~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
[deleted]
[–]gideon_zotero points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Reminds me of the beta baiting of feminists. If only men would stop objectifying women, women would be more open sexually and love all the men.
If ANYONE spurs you into a mob against their enemies, they are using you.
Chomsky, Zinn, Alinsky, Obama, Trump do not care about you. They care about those in power and want that power. Intellectuals aren't concerned for the poor, they hate the rich. Feminists don't care about women, they hate the men that won't fuck them.
Always find the agenda. All people are inherently selfish, the more successful they are the more selfish they actually are. Success needs laser focus and that is something altruism simply can not achieve.
[–]rigbed1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Which is why redpill says to put yourself first
[–]SasquatchMcKraken7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link
I despise Noam Chomsky's politics. Not a crisis anywhere at any time since 1950 where he doesn't detect the hand of the CIA or some other U.S. gov't entity. This quote reflects his popular brand of cynicism, i.e. that a secretive cabal runs everything and "we the people" are too duped to overthrow them. With Chomsky the enemy is a quasi-fascist, corporatist oligarchy. In other tellings it is a vast left-wing conspiracy. Once upon a time it was the Catholic Church. To this day many view a Jewish hivemind as the grand conspiracy. In all cases it's idiocy. I'm glad to see you've shaken off this fatalism and decided to forge your own way in life. I view the conspiratorial mindset as an elaborate excuse, either absolving the theorist of action or directing his actions in a futile direction (knowingly or otherwise).
[–]sebwiers6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
a secretive cabal runs everything and "we the people" are too duped to overthrow him
He never claims its a secretive cabal, but that its an environmental system that rewards certain decisions / attitudes and punishes others. And yes, it takes a huge effort to alter an entire socio-political environment, and yes, the wealthy have invested huge sums of money in doing exactly that, to their favor. Those are all pretty self evident truths.
The CIA stuff is actually pretty nutty, and I'll admit international politics is above my paygrade and interest level, but yeah, money is the mover there as well. Greed scales directly with what you have (pretty basic psycology) and the very wealthy have 10,000 times what most people have. Is it a surprise if those in power use it to fuck over entire nations for personal gain, even if it is self destructive in the long run? Assuming any less would be to think people are rational or altruistic.
[–]SasquatchMcKraken0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Well yeah, that's anything involving a large collection of humans, which is basically what a society is. There's bound to be a certain environment shaped by history, policies, ideologies, culture, available resources, etc. No plot is necessary, and it isn't as nefarious as he and others make it seem. And you don't have to be a millionaire to have a stake in your society; most of us have far more to lose than our "chains," which is why I almost always roll my eyes any time any First Worlder starts prattling on about "the elites." Globally speaking, we're all "elites" (no offense to the non-1st world dudes on TRP).
[–]sebwiers1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
There's bound to be a certain environment shaped by history, policies, ideologies, culture, available resources, etc. No plot is necessary, and it isn't as nefarious as he and others make it seem.
That was my point. But its not really him that makes it seem that way, its his fringe supporters & the straw men constructed by detractors. He DOES try to bring out the role media plays in that environment, and how it helps shape ideology, culture, etc, and who has say in who gets a job in media. I think this is a pretty sound analysis, even if some conclusions are a reach.
And you don't have to be a millionaire to have a stake in your society
Nope, but being a multi-billionaire gives you a much larger influence. Simple math says its 1,000 or more times what even a millionaire has. And it doesn't really matter who the individuals are, the government simply serves the interest of "the economy" as a whole. As you say, its society as a whole that is fucking up. Or not I guess, if you like what its doing. But be aware of what its really doing; most people grossly underestimate the USA's levels of wealth imbalance, government fuckery, etc. You can support that if you want, just do it with eyes open.
[–]SasquatchMcKraken0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
My eyes are open, it's just that I'm looking at things in an entirely different way. I'm not blind to the fact that wealth can help gain influence, but it isn't that simple. "The wealthy" aren't a monolith (Right-wingers hate Soros, left-wingers fear the Koch Bros., etc.) and participation, more than money, is what gains influence. There's a correlation between wealth and how much one participates in government ("lobbying," as its usually known) but the non-wealthy aren't necessarily barred from doing so.
