Lefty Hero Noam Chomsky Proposes Facism as a Solution to Global Warming…
A Socialist proposing Fascism, where have we seen this before? How about 1930s Germany for starters.
Via Real Science:
“Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something.
Well, given the state of the popular movements we have today, we’d probably have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I’d even agree to it, because there’s just no other alternatives right now.”
Posted by ZIP on Wednesday, March 16, 2011, at 9:51 am | 
Tweet
I think Noam’s getting a little soft in the head. There’s no alternative to fascism? With ‘everybody’ agreeing to it?
And they call this guy an “intellectual”?
This guy’s still alive?
I have nothing but contempt for those who would impose their will when their arguments fail to convince.
This retard was complaining about “Stalinism” when Israel, wisely, wouldn’t let his fifth-column ass into the West Bank last year.
Stalinism as long as he can be in charge; the Left’s wettest dream.
Yes, fascism is the answer! I mean, just look at the ecological paradises (pairadice?) of Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, etc, etc…
What a effing turd herder
“..and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now”
#############################################
They, the Warmists, have been claiming this for over ten years already…
and it hasn’t been warming… in fact it is cooling….
but why let the facts get in the way of their mantra…
According to Gore… the Arctic is going to be ice free this year…
too bad nature isn’t cooperating…
There is a big mural to this guy in Philly.
I dont understand how one of the birthplaces of the USA can turn into such a liberal shit hole.
Wow, what are the odds the liberal media will call him on this? :-/
And I thought we Conservatives were “fascists”. Someone needs to tell those protesters in Wi.
another douchebag calling himself a scientist .
it isn’t warming dsue to man it’s the f’n sun.
fear the cold …even my tomatoes know enough not to grow when the ground is frozen.
Here’s hoping this mental turd is one of the first intellectuals interred in the gulag under his beloved fascist system.
Idiot.
PS: May his books will be the first thrown onto the burn pile.
I still propose all these global warming pundits just off themselves. Everytime they spew out their lungs they are polluting the planet.
General Malaise, he was a specialist in linguistics. Oddly enough, no one has been able to find examples in real life of the laws that he proposed for languages. You might glance through “The Anti-Chomsky Reader” for more details.
The environmental movement arose out of the wreckage of the New Left.
They call themselves Green because…
they’re too yellow to admit they’re really Reds.
Lenin’s birthday was chosen to be the date of Earth Day.
Al Gore has been clear as to what the “greenies” want…
In “Earth in the Balance”, he wrote that saving the planet would require a “wrenching transformation of society”.
That Al Gore won a political prize for an alleged work of science.
That rather speaks for itself, doesn’t it?
why is this sob still breathing oxygen?
Sounds to me like Noam and Adolf (Hitler) would make great comrades!
These old leftists f*ckers just don”t get it. They didn’t get the message at the beginning of the 20th Century and two world wars later they still aren’t listening.
This is simply a re-statement of what happened in Nazi Germany. With the advent of a foreseeable crisis, the people agreed to allow Fascism–it does not mean Chomsky agrees with this choice.
“Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that
Noam Chomsky, noted elitist, communist and all around dumbass, had a heart attack due to his arteries being clogged with hubris.”
The world would be a nicer place. Next!
I am still astounded how the election of Obama has the hardcore leftists admitting what we on the right have been saying for some time now. Many of these “intellectuals” and leftist heros are true marxists, socialists & communists. This feeling of carte blanche to speak the truth about their true feelings regarding unlimited government power has never been so overt. Well, not since the 60′s at least.
The reality illustrated by this candid admission by Chomsky is that the proclivity for a facist state does not lie on the right side of the political spectrum and never has.
The green movement has become the new millenium’s facist, tyrannical idology.
Fascism and Communism are two sides of the totalitarian coin. Which ever way it comes up, everyone loses.
tadcf: “it does not mean Chomsky agrees with this choice.”
Too bad his own words refute your assertion.
