
Chomsky praises Snowden and condemns US hypocrisy - wlj
http://antonyloewenstein.com/2013/07/29/chomsky-praises-snowden-and-condemns-us-hypocrisy/
======
orbitingpluto
Unsurprisingly, non-Americans take exception to American exceptionalism.

America is literally pulling a, "We're better than you so we can violate any
of your laws - including _our own_ \- and then murder, torture & kidnap. We
are sovereign over the entire world."

Few non-Americans think that's a swell idea, so it will only last as long as
American power lasts.

If you agree with Chomsky or not or if you think American power will last or
not, you at least have to be able to concede that _everybody else_ in the
world has a valid gripe about the benevolent bully who really likes his big
stick. Chomsky is just an American who noticed that...

~~~
hox
Do you honestly think other nations don't do the same? Treating the U.S. as an
exceptional case in this regards is just ridiculous.

~~~
peterashford
Yeah, us New Zealanders have kidnapped lots of US citizens and handed them
over for torture in opposition of own laws. We've established an overseas
prison explicitly to hold people who would have rights if we imprisoned them
locally.

But, you know, it's cool : all states do the same thing.

~~~
dnautics
don't be so smug. It almost happened, with kim dot com.

~~~
mkramlich
Though one could argue there is a big difference between "actually has and is
continuing to be so" and "almost, maybe, kinda, sorta"

~~~
dnautics
unquestionably, and to their credit the New Zealand authorities brought an end
to the farce in a timely fashion. But, the statistics of small numbers can be
deceptive. Certainly, in the US, plenty of farcical prosecutions are halted,
but there are also plenty of counterexamples. And the population of the US is
nearly 100x the population of new zealand.

------
zackmorris
I've been a big fan of Noam Chomsky for years. I had to implement a recursive
descent parser for a project recently and stumbled onto this:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy)

He laid out the classes of formal grammars clear back in 1956. Every time you
use a regular expression, compile code or run a script, you're applying
concepts that he helped pioneer. I almost couldn't believe it.

I have a new appreciation for his work, and a better understanding of why his
logical approach to ethics/civics/philosophy always resonated with me.

~~~
samatman
Chomsky is a critical bridge between the ancient and modern, but credit for
generative grammars belongs to Panini:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar)

A good 2500 years prior. Chomsky was in the right place, at the right time, to
carry that work forward into computer science. Not to detract, but the point
is key: Sanskrt was formally specified 2500 years ago in a way that is
recognizably a CFG.

~~~
sinkasapa
Yes, and not mildly context sensitive.

------
OldSchool
Chomsky is one of the greatest intellectuals of our time. The man has nothing
to lose and nothing to gain by voicing his thoughts. Too bad he is getting up
there in age but hopefully we will enjoy his presence for many more years.

~~~
WayneDB
He is a great intellectual, but he _MAY_ also be acting as just another
control mechanism, a gatekeeper:

[http://educate-
yourself.org/cn/noamchomskygatekepper26sep05....](http://educate-
yourself.org/cn/noamchomskygatekepper26sep05.shtml)

[https://startpage.com/do/search?query=chomsky+gatekeeper](https://startpage.com/do/search?query=chomsky+gatekeeper)

Bio of the author of the first article -
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-
abrahamson](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-abrahamson)

(Has the mention of this simple possibility offended you? If you think it's
impossible, tell me why.)

~~~
vdaniuk
I have no opinion on Chomsky as I am not really acquainted with his works.
However, I was interested in him and trying to get some sort of minority
opinion on Chomsky I decided to investigate your links. My conclusion is based
on this great quote: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". I
have seen zero citations, links or verifiable research on the pages, so for
the time being I will use more conventional facts about Chomsky.

~~~
lukifer
I agree with the principle of "extraordinary proof", but in practice, what
qualifies as extraordinary is highly subjective. To a Creationist, spontaneous
generation of life is extraordinary. To a Truther, the buildings falling due
to fire alone is extraordinary, etc.

I prefer the idea that an extraordinary amount of _certainty_ requires
extraordinary proof. Skepticism should be the default position.

------
Todd
Link to associated video:

[http://mondoweiss.net/2013/07/chomsky-says-snowden-should-
be...](http://mondoweiss.net/2013/07/chomsky-says-snowden-should-be-honored-
for-telling-americans-what-the-government-was-doing.html)

The quoted segment starts at 1:21:25

------
cconroy
(This has nothing to do with Snowden but Chomsky's main point.)

One thing I found troubling about all this is you can't expect the victims in
other countries to decouple the intentions of the American gov't from American
citizens.

