The Anti Chomsky Reader by Peter Collier David Horowitz (PDF)

Description

New

User’s Reviews

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐There’s something very ugly going on here. The mere concept of an Anti-Chomsky reader is interesting, implying that he’s a messiah and that ‘we will set out to debunk him once and for all’. To think that one book, or a whole series of books that construct Chomsky-ite theories in favor of straw man arguments will finally ‘debunk’ him can’t be serious, and the book should be read with a fat grain of salt.I don’t know what exactly set Horowitz and Collier off on this. I don’t believe Chomsky ever penned an anti-anybody reader, and for good reason. What are you telling people about your own work and opinion? It’s almost as if Chomsky’s work has revealed something unacceptable about not only the authors but about other intellectuals, and it just can’t be tolerated, so an irate book claiming to ‘finally’ debunk this thinker is needed.Noam Chomsky is not God, folks. He would probably be the last one to think he is. What’s important is that you do not have to agree with everything he says–something his critics conveniently believe about anyone who references him–in order to find value in his thinking. Chomsky has never written a ‘manifesto’, or a ‘bible’, or an anti-whoever book. He doesn’t have a ‘plan’. He subscribes to a type of thinking that often tries to consider ‘honesty’, as in, actualy intellectual honesty. And he has written and talked about his own work often enough to suggest he is well aware of his own role in the intellectual world, and that he doesn’t spend 24 hours a day pursuing the ‘truth’, not even close.I almost can’t believe what some of this book covers. The whole anti-Semite argument returns, yet again. Once again, other intellectuals appear to be condemning him for not loving the Israeli leadership and the Israeli legacy of state terror, and therefore making him ‘anti-Semitic’, meaning he hates himself, of course. Once again we have mention of Holocaust denial, which is absolutely idiotic given how much has been said about this. More has now been written about Chomsky’s alleged support of Holocaust denial than what Chomsky wrote in that intro the infamous book in the first place. If you believe in free speech, he was basically saying, you would believe in someone’s right to pen a book about how the Holocaust never took place–no matter how ridiculous, since Chomsky never even read the thing, and believes that even entering such a discussion is ‘to lose one’s humanity’. The Khmer Rouge discussion is another look at this overplayed ‘example’ of how Chomsky ‘supports’ mass murder, etc, etc. Again, given the brains behind the book, I’m surprised that they challenged what they did. The examination of the propaganda model is very unfortunate, misrepresenting Chomsky’s and Herman’s work and once again ignoring the central theme in favor of feverishly debunking someone who says a lot of things that people don’t like to hear.Perhaps if Chomsky joined the ranks of countless intellectuals who condemn others for crimes, and ignored what his tax dollars are contributing to, his critics might quiet down, which is exactly the point of much of his work. Why criticize another country for their crimes when you have less influence to change them? Why not examine yourself, and your country, and look to correct what you yourself may be responsible for? It’s an attempt at intellectual honesty, a difficult and bumpy path, and it’s not surprising that it’s been often met with frothing contempt by many. It’s a lot harder to express dissent than to simply line up and support existing power.Noam Chomsky is a person who is thinking about the real world and is trying to explain it. He has specific beliefs about the role of power in the world, and about the role of the superpower of which he is a citizen. He is not always correct, or ‘right’. And given the amount of work Chomsky has done, the amount of talks, and interviews, and information he has dealt with (he’s very empirical) the idea that one might tome (with the very original ‘negative’ photo of his face) will ‘finally’ put permanent suspicion on this man is rather childish and unfortunate.