“we’d probably have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I’D EVEN AGREE TO IT, because there’s just no other alternatives right now.” Noam Chomsky
Your reading comprehension………improvement is needed.
How did Chomsky get to this from being a linguist?
I think what he really means is a fascist takeover, whether everyone agrees to it or not.
Let’s use his words, but modify for the other possibility…
“Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way OVER estimated, and that the catastrophic effects are NOT going to set in 10 years from now, and not EVER.
Well, given the state of the MINDLESS CLIMATE CHANGE RELIGIOUS CULT we have today, we’d NEED A CONSERVATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I’d even agree to it, because there’s just no other alternatives right now.”
i’ve always said… ‘scratch the veneer of a progressive/liberal and you’ll always find a fascist beneath”.
they are like the lizards in “V”.
@Ezra says:
March 16, 2011 at 11:14 am
“Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that
Noam Chomsky, noted elitist, communist and all around dumbass, had a heart attack due to his arteries being clogged with hubris.”
The world would be a nicer place. Next!
fubar Likey!
I seem to remember that during the late 60′s and 70′s these “environmentalists” were claiming that we were moving into another ice-age. But then it started getting warmer, so they all started screeching “greenhouse effect”. Now I guess these morons have decided that “climate change” will cover their butts no matter what happens. Either way, their so called science has been exposed as fraud and it seems that their only recourse is to try and use force.
Chomsky should go back to his roots, and seem like a real person again. Lately he seems like a mere amalgamation of conflicting ideas. Frankly, I don’t know what he’s trying to do anymore.
I get him sometimes, and occasionally have sprung to his defense, but this one just baffles me. Nothing about fascism guaranteese a halt to the greenhouse effect. Even if one defends, for example, China’s population control measures, it should be noted that the world’s population level is still rising, and governments can’t do anything particularly effective about it.
What the hell is “facism?” :-/
You do know that the Nazis ran on a virulently anti-Communist platform, right? The idea was that Communism was a Jewish plot to tax the hard-working German middle class and redistribute their wealth to “degenerates.” This was the Nazis’ main selling point.
Also, where does he propose Fascism? Isn’t his quote a critique of the bullhorn-and-bandwagon politics of today? I read his quote as saying things are at such a bellicose and ignorant turn that the reaction would be a fascist movement; then he ironically adds that in this case he’d go along with it.
You people puzzle me.
@HarryPrimate: Actually, the theory goes that global warming is followed by an ice age. If polar ice caps melt and disrupt the “conveyor belt” of warm currents on the ocean floor that cycle up from the equator, around the Arctic Circle and along the coast of Canada and the USA and Western Europe, then these northern countries would experience a sharp drop in temperature.
Lucius T. Abernathy: “You do know that the Nazis ran on a virulently anti-Communist platform, right?”
Time to clue in those who think they know history but do not.
National socialism is what Hitler considered to be a more refined version of Marxism. He was anti-bolshevik (jewish bolshevism to be exact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Bolshevism ) but from his very quotes from the time he considered communists as bretheren to be admitted into the nazi party.
“[T]here is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it,” said Hitler to Rauschning. “There is, above all, genuine revolutionary feeling, which is alive everywhere in Russia EXCEPT WHERE THERE ARE JEWISH MARXIST (emphasis mine). I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the party at once. The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade-union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communist always will” (Quoting from Rauschning’s The Voice of Destruction, pg. 131) (Peikoff, 221).
“I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate to admit. The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and penpushers have timidly begun…I had only to develop logically what Social Democracy repeatedly failed in because of its attempt to realize its evolution within the framework of democracy. National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with the democratic order.” (Hitler to Rauschning, The Voice of Destruction, pg. 186).
As Germans in the years just before Hitler’s rise once said, “a Nazi is like beefsteak: brown on the outside, red on the inside.”
Next time, don’t even try to come here and attempt to cloud the subject with false narratives. You will lose.
The contempt that Hitler had for Stalin and for “Bolshevism” generally should also not mislead us in assessing the similarity between Nazism and Communism.
