/lit/ - Literature

Why is this guy regarded as the world's foremost linguist and intellectual? As far as I know almost every idea he has espoused was proven wrong

>Both parties are beholden to, and serve the interests of capital
>Having an illusion of choice in politics between parties is part of how consent is manufactured in the media system
>Oh, by the way, please vote for Joe Biden this election because Trump bad.

What is it about the American electoral politics that has such a strong hold that even people who claim to be revolutionaries that want to tear down the whole system still get invested in shilling for their puppet of choice when elections come around? The way it co-opts energy that should be used for greater goals from people who should know better is an astounding level of cultural hegemony that is has no parallel. There really is no true opposition to the current system, otherwise, serious people wouldn't fall for this everytime.

RIP

Why does Noam Chomsky have such a cock sucking fan base? I mean everywhere I go it's just non stop dick sucking cult behavior as if he is a God and is right about everything.

Has he ever written any non-linguistic books that didn't bash America or Israel?

His writings are so fucking boring holy shit. Someone needs to create a cliff notes of his books, essays, etc. in a style of writing that's not literally mind-numbing.

Where should I start with Noam Chomsky?
I'm not exactly smart and I'm not the best reader, so I've heard "understanding power" is fairly easy to read, is this true?

What's it like to be smart? I've always wondered what it would feel like to see the world through the eyes of an intelligent person.

>>8625061
How the fuck has no one in this thread recommended manufacturing consent? Chomsky is literally an expert at this stuff

Why do people say he supported Pol Pot without ever actually quoting him or citing it?

Is he the greatest thinker of our time?

staring picture here

Anyone here have an interest in linguistics? Favourite books?

Who here /chom/? I read Interventions but want to read something more seminal. Where to start?

Also, Chomsky general.

ITT: intellectual gatekeepers

>see Zizek on lit
>see tonnes of his videos
>think he's funny and charismatic
>watch his two movies, read his newspaper articles, like them all
>buy living in the end times
>"humanity is reaching a crisis point, we have common problems relating to environment, biogenetics/transhumanism, social divisions, we need communist inspired solutions"
>know that he publishes many many books, each belonging to either hardcore Hegelese or books for non philosophers to read
>start the book
>endless impenetrable ramblings, endless Freud, lacan references, with his political views thrown in every once in a while

Holy Jesus, even the afterword is pointless. The best I can decipher the lacan etc references is that he uses them as a model to then apply to real-life politics but I don't expect that as correct. (Stirner has trained me well).

I gave up on Zizek after 100 pages and started manufacturing consent. It's great so far.

>white
>male
>wears skinny jeans and hipster clothing
>"bisexual"/genderfluid or some other strange shit
>has gone to college, but studied some useless liberal arts or humanities garbage
>works at starbucks and lives off of handouts from parents to fight their crushing student loan debt
>does not understand economics or science, only cares about "muh feels"
>Has never read any good conservative literature like Ayn Rand to challenge their viewpoints
>smokes weed and does drugs

What is your opinion on this fuk boi /lit/?

>For one thing, Chomsky is the last great Enlightenment thinker–perhaps the greatest of them.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/05/22/the-value-of-noam-chomsky/

>>6574741
Of course (pic related)

>intentions don't matter
So he's been an idiot all along?

Find a flaw.

I finally read through Noam Chomsky and Sam Harris' email conversation after seeing a thread about it earlier. I really admire how Chomsky failed to address the issues civilly, and I also like the way Chomsky managed to not be clear at all until the end. Noam Chomsky was pretty childish during most of the conversation, and he failed to participate meaningfully in what could have been a meaningful discussion.