Another difference stems from the fact that I don't judge my well-being relative to how others are doing. There are plenty of countries with a lot more wealth equality than the U.S. that I wouldn't get caught dead in. The economy isn't a zero-sum game.
It should be noted that I don't hate Chomsky as a person and I recognize his work in linguistics. He's clearly a very bright man in many areas, but his politics are utter dogsh!t and his fans don't help.
[–]sebwiers1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Chomsky himself is fairly left leaning, but his core analysis isn't really right or left. Its about how power is created, what it is used for, and who it historically has and currently benefits and harms. If you can get past his personaly preferences for ideology, his historic analysis is pretty good, though it has some large blind spots (namely Soviet and other efforts in the same arenas).
There are plenty of countries with a lot more wealth equality than the U.S. that I wouldn't get caught dead in.
Well yes; most countries in the world have better wealth equality. Going by Wikipedia, there are only 4 countries with hither wealth inequality; Nambia, Zimbabwe, Denmark, and Switzerland. So of course there's a lot more equal that few people would choose to live in, because there are a lot of countries PERIOD that are more equal, some awful and some wonderful. Its not really a predictor of quality of life, is it?
I recognize his work in linguistics
From what I gather, a lot of that has proven to be incorrect. But I guess they were hypothesis that needed testing, much like Newton was wrong about how physics work but still important (or maybe Frued and Psycology is more apt; I can't say which analogy is more apt and have seen people voicing both extreemes and more).
[–]SasquatchMcKraken0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
No it isn't, which is why the late obsession with wealth inequality has vexed me. I don't know what it is now, but in 2015 something like $35,000 per year put you in the Global 1%. To me the whole discussion is rich people arguing over their share of the loot. As for his point on power, to me most of that is common sense. I'm not aware of anyone who disputes the power of having power and that it sucks not to have it. His blind spots are, to me anyway, the most relevant part of his ideology/philosophy because from there harmful idiots spring up.
Edit: I looked into it and as of April of this year apparently it's $32,400, or €30,250, to make the Global 1%
[–]sebwiers1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No it isn't, which is why the late obsession with wealth inequality has vexed me. I don't know what it is now, but in 2015 something like $35,000 per year put you in the Global 1%
The cost of living in the USA is a lot higher than many places where people have incomes closer to the world average. You do OK on $35K a year here, but in many countries you could live rather lavishly (excluding purchase of imported manufactured goods - you'd still have a cheap car or motorcycle, but getting it fixed would cost less).
The main reason I'd argue in favor of greater income equality is it helps drive technological development, both in the short and long run, and technological development is what does improve quality of life. I'm referring both to the implementation of existing technologies (such as cities with universal plumbing vs shanty towns in developing nations, or industrial nations reducing fossil fuel use) and inventing new ones. I'm also just ideologically in favor of rapid tech development.
As you say, most of the rest comes down to emotion laden arguing over loot - for BOTH sides of the argument. But few people on either side of that argument realize just how skewed the distribution is, both inside the US and in the US vs world at large, and I think the argument (meaningful or not) might be very different if they did.
[–]OGlancellannister1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Agree Noam Chomsky is not nearly as bad as some of the nutjobs coming from the far left, but he has a much larger and more respected platform unfortunately. The Arab world has massacred itself for a millennia — yeah I agree that their anger being directed at the US is a result of foreign policy, but to pretend this world would be sunshine and rainbows without US intervention is lunacy. We're one of the best countries in the world, and the Western civilization is better off from all that we have created.
[–]BestSC860 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ask Chomsky how his Kymer Rouge buddies are doing these days.