Leftist sects are very prone to rivalry, dissension, schism and hatred of one-another.
One has only to think of the…
Bolsheviks versus the Mensheviks,
Stalin versus Trotsky,
China versus the Soviet Union,
China “teaching Vietnam a lesson”,
Vietnamese suppression of the Khmer Rouge etc.
Similarity does not preclude rivalry and in the end it was mainly competition for power that set Hitler and Stalin on a collision course.
Ludwig von Mises speaks of those similarities…writing in 1944 he said:
…. “The Nazis have not only imitated the Bolshevist tactics of seizing power. They have copied much more. They have imported from Russia the one-party system and the privileged role of this party and its members in public life; the paramount position of the secret police; the organization of affiliated parties abroad which are employed in fighting their domestic governments and in sabotage and espionage, assisted by public funds and the protection of the diplomatic and consular service; the administrative execution and imprisonment of political adversaries; concentration camps; the punishment inflicted on the families of exiles; the methods of propaganda.
They have borrowed from the Marxian’s even such absurdities as the mode of address, party comrade (Parteigenosse), derived from the Marxian comrade (Genosse), and the use of a military terminology for all items of civil and economic life.
The question is not in which respects both systems are alike but in which they differ…”
@Rob
Very well stated.
No offense, but in fact, the Nazi party gained a foothold due to the backlash *against* the socialist and liberal policies of the Weimar republic. Without the Treaty of Versailles, hyperinflation, and the Weimar republic’s mishandling of it, there would’ve been no Nazi party.
The only aspect of Socialism that was of any interest to the Nazi party was wresting power away from the church. You have to understand that the Nazi party was a Lollapalooza of sorts to all sorts of extreme nationalists: societal outcasts who saw themselves as having been robbed by both socialism and capitalism, even by history itself, and who would cling to any philosophy — however incoherent — that promised a “return” to a purer, original Germany “intended” by its founders. In this case the so-called Aryans.
You’ll never go broke appealing to poor and uneducated people’s sense of indignation and pride, basically, by telling them some story about turning your country away from some perceived corruption and back to its “former glory.” Characterizing the Nazi party as “liberal” is a little like calling Timothy McVeigh or 101 Michigan “patriot” militias “liberal.” Even calling them “conservative” — in the traditional, not the wingnut, sense of the word — would be a stretch. The correct term is probably “ultra-right nationalist.”
I’m actually not terribly interested in what your ideology is, and if your ideology suits you, so long as you’re not actually harming anyone, God bless. But mischaracterizing history to reach a conclusion predetermined by dogma makes it difficult to analyze and therefore learn from history; it also weakens your own points. I would be more persuaded if your points were more analytical than rhetorical.
Regarding the von Mises quote: much of it is what’s called the “genetic fallacy.”
The genetic fallacy supposes that, because a word or symbol has a particular origin, then its current usage is a logical extension of that origin.
For instance: the Nazi Party adopted the swastika as its symbol. The swastika was originally a Buddhist symbol. Therefore: Nazis are Buddhists.
No… the swastika was a Russian design
There was a Soviet Swastika — used by the Red Army in its early days.
It was worn as a shoulder patch by some Soviet troops.
The Swastika too was a socialist symbol long before Hitler became influential. Prewar socialists (including some American socialists) used it on the grounds that it has two arms representing two entwined letters “S” (for “Socialist”).
So even Hitler’s symbolism was Leftist.
Hitler did however give the symbol his own twist when he said:
“Als nationale Sozialisten sehen wir in unserer Flagge unser Programm. Im Rot sehen wir den sozialen Gedanken der Bewegung, im Weiss den nationalistischen, im Hakenkreuz die Mission des Kampfes fuer den Sieg des arischen Menschen und zugleich mit ihm auch den Sieg des Gedankens der schaffenden Arbeit”
translated…
“As National socialists we see our programme in our flag. In red we see the social thoughts of the movement, in white the nationalist thoughts, in the hooked-cross the mission of fighting for the victory of Aryan man and at the same time the victory of the concept of creative work”
In German, not only the word “Socialism” (Sozialismus) but also the word “Victory” (Sieg) begins with an “S”.
