely ZERO academia credentials as an economist or political scientist.

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

Take your appeal to authority fallacies and shove them up where the sun don't shine. The guy is a linguist, he has absolutely ZERO academia credentials as an economist or political scientist.

lol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky#Academic_achievements.2C_awards_and_honors

when you have all of that then you can talk. Just because he doesn't agree with your political views (I don't agree with his) doesn't mean that he isn't intelligent or that his opinion isn't valid. The point I was originally trying to make was that Chomsky is firmly set in his beliefs and is an MIT professor who could surely debate all day about his political views (he gives speeches and does interviews year round) and you would never change his mind. You can say that he is wrong (which I think he is) but it will not change his mind even with evidence presented because he believes that wages are a form of slavery and therefore capitalism is bad to him. It's like trying to convince an anarchist that more government is good for them.

 

[onlyrp]

Hey all
Chomsky's argument comes across as ridiculous to me. Yet many youtubers seem to find arguments convincing. I just watched this:
Noam Chomsky: Is State Capitalism Making Life Better?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFxYyXGMfZM&lc=3k92JccA84wGT8roH9zA4zZc8hqfXsBKYKH1tm5D9Lw&feature=inbox

Chomsky compares our current society to slave society, and based on that, continued to disregard the economic progress so many hardworking Americans have made.

Ridiculous! How do you effectively debunk this fallacy?
Thanks!

why do you want to debunk that? Don't you know that without people hating corporatism, captialism and feeling screwed by banks, we can't have a Ron Paul revolution and an angry mob to take back the white house? DOn't you know that Chomsky is the ideological godfather of occupy movement and our best allies? If we distance ourselves from them, we'll be alone and lose like always, and we play right into the false party division. We need to work together with people we otherwise hate when the time is crucial for change, our common enemy doesn't care if you listen to Glenn Beck or Alex Jones.

 

[Black Flag]

Yeah, anybody here a Professor at MIT? Didn't think so.

You assume Professor's at MIT are always right? .... uh no.

 

[Black Flag]

Derail

he believes that wages are a form of slavery and therefore capitalism is bad to him. It's like trying to convince an anarchist that more government is good for them.

Well said - though it is not the same thing as trying to convince the anarchist.

Most people have reached the philosophy of archo-capitalism and anarchy itself, not by opinion or feeling, but by the inescapable truth of reason.

To convince an anarchist that government is "good for them" would require reasoning - but it was reasoning that led them to abandon Statism in the first place.

 

[DerailingDaTrain]

You assume Professor's at MIT are always right? .... uh no.

Ugh. I was simply stating that since he is a professor at MIT and consistently asked to speak, debate, etc about his political views then he is indeed intelligent which this person denied

He is definitely not one of the most intelligent men in history, not even close.

I guess I should have said of our time when describing intelligence though instead of in history. I am not saying that an MIT professor is always right but that at the very least they are intelligent. Unless you think that MIT hires idiots to fill all teaching positions then I am correct in my statement.

 

[lysol5555]

Chomsky's crowd are a bunch of brainwashed zombies who have mastered a few synonymous terms out of their pocket thesaurus, they're basically a slightly more verbose version of your typical brainless Obama supporter. A small handful of them are supporting Paul just based on his foreign policy but utterly oppose the idea of economic liberty because they can't get out of the notion that the term has to be associated with corporatism. I spent 4 years banging my head against a wall trying to get these people to listen to reason, and honestly, you'll have more luck convincing a Neocon to knock off the warmongering than you will convincing one of these drones to think outside of their dogmatic boxes.

Except they are more extreme than Obama's supporters. They have an imaginary society of anarcho-socialism, syndicalism in their mind. I have spent countless hours debating them these zombies on youtube, they always have some strange arguments along the logic of : "Smoking causes cancer", chomsky's drone: "yeah, but drinking milk causes cancer too", or the classic "Soviet Union is not socialism". You just can't talk sense into them.
I am not smart enough to dissect their whole system of thinking and logic. I was hoping someone is can give some tips on how to debate them. Milton Friedman was brilliant, but even he cant convince the leftists. I think it takes a complete disregard of facts to believe in Chomsky, but of course they always accuse us of the same thing.

 

[Sam I am]

I think Chomsky is quite the genius, and I agree with everything I've heard him say. Mind you, I don't listen to him speak about many topics, and I'm sure there are some among those topics, where I would disagree with him.

Hey all
Chomsky's argument comes across as ridiculous to me. Yet many youtubers seem to find arguments convincing. I just watched this:
Noam Chomsky: Is State Capitalism Making Life Better?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFxYyXGMfZM&lc=3k92JccA84wGT8roH9zA4zZc8hqfXsBKYKH1tm5D9Lw&feature=inbox

Chomsky compares our current society to slave society, and based on that, continued to disregard the economic progress so many hardworking Americans have made.

Ridiculous! How do you effectively debunk this fallacy?
Thanks!

 

[Wesker1982]

Chomsky’s Augustinian Anarchism

 

[A Son of Liberty]

Admittedly, I have never read him, but as I understand his positions (and I'm perfectly willing to admit I'm misperceiving), he is a some sort of left-anarchist; as in, he does not believe in the legitimacy of the state, but believes that mankind has some sort of collective obligation. So cheers to him for understanding that the state is an illegitimate entity, and he and those who agree with him are free to collectivize, as long as they leave me alone. But I can't figure out the logic behind that idea. The sovereignty of the individual is self-evident - I can understand and even get behind a sense of obligation to other human beings, but not a compulsion.