[ Post New Message | Post Reply to this One | Send Private Email to Quentin Crain | Help ]

Response to Comments: /Politics/Chomsky.html

from Quentin Crain (nanotech@europa.com)
Much of what I say below has been said by others on the comments page, but I wonder why you have not commented?

=====

I am disappointed in your choice of Chomsky. This is hardly one of Chomsky's "books". It is more appropriately a small collection of essay/remarks. One must read more than a single book of Chomsky's (or yourself or anyone) to be able to interpret what is being said. I would also suggest this to someone who agreed with Chomsky, but has only read this one "book". Finally, not only do you judge Chomsky by one "book" but you quit after 17 pages! This is most distressing coming from a professor--do you believe it unnecessary to complete an author's book, essay, article *before* passing judgement?

Also implied by other commenters, Chomsky should be read with other "progressive" (for lack of a better term) authors in order to have a better understanding of alternative views of history. Or is history as simple as you explain it? Perhaps you have a suggestion of an author who has a different perspective of history than yourself that you feel is not so allergenic?

*All* the Founding Fathers spoke of the Native Indians as "savage beast", "dogs", etc; Lincoln would have accepted slavery if it would have kept the Union together; Malcom X spoke of Hitler as a "great man", but "a sick and demented man."--does this invalidate other things they have said? If I read something I do not like or believe to be wrong, do I stop reading? Or should I finish the sentence, stop and think, and then discuss?

(posted 8729 days ago)

[ Previous | Next ]