So he said that the two letters “S” in the hooked-cross (swastika) also stood for the victory of Aryan man and the victory of the idea that the “worker” was a creative force: Nationalism plus socialism again, in other words.
All leftist…
And if you really want to go back in time… at least stay in the West…
Ancient Greek architectural, clothing and coin designs are replete with single or interlinking swastika motifs. There are also found gold plate fibulae from the 8th century BC decorated with an engraved swastika.
It wasn’t found in Buddhist culture until the 5th century BC…
some three hundred years after the Greco-Romans were using it
so it looks like the Greco-Romans were the first to use it…
not the Buddhists…
The swastika symbol is also known in these contexts by a number of names, especially gammadion.
The swastika in Germanic antiquity…
The swastika shape (also called a fylfot) appears on various Germanic Migration Period and Viking Age artifacts, such as the 3rd century Værløse Fibula from Zealand, Denmark, the Gothic spearhead from Brest-Litovsk, Russia, the 9th century Snoldelev Stone from Ramsø, Denmark, and numerous Migration Period bracteates drawn left-facing or right-facing.
The pagan Anglo-Saxon ship burial at Sutton Hoo, England, contained numerous items bearing the swastika.
The Swastika is clearly marked on a hilt and sword belt found at Bifrons in Kent, in a grave of about the 6th century.
Hilda Ellis Davidson theorized that the swastika symbol was associated with Thor, possibly representing his hammer Mjolnir – symbolic of thunder – and possibly being connected to the Bronze Age sun wheel.
Davidson cites “many examples” of the swastika symbol from Anglo-Saxon graves of the pagan period, with particular prominence on cremation urns from the cemeteries of East Anglia.
Some of the swastikas on the items, on display at the Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, are depicted with such care and art that, according to Davidson, it must have possessed special significance as a funerary symbol.
The runic inscription on the 8th-century Sæbø sword has been taken as evidence of the swastika as a symbol of Thor in Norse paganism.
Lucius T. Abernathy: “But mischaracterizing history to reach a conclusion predetermined by dogma makes it difficult to analyze and therefore learn from history; it also weakens your own points. I would be more persuaded if your points were more analytical than rhetorical.”
Ok, let’s analyze history by looking at some quotes from an article published back on January 5th, 1933 and see who is reaching the dogmatic conclusions. Please tell me where the article strays from the reality that national SOCIALISM is more a ideology of the left (particularly politically) than the right.
Literary Digest
January 5, 1933
http://www.oldmagazinearticles.com/pdf/Nazi_Labor_Unions.pdf
“A socialist workers government has achieved a worker’s revolution in Germany without resorting to, tho in some respects approximates, Communism.”
Well, I guess at the time people certainly didn’t consider nazism something politically aligned with what someone today would call capitalistic or “right wing”.
Re: Unions
“The Reich under Hitler, has wiped out corporate trade-unionism by forcing all workers to join one great government union, the National Socialist Union of Employers and Workers. The name is significant in that it is compulsory for employers, as well as workers, to belong to the same group. With 20,000,000 members it is the largest trade-union in the world.”
Again, where exactly does this story of Hitler’s first days sound anything like the vision that the right would promote? Government centralization and requisite membership to a union? Sounds like the proclivities of the left to me.
Key quotes of the article, “I visited many plants in these districts where violence and terror reigned right up to when Hitler was elected Chancellor in 1933. Had any of these workers been communists? I asked. Yes, one of them had. Why had he become converted to National Socialism? Because Hitler had given him everything that communism promised”
These are but a taste of the political similarities between leftist thought and National Socialism.
Again, please point us to factual statements, articles from the period, something that you can attribute to an ideal of the modern right (liberty, free markets, especially LIMITED GOVERNMENT, etc) and maybe your blanket statements might have teeth. Problem is, all you have is platitudes and misguided assertions that are backed by no fact at all.
