Zionism and Nazism: is there a difference that makes a difference?

Noam Chomsky:

"Little of novelty or substance can be added to the millions of words that have already been written or spoken about Noam Chomsky. But it’s worth repeating a couple of them, if only to underscore the sheer, breathtaking scale of his achievements.

"First, he is the eighth most-cited author in the world, ever.

"Sharing the top ten with him are: Marx, Lenin, Shakespeare, Aristotle, the Bible, Plato, Freud, Hegel and Cicero.

"Put simply, to ignore his work is to court ignorance and irrelevance.

"Second, he is, without a doubt, our Bertrand Russell: a man of extraordinary intellectual achievement, the father of modern linguistics, a pioneer of cognitive science, a political thinker of astonishing breadth and erudition, a writer of great moral courage in the face of cruelty and oppression, a tireless campaigner for peace and justice, and a robust voice of reason in the wilderness of despair and cynicism that is our modern world."

ZCommunications

An interview with Chomsky is your source. That is pretty stupid, not because of who Chomsky is, but because its simply an opinion, in an interview, not even a history scholar.

That is your idea of offering a bit of information to have a discussion about history.

City Journal

Here’s a small but representative sample. The goal of America, Chomsky charges, “is a society in which the basic unit is you and your television set. If the kid next door is hungry, it’s not your problem. If the retired couple next door invested their assets badly and are now starving, that’s not your problem either.” Prisons and inner-city schools, Chomsky maintains, “target a kind of superfluous population that there’s no point in educating because there’s nothing for them to do. Because we’re a civilized people, we put them in prison, rather than sending death squads out to murder them.” Another example: “When you come back from the Third World to the West—the U.S. in particular—you are struck by the narrowing of thought and understanding, the limited nature of legitimate discussion, the separation of people from each other.”

the U.S. instigated a process that “annihilated the indigenous [American] population (millions of people), conquered half of Mexico, intervened violently in the surrounding region, conquered Hawaii and the Philippines (killing hundreds of thousands of Filipinos), and in the past half century particularly, extended its resort to force throughout much of the world.”

For Chomsky, turn over any monster anywhere and look at the underside. Each is clearly marked: MADE IN AMERICA. The cold war? All America’s fault: “The United States was picking up where the Nazis had left off.” Castro’s executions and prisons filled with dissenters? Irrelevant, for “Cuba has probably been the target of more international terrorism [from the U.S., of course] than any other country.” The Khmer Rouge? Back in 1977, Chomsky dismissed accounts of the Cambodian genocide as “tales of Communist atrocities” based on “unreliable” accounts. At most, the executions “numbered in the thousands” and were “aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from American distraction and killing.” In fact, some 2 million perished on the killing fields of Cambodia because of genocidal war against the urban bourgeoisie and the educated, in which wearing a pair of glasses could mean a death sentence.

Chomsky concedes that the WTC attack was unfortunate—not so much because of the deaths of Americans, but because “the atrocities of September 11 were a devastating blow to the Palestinians, as they instantly recognized.” (Some other group, disguised as Palestinians, must have been dancing in the streets that day.) Israel, he adds, “is openly exulting in the ‘window of opportunity’ it now has to crush Palestinians with impunity.”
 
Last edited:
In addition to Bertrand Russell, Albert Einstein has also been compared to Chomsky. In 1955 Russell and Einstein wrote a letter to the world pointing out a choice that is "stark, dreadful, and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?"

Noam's position over the last 55 years is that war remains the most immediate threat to the survival of the specie, and the principle reason is the amount of profit war generates for those who cast the shadow called "politics" across American society.

Do you think it's likely a specie that kills its young for money (or glory) is hardwired to self-destruct?

Copyright 2006 Failed States by Noam Chomsky P.3.
 
In addition to Bertrand Russell, Albert Einstein has also been compared to Chomsky. In 1955 Russell and Einstein wrote a letter to the world pointing out a choice that is "stark, dreadful, and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?"