Reading his shit got me into the first big debate in a Political Science class in uni.... The teacher loved his shit but in background reading, I came across a bunch of his essays from the 70s where the damn fool was railing against the USA and its evil capitalists thug-o-cracy asattacking his beloved communist, new era Kymer Rouge. He viciously attacked anyone who was telling what the hell was going on in Southeast Asia and he continued the entire time while the Kymer Rouge was slaughtering millions. He even openly went after one of those people shown in the movie "The Killing Field" as a lair, fraud and a tool of the evil USA and never apologized when the journalist called is ass out in an auditorium with actual proof.
That piece shit can die off.
[–]Stythe1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I would have had the same reaction in the past and the same one as you now. It's funny how actuslly seeing the world changes everything.
I realized recently what it is. Upon reflection, after years of hard work and struggle, I stopped worrying about how I felt about things and starting thinking about what I was going to do about things. It's literally feels vs reals.
[–]NeoreactionSafe4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sorry guys... I'm not going to see reality as like "The Wheel of Fortune" (randomness) but will instead see the crimes as real.
http://www.learntarot.com/bigjpgs/maj10.jpg
There is a Globalist Tyranny which seeks to create the Blue Pill mythology.
Who knows what?
That depends on where in the pyramid you are... those not at the top are just tools for those above.
Enjoy the Destruction of the Blue Pill mythology.
Fuck globalism.
[–]RedPillgrim1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Scrolled to the bottom then up, saw "fuck globalism" knew right away who it was. Stay woke bros
[–]sebwiers0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Each apathetic drone in my way is just less resistance for me on my path.
I guess it depends what your path is. If your path is something that benefits from interacting with other engaged, aware individuals they can be an obstacle, and certainly don't provide less resistance.
[–]MrBellsprout1230 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And people will hate you. Your friends will start to hate you, everyone except us on TRP and MEN will like you/ respect you.
[–]HopefulAboutADHD 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
"As long as the general population is passive, apathetic, diverted to consumerism or hatred of the vulnerable, then THE POWERFUL CAN DO AS THEY PLEASE, and those who survive will be left to contemplate the outcome."
I think the bold part refers to global warming, which is pretty much Chomsky's main concern these days, as he considers it a "threat to organized human life on Earth." See this talk on global warming called "Racing to the Precipice" from March 2017, for example. (If you watch it, watch at 1.25 speed.)
My question to you is: Suppose you become very rich, which is fucking awesome, but then global warming ravages human civilization. Will it be all that fun to live in a fancy bunker? Because even the wealthy can't fully insulate themselves from global warming (or from nuclear terrorism, or other threats).
To me anyway, rational self-interest seems to include doing something about these threats, since we all have a stake in civilizational threats, rich and poor alike.
Is it so good to be a wealthy person trapped on the Titanic?
Again, all power to you regarding becoming rich and powerful, but can you really insulate yourself from the world as it goes down the tubes?
(You could even argue that the rich should be more concerned about these threats because they have more to lose.)
[–]jay1451 points points points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I don't think climate change will have a noticeable impact on my life in my lifetime. With that said, if I were super rich, you better believe I'd make some change in the world. I'd probably research some charities and go there in person to see if it's worth donating to. Along with building some libraries or making some public schools not suck so much. Yea my point is: I wouldn't be riding around in a convertible going weeeeeeee with girls rubbing on me while money flies out behind us. I'll only do that on weekends.
[–]1OneRedYear0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
|I don't think climate change will have a noticeable impact on my life in my lifetime.
That's what everyone thinks. My 14 year old thinks the same thing. And that's the problem.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]gideon_zotero points points points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]rigbed1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SasquatchMcKraken7 points8 points9 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]sebwiers6 points7 points8 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]SasquatchMcKraken0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]sebwiers1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]SasquatchMcKraken0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]sebwiers1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]SasquatchMcKraken0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]sebwiers1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]OGlancellannister1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BestSC860 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Stythe1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]NeoreactionSafe4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]RedPillgrim1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]sebwiers0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MrBellsprout1230 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HopefulAboutADHD 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]jay1451 points points points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]1OneRedYear0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link