Also, the fact that you didn’t even touch on the quotes I listed previously only tells us that you are unable to face the fact that your dogmatic preconceptions about national socialism are completely baseless.
I doubt most of you know what fascism is, let alone give any sound critiques.
CMEN
Yep… that’s what you are
Rob and B-Line, thanks for that great info.
Here’s a vid on topic, including examples of the Nazis borrowing propaganda images from the Soviet Commies:
The Left’s Dirtiest Secret – the Relationship of Communism and Nazism
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/08/lefts-dirtiest-secret-relationship-of.html
For starters. Dr. Noam Chomsky is a scientist. In fact he is a pre-eminent scientist who worked for 50 years at the world’s pre-eminent technical university MIT. More importantly he is a genius in the true sense of the word. I.e. Someone who has established or redefined a field of study. E.g. Einstein redefined physics. Darwin established evolution. Newton invented calculus. Copernicus inverted our cosmos, etc.
It is no exaggeration to put Chomsky in the same paragraph as these folks as he redefined the field of linguistics.
In addition to being the father of modern linguistics he is also a distinguished philosopher. In addition to being a highly respected philosopher he is also a social critic and this is what gets him into trouble with folks like you.
As a social critic, economic historian, and chronicler of American foreign policy he has some one hundred titles to his credit. That’s right, 100 books to his credit. I don’t know what you’ve been doing with your time, but the good Dr. has been flat out busy.
Today he is 82 years old and keeps a speaking and writing schedule that would be daunting for anyone half his age.
The upshot of all of this is no matter what you think about his ideas he is deserving of respect, a fair hearing, and reasoned debate.
Noam Chomsky is thinking about the survival of humanity.
If something drastic had to be done in order for us to survive, he would agree to it in order to continue life on earth. This is a very serious matter that the media and our owners do not want us to consider. They favor their system over life.
Everyone should become highly informed about the facts around the corruption of science by these frauds. I recommend ‘The Hockeystick Illusion’. This book thoroughly documents this fraud.
James Hansen, a complete douchebag employed by NASA for decades, and one of the chief kingpins of this global fraud, was recently in China begging them to impose sanctions and boycotts on the US to force us to comply with his phenomenally idiotic agenda.
And recently in Cancun at the Cankook conference it was determined that the US and other developed nations must endure WW2 style austerity measures to save the planet. The public perception has turned. The global warmists no longer have the upper hand, but everyone should be armed with facts to combat their absurd arguments. As we all know, the fact that the public doesn’t support an agenda is a virtual guarantee that Obama will impose it. Caps on greenhouse emmisions coming soon, unless you happen to live in a rust belt swing state. Sorry, I can’t spell for shit. Dislexia. Dammit.
@ John Brown and ParisianThinker: I see talking points.
I’m super sorry to be a Bogard but I could not let this pass. John Brown 4 comments above says,
“The upshot of all of this is no matter what you think about his ideas he is deserving of respect, a fair hearing, and reasoned debate.”
We should have a “reasoned debate” about imposing Facism on the US? You are absurd on your face. I sentence you to read 200 volumes about the 3rd Reich. American’s don’t need to have a so-called reasoned debate about the illusory benefits of Facism. We all know it’s evil. Just cuz.
John Brown says:
“For starters. Dr. Noam Chomsky is a scientist….”
Dr. Peter Venkman, PhD in Psychology and Parapsychology:
“Back off, man. I’m a scientist.”
ZIP, Why does the right take everything the left says out of context? Noam Chomsky is an intellectual beyond any measure you can imagine among any social circle you’ve been a part of.
AND he was being sarcastic. It is a warning.
Of course you probably know that, but couldn’t resists playing your co-horts here for the unenlightened fools they are. I find that so strange that there can be so much solidarity on the right, but absolutely no genuine respect for each other beyond the mob mentality moment.