Noam's position over the last 55 years is that war remains the most immediate threat to the survival of the specie, and the principle reason is the amount of profit war generates for those who cast the shadow called "politics" across American society.

Do you think it's likely a specie that kills its young for money (or glory) is hardwired to self-destruct?

Copyright 2006 Failed States by Noam Chomsky P.3.
Oh, his ego is even worse than I thought. I prefer Nostradamus, it holds more factual information than Chomsky's anti-semetic, western hating rants.
 
"Chomsky's anti-Semitic, western hating rants," draw much of their inspiration from an objective reading of Western history:

"The English colonists in North America had no doubts about what they were doing.

"Revolutionary War hero General Henry Knox, the first Secretary of War in the newly liberated American colonies, described 'the utter extirpation of all the Indians in most populous parts of the Union' by means 'more destructive to the Indian natives than the conduct of the conquerors of Mexico and Peru,' which would have been no small feat."

In his 2009 Edward Said Memorial Lecture at Columbia University, Chomsky probes Western civilization's emphasis on imperialism, particularly settler colonialism "commonly the most vicious form of imperial conquest..."

Chomsky links our sixth President's policies of genocide against "that hapless race of native Americans" with contemporary commentators linking (John Quincy) Adams with the Bush Doctrine:

"Distinguished contemporary commentators reinterpret the wisdom of Providence in secular terms.

"The prominent Yale historian John Lewis Gaddis hails Adams as the grand strategist who laid the foundations for the Bush Doctrine: the doctrine that 'expansion is the path to security' -- a convenient doctrine, for those who can get away with it, or who have powerful patrons.

"With evident appreciation, Gaddis observes that the doctrine has been routinely applied throughout the history of the 'infant empire,' as George Washington termed the new Republic.

"He passes in silence over Adams's gory contributions to the 'heinous sins of this nation' as he established the doctrine in a famous State paper justifying the conquest of Florida on utterly fraudulent pretexts of self-defense.

"The conquest was part of Adams's project of 'removing or eliminating native Americans from the southeast,' in the words of William Earl Weeks, the leading historian of the massacre, who provides a lurid account of this 'exhibition of murder and plunder' targeting 'lawless Indians' and runaway slaves."

All of which proved a little harsh on runaway slaves and lawless Indians and Iraqis, but as long as cost is socialized and profit privatized Western civilization will continue to expand until....?
 
One in three were Jewish, maybe less, that does not make two in three Arab, being this simple one in three is a Jew, one in three is an Arab, one in three is Christian.

Seems by your post Arabs are the minority.

The USA and England you state created Palestine, What policies by which president, you dont need to be specific I just need to know which years roughly you believe this happened.
"By 1948, there were approximately 1.35 million Arabs and 650,000 Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before, and more Jews than had lived there since Roman times."

MidEast Web

Britain initiated the colonial project in 1917 with the Balfour Declaration:

"In 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, which stated that the government viewed favourably 'the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'...

"The Declaration was issued as a result of the belief of key members of the government, including Prime Minister Lloyd George, that Jewish support was essential to winning the war; however, the declaration caused great disquiet in the Arab world."

Arab - Israeli conflict - Wiki

At the end of World War II the US inherited Britain's colonial project in Palestine of creating a Jewish homeland in a region of the world that was overwhelmingly Arab.

I believe all US administrations since Truman's have pursued a policy of arming Israel (at US taxpayer expense) while providing blanket diplomatic cover for all Israeli aggression.

It seems like a simple case of following the vast amounts of money that come from arms sales and oil sales and how cost is always socialized while profit becomes the property of the fortunate few.



No Christians, no Kurds, no Syrians, no Druze, how is that, its simple, they pump the Arabs numbers up by including the non-jew population into the Arab data. Clever, huh. No matter though, the amount of people of any particular race or group is irrelevant, there is sufficient population on either side of the argument to justify either establishing a nation.

I notice your post states "more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before". Where do you suppose they came from, immigration, attracted to the better life living alongside the Jews and Christians. Anyhow, can you explain how the Jews took the land from the indigenousness people when you just posted that the Arab population is larger than anytime in history.