⭐Chomsky is interesting as a case study of leftism as a form of “magical thinking” character disorder. How and why do reasonably intelligent, and often highly intelligent, individuals construct parallel realities that exist only in their own wishful thinking, while denying the objective realities offered by the world of experience and phenomena (the “real world”)? It is a widespread and long-standing epidemic extending back through a generation of apologists for the Soviet Union, who proclaimed the thuggish police state a “worker’s paradise” despite abundant observable evidence to the contrary (Stalin called these Western journalists and intellectuals “useful idiots”) and further into 19th century Europe. Chomsky is perhaps the most extreme contemporary specimen of these “educated fools.”The collection of essays at hand goes far toward demonstrating the mechanisms of Chomsky’s (and the Left’s, in general) madness. He begins with a burning, unreasoning, and above all unquestioning hatred for the United States and everything it stands for, supplemented with a peculiarly virulent strain of anti-Semitism (seemingly paradoxical for a Jew, but not at all unusual in the world of the Left). Thus America is the most vicious, evil entity in the world, and everybody else in the world is more or less good, especially (of course) our enemies such as Al Qaida and Islamofascism generally. Pol Pot never committed genocide; that was just a typical American lie. America deserved 9-11 (it was a bad thing, of course; but we asked for it and had it coming). And Chomsky, while never overtly denying the Holocaust, is sympathetic to alternative interpretations which do deny it. Controlling the American government is a cabal of ghoulishly evil corporate executives who enjoy oppressing and destroying everyone and everything in order to get richer and richer. They also control the media, which is why all the media print nothing but pro-capitalist flag-waving jingoistic right-wing propaganda. Talk about living in an alternate reality!The authors expose and dismantle the fraudulent thinking, the lies, the half-truths, the distortions that form Chomsky’s positions, as well as demonstrating the man’s titanic arrogance. I would like to have seen something from Daniel Pipes included in the collection, because his few paragraphs on Chomsky in his excellent “Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where it Comes From” were keenly insightful. This leads to the deeper area of inquiry which is necessarily more speculative than the matter-of-fact offerings in the Collier & Horowitz collection, which would explore the pathology of the Chomsky/Left mentality. Why do these people choose to lie to themselves about the world around them? Why do they so often fly into a blind rage of hyperbolic vituperation when confronted by opposing evidence, like overgrown infants throwing a tantrum? These characteristics suggest a sort of permanent adolescence, an inability to mature, a colossal ego structure which is as vulnerable and weak as it is overinflated…but in the non-pathological course of development, men and women emerge from this limbo between childhood and maturity as they awaken to a broader and deeeper reality, leaving magical thinking behind.Chomsky’s brand of dream-state tripe is immensely popular among those too young to know better as well as among those who’ve successfully dodged any engagement with the real world by building careers in the ivory towers of academia and entertainment where the consequences of bad ideas can be safely ignored in favor of the narcissistic fantasies of the Left. Indeed, there seems to be something inherent in the life of the mind that renders the “intellectual” especially susceptible to leftist fantasies, with their assurances of moral and intellectual superiority that cannot stand up to any test of reality. Useful works that delve into these questions include Paul Hollander’s classic “Political Pilgrims,” Raymond Aron’s “Opium of the Intellectuals,” Jacques Barzun’s “House of Intellect,” Richard Crossman’s “The God that Failed,” and in a more colloquial vein, Mona Charen’s recent “Useful Idiots.”

⭐Makes some salient points about a man who for some is as unassailable a saint .I expect lots of negative reviews for the cardinal sin of being anything other than a flattering sycophant at the temple of Chomsky.

⭐This is an excellent and thorough expose of Chomsky and what he really stands for. Unfortunately, deluded leftist pseudo-intellectuals won’t be likely to read it. Highly recommended.

⭐Jamie Glazov and others (such as ex-Red Diaper Babies Ron Radosh and David Horowitz) have noted the surreal fantasy world inhabited by leftists and their fellow travellers. Their ability to view up as down and black as white is something to behold. To witness, just read the reviews. The semi-literate rants are Chomsky-fans, whereas those who don’t write with Crayons tend be critical of Chomsky and more concerned witht the contents of the book rather than launching ad-hominem attacks on positive reviewers.Oh – and to intimate that Chomsky is Jewish and therefore can’t be an anti-Semite or viscerally opposed to Israel is so stupid as to be undeserving of comment.

⭐There is much to criticise in this book but many of the reviews by Chomsky’s supporters are as duplicitous as the man himself. His obsessions with Israel go beyond discussions of anti-Semitism: they are simply biased and, like many on the left (and in the UN), ignore the repressive regimes in the Arab world and their crimes. The old canard about the Faurisson case can be put right: it was never about free speech. Faurisson was censured in France for gross academic misconduct in distorting and possibly fabricating ‘evidence’ for his vile ideas. Chomsky’s writing calls Faurisson an ‘apolitical liberal’ and his ideas have ‘ interesting historical findings’. A vehement Holocaust denier, who claims Jews, including children, rightly wore a yellow star to warn the Nazis who may be terrorists?Respectable historians ignore him because he is not a historian. His book on the Cold War has so many errors that you would fail History A level if you used it.His views on the media are generally out-dated and riddled with a conspiracist outlook. He has never been fined, imprisoned or lost his job over his writings, unlike writers in the countries he admires. His personal attack on Vaclav Havel was particularly hypocritical and odious in that regard.There is so much grovelling before this man that any counterblast is welcome, even if flawed.

⭐It should not be necessary to expose Noam Chomsky as a lying charlatan, in his political and historical comments, – as it is so obvious that he is one. However, Chomsky is treated (by much of academia – and vitually all of the media) as a great intellectual whose opinions on political matters should be treated with respect.This writers of the essays in this book carefully examine the words of Noam Chomsky and show him to be what he is (see above – lying charlatan). Chomsky not only says things, about various political and historical matters, that are not true – the evidence is overwhelming that he knows that they are untrue.Some of the writers in this book also question Chomsky’s academic work in linguistics – on this matter I simply do not know enough in order to make a judgement.

Keywords

Free Download The Anti Chomsky Reader in PDF format
The Anti Chomsky Reader PDF Free Download
Download The Anti Chomsky Reader 2005 PDF Free
The Anti Chomsky Reader 2005 PDF Free Download
Download The Anti Chomsky Reader PDF
Free Download Ebook The Anti Chomsky Reader