And why do you people so hate everyone who isn’t scrambling to steal every ounce of wealth they can get their grimy hands on? The irony is, you probably want the same things that the people you put down want, but you wouldn’t know it, that we already have a fascist government, and have pretty much since WWI. By the way, you might want to look that up. “Fascism” I mean. It’s about corporate-owned government. You know the kind of government you so hypocritically seem to be after, you and the subservient Tea-Party?
ZIP: as in “compressed” or short-sighted, narrow-minded? So sad…
With the leading title of that nature you know the following…a character smear of no bearing. To suggest that Mr Chomsky proposed such a thing is sheer nonsense and to be blunt a lie. Shame on you fools!
what a right wing echo chamber this is…
Hello, are you comatose? Iraq-war fake WMD, US-made-911, fake terror, fear, control, lies and anti-democracy at every turn.
not that liberals (in the USA-sense) are much better, but thats the beauty of it.
google TANGIBLEINFO + “learned hopelessness”
or U2R2H + WTC
be conscious and aware, you are manipulated
I think the fact that you bring up Nazi Fascism is interesting. Take a look at the United States once it entered WWII. In order to prevent a potential world takeover by the Nazis the US turned into basically a fascist state – TAXES on nearly all employed, price controls and rationing, near universal employment WILLINGLY working for the war cause – including women and minorities, prohibition on credit cards and consumer credit, the internment of Japanese American citizens, and a massive propaganda campaign to rally the country against the Axis.
To put it in more simple terms out of respect for the intelligence of this forum, let’s use the example of some big hollywood disaster films. Converting to a fascist state to save mankind. Sure you don’t think it’s fascism, because you believe in the cause to save the planet. You may even find yourself working alongside the Russians OH MY! (Armaggedon)
If you believe in the cause, then it is only “the other guy” that is living in a fascist state. I think the point of Chomsky’s statement, is that you weigh out the costs and make your decision to go forth in basically a fascist state, because the alternative is most likely death and destruction.
Is there a possibility that during WWII, many of the the people on this blog would have said, “Screw that, I’m not going to live in this oppressive state. If I don’t want to recycle my old car tires for the war, I don’t have to! I get a lot of heat from them when I burn them. Let’s move to Greenland darling!
Cheers
Doesn’t anyone here READ? The hypothetical quoted is as follows:
“Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something.”
In other words: Assume as TRUE that the catastrophic effects of the greenhouse effect “are ACTUALLY going to set in 10 years from now.”
People are free to attack the hypothetical, and may indeed be correct in doing so. But that is not what is reflected in the vast majority of responses here.
Hahah. How about you spell the word “Fascism” correctly before you continue with your ignorant ‘article’.
By the way, if you knew anything about “facism” (Fascism) you would know that it is actually a radical right wing ideology and has nothing to do with Socialism. The Nazi National Socialist party has nothing to do with Socialism and actually murdered socialists and communists.
The Nazi National Socialist party has everything to do with Socialism and only murdered socialists and communists because they stood in the way of Hitler’s plans for Europe, not because he disagreed, or even cared about what their theology was.
I think the socialists on this site love to use the Fascism=Right Wing as if somehow being diametrically opposed to Socialism means you are Fascist and therefore on the Right. Since the definition of Fascism is centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition it is not quite the opposite of Socialism/Communism. They all have in common a controlled citizenry and the removal of freedom, which requires a dictatorship of some sort.
I’ve never understood the name-calling on the Left when they attack those on the Right with “Fascism”, that’s sort of like calling Tea Party members “racists”. Conservatives (commonly called the Right) want less government, personal responsibilty and free market trade, lower taxes, freedom to keep the money they work for….none of these ideals fit with Socialism, Communism, NOR Fascism.
BTW – saying the right wing ideology is Fascism is like saying National Socialism is not Socialism…….just because you say it doesn’t mean it’s true. I should also point out that Nazis were aligned (muy simpatico) with the Fascist theology of islam as Socialists/Communists are today. Isn’t that interesting how birds of a feather…….flock together.