At the end of World War II the US inherited Britain's colonial project in Palestine of creating a Jewish homeland in a region of the world that was overwhelmingly Arab.

In no way, shape, or form did this happen. The end of the war was 1945, Britain did not leave england until 1948, three years later. The only action taken by the USA was to vote in the United Nations for partition in November of 1947.

I believe all US administrations since Truman's have pursued a policy of arming Israel (at US taxpayer expense) while providing blanket diplomatic cover for all Israeli aggression.

I know they have not.

No arms deal with the Truman administration
No arms deal with the Eisenhower administration.

Kennedy was the first in 1963, that is 18 years after what you believe. The deal was for the Hawk anti-aircraft missile system, a defensive system. One condition though, Kennedy demanded the USA be allowed to inspect Israel's nuclear program. Israel developed nuclear weapons secretly, without the USA. France did it, the French gave Israel nuclear technology. Seems anywhere a problem exists in the world, there was France.

This is where things were at the time of Kennedy's assassination.

It was 1965 during Johnson's administration that the defensive weapon system was delivered.

A total of twenty years after the year you posted.

How accurate are any of your beliefs or knowledge of Israel.

I see George and Chomsky have ceded, without being able to address my post George cedes there is no basis in fact Chomsky's view.

The USA are the good guys. Chomsky cannot even respond to my simple post, I mean George cannot cut/paste a good Chomsky rebuttal.
 
Are you in favor of a "one state" or "binational" solution to Israel's "Arab problem"?

Chomsky has the following thoughts:

"Among the options under discussion are one-state and binational approaches.

"These are crucially different.

"There are many forms of multinationalism in the world: Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, etc.

"The concept is a cover term for arrangements that allow forms of autonomy for groups within complex societies, not necessarily only those that choose to regard themselves as 'nations.'

"Quite different are one-state systems, with no form of autonomy for various communities.

"In the US, for example, Latinos do not have autonomy or control over language or education in the areas stolen by violence from Mexico (or elsewhere); nothing approaching, say, the partial autonomy in Catalonia, to mention one of many cases of some form of multinationalism.

"Let’s turn to some of the relevant background. Pre-1948, binationalism was a minority position within the Zionist movement.

"From 1967-73 Israel had a real opportunity to institute a binational settlement in cis-Jordan in the context of a full peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan, hence the relevant part of the Arab world.

"There was no interest.
"The PLO had no interest.
"US articulate opinion was bitterly opposed.
"My own writings on the topic were harshly attacked from all sides."

"After the 1973 war, that option was effectively closed. Palestinian national rights were, for the first time, clearly and forcefully articulated in the international arena.

"A two-state settlement was brought to the UN Security Council in January 1976, vetoed by the US, an act condemned by Syria, Jordan, Egypt and the PLO.

"Since then there has been a broad international consensus in favor of a two-state settlement, blocked by the US and Israel alone.

"It should be unnecessary to review this history once again."

Or not.

Advocacy and Realism...
 
Zionism and Nazism: is there a difference that makes a difference?
Nazism is the father of Zionism. Although strangely, the idea of a master race originated in Judaism who consider Jews above everyone else as God's chosen people.
 
Chomsky must be making his mark or there would not be so much slime against him.

The only thing remarkable about him is how he's used you morons to make a pile of money speaking about the evils of capitalism.
Do you find it remarkable Chomsky is the 8th most quoted author of all time?

The only living human being on a Top Ten List that starts with the Bible?

How many of Noam's books have you read?

Never mind.
 
Chomsky must be making his mark or there would not be so much slime against him.

The only thing remarkable about him is how he's used you morons to make a pile of money speaking about the evils of capitalism.
Do you find it remarkable Chomsky is the 8th most quoted author of all time?

The only living human being on a Top Ten List that starts with the Bible?

How many of Noam's books have you read?

Never mind.

Chomsky has never been quoted on the front pages of the NY Times or Washington Post, nor on Meet The Press nor in Congress nor in the White House

chomsky is a crackpot, just like you :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top