Unfortunately, Chomsky took the literal exact opposite view of the Ukrainian War than he did the Vietnam War - that the imperializing power in Ukraine deserves some concessions, as a treat.
Chomsky definitely had serious contributions to make to political thought, but he could be intensely campist in his positions on international affairs. "If the West does it, it's bad; if anyone else does it, it's understandable or the West made them do it" kind of thinking.
To my knowledge, he never advocated for the kind of brutal domestic institutions the way tankies do, and was opposed to that thinking - so no horseshoe (or stethoscope) theory, simply a view of international politics which was consistent in team colors, but inconsistent in principles.
I think it's worth making the distinction between a tankie and a campist.
Chomsky, legitimately, does not believe in the implementation of a Soviet-style regime, unlike, say, Michael Parenti.
It's more that he shares one significant quality with tankies - namely, the quality of campism. "West bad, therefore, anything anti-West must be less bad because it damages Bad West".
Let's hope Chomsky will find his own peace in a russian internment camp (let him experience what he wishes for Ukrainians in the occupied territories).
12 Comments
finitebanjo@piefed.world · 22 pts · 280d
PugJesus@piefed.social · 11 pts · 280d
Noam, unfortunately, was always intensely campist on international affairs.
Triumph@fedia.io · 4 pts · 280d
Dude was barely competent at his best.
krooklochurm@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 280d
He was a pioneering linguist.
Everything after that was kind of ehhh
Ep1cFac3pa1m@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 280d
Guys, appeasement will definitely work this time
MessagingMatters@mstdn.social · 10 pts · 280d
@PugJesus Did he jump the end of the horseshoe?
PugJesus@piefed.social · 20 pts · 280d
Unfortunately, Chomsky took the literal exact opposite view of the Ukrainian War than he did the Vietnam War - that the imperializing power in Ukraine deserves some concessions, as a treat.
Chomsky definitely had serious contributions to make to political thought, but he could be intensely campist in his positions on international affairs. "If the West does it, it's bad; if anyone else does it, it's understandable or the West made them do it" kind of thinking.
To my knowledge, he never advocated for the kind of brutal domestic institutions the way tankies do, and was opposed to that thinking - so no horseshoe (or stethoscope) theory, simply a view of international politics which was consistent in team colors, but inconsistent in principles.
Triumph@fedia.io · 1 pts · 280d
So he’s a tankie.
PugJesus@piefed.social · 12 pts · 280d
I think it's worth making the distinction between a tankie and a campist.
Chomsky, legitimately, does not believe in the implementation of a Soviet-style regime, unlike, say, Michael Parenti.
It's more that he shares one significant quality with tankies - namely, the quality of campism. "West bad, therefore, anything anti-West must be less bad because it damages Bad West".
Triumph@fedia.io · 5 pts · 280d
Close enough for me.
Skiluros@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 280d
Neither does modern russia or the modern CCP.
That's not much of an achievement.
Chomsky is pretty close to being a tankie IMO.
finitebanjo@piefed.world · 2 pts · 280d
Skiluros@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 280d
Let's hope Chomsky will find his own peace in a russian internment camp (let him experience what he wishes for Ukrainians in the occupied territories).
AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space · 9 pts · 280d
Chomsky is the Kissinger of the Left.