Except (even more troubling) is that citizens seem to support drone warfare
([http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/10/m...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/10/most-
americans-approve-of-foreign-drone-strikes/)).

~~~
speeder
Frankly, excepting a few circles (like, Hackers) most US citizens I've met
support US government positions, even the most stupid ones, maybe out of
ignorance... But they do.

I remember even once, I was eating in a restaurant in front of my home
(literally, it was across the street), and 3 US citizens were talking in
english in a nearby table... Their conversation was one of the most horrible
things I heard in a while, they were advocating get rid of immigrants, because
all immigrants were filthy evil people and deserve to die, and that
brazillians were scum, and whatnot (and they were saying that in Brazil).

I almost hit one of them in the head, but then I realized they were 3, and I
was one, so I decided to just finish my food and leave as quickly as possible.

Other encounters with typical US citizens were not much better, reading
comments on mainstream newspaper do not make me believe better either.

And I cannot count how much times I got into arguments about our US supported
dictatorship during the cold war, with US people that believe that I should
have thanked the US government for "saving" us.

And then, saving from what? And the reply is whatever fake threat of the time
(communists, terrorists, muslims, whatever). This get me so much on my nerves
that I even started to join random communication channels with US people
(like, game chats, site chats, social networks) and provoke them into
political arguments, just to check, and yes, many DO believe the US came here
to "save" us, it is like if US citizens have some sorta of weird hero complex
where they believe that the foreign policy of the US is save everyone. This is
something that I never understood properly, how the hell a population can
believe such bullshit.

Beside other bizarre views (for example frequently I see comments defending
that US should just turn North Korea and Iran into glass... Usually when
reading reuters.com)

~~~
dictum
>it is like if US citizens have some sorta of weird hero complex where they
believe that the foreign policy of the US is save everyone

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism)

------
pvdm
"Prism is an attack on American citizens" -Chomsky

~~~
northwest
It's actually pretty strange that even he limits the damage to the US only.
Whereas it's clearly worldwide damage.

EDIT: I suppose he phrased it this way so that we listen more closely (or
listen at all).

~~~
znowi
_Attack on American citizens_ is a way more powerful message than attack on
German or some other "second class" citizenry :)

But also, it is _American_ elected officials who deployed the program on
_American_ taxpayers money. Therefore, American citizens, unknowing to
themselves, have become a major investor into the greatest surveillance
network in history, which spies back on them and the rest of the world.

So Chomsky's quote hit it right home.

~~~
northwest
Great point.

------
northwest
I think it's time somebody hand Chomsky a bigger mic.

~~~
grandalf
That would be nice, but among those with the intellect to understand any kind
of nuanced view, his opinions are well respected.

------
davidp
I like the attention Chomsky brings to the NSA surveillance problem, but I
think he does Snowden a disservice by using him in any kind of comparison to
the true terrorists he lists. In attempting to point out the unevenness of
America's extradition requests, he inadvertently puts him in the same "moral
high ground" as the terrorists, which doesn't help.

------
ballard
What's with the "nothing to hide" meme? Has there been any research on it? Is
it a product of meritrocratic naïveté, Facebook signalling, consumerism, media
or another combination? It seems like a great way to have a compliant, feeble
populace dependent on others for protection.

------
michaelbuddy
"What would Chomsky do?" isn't a bad first question to ask on all geopolitical
matters.

------
soup10
Chomsky takes the anti-American, or anti-government side of any and all
debates and writes whiny essays full of sarcastic jabs that preach to a choir
of the faithful. He makes no attempt to consider the side of government(or
whoever he as casting as the villain at the moment of his self righteous
spiel). It's as much of a tragedy to take him seriously as it is to take
radical right think tank garbage seriously.

~~~
rdtsc
Soup10 takes the anti Chomskian side and writes whiny comments full of ad-
hominem attacks. He makes no attempt to consider Chomsky's side.

But I still have hope and I am sure soup10 unlike Chomsky of course has a long
list of documented bullet points that explain government's side.

~~~
brockers
I am a huge fan of Snowdens, of ending the Orwellian institutionalization of
our democratic society, and even of Chomsky's statements in this instance but
in Soup10's defence, Noam Chomsky IS an anti-American/anti-Government liberal
socialist anarchist (in fact that is how he would describe HIMSELF) who uses
linguistic gymnastics to de-construct cultural norms in a way the reflects his
own ideology. As such he almost exclusively preaches to those already with a
natural sympathy towards his world-view, in such language as is meant to
incite.

Finally, while Chomsky is obviously a genius well beyond the trite use of that
word; he undoubted can be described as both self righteous and egotistical
regardless of their justification.

Honestly, Soup10's only real mistake was in suggested that Chomsky's ideas
should not be taken seriously. Even if one doesn't agree with him, many will
based solely on the position he holds in the pantheon of liberal
intelligentsia. Meaning that his words are likely to effect the debase of this
issue going forward and should not, therefore, be lightly cast aside.

~~~
ak39
Define "Anti-American" please.

~~~
kaonashi
The belief that America should not be constrained by the morality of its
actions. Essentially the same Nixonian argument "when the president does it,
that means it's not illegal", which becomes "when the United States does it,
that means it's not immoral or illegal".

------
jgalt212
Stop posting Chomsky stuff to HN. He is not an intellectual. He either cannot,
or refuses to see both sides of the coin--either in his political writings or
academic writings (e.g. there profound and valid empirical cracks in his
universal grammar model that he's failed to acknowledge).

Down with Chomsky. Down vote me, I don't really care. I'd surely trade all my
HN Karma for a reduction in Chomsky related posts to HN. It will make HN a
better community.

~~~
thirsteh
Okay, jgalt212...
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Galt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Galt))

