Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 6:15:32 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline 		I thought the politicos here might enjoy this blast from the past:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt-GUAxmxdk


_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 8:20:01 PM   
pollux


Posts: 657
Joined: 7/26/2005
Status: offline 		There's one of Buckley and Gore Vidal out there that's pretty good, too.  And they've been suing each other for the last 40 years over it 

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 8:38:18 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline 		Thanks for the heads-up on that, pollux.   And good to see you posting again.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to pollux)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 8:41:04 PM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline 		38 years and Noam Chomsky still can't give a straight answer to theis question; Do you believe in private property?

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 8:48:14 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline 		Buckley and Vidal - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AzjZrtqCIw

And here in the same room, it gets nasty - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6696423256021555803



_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 8:49:51 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

38 years and Noam Chomsky still can't give a straight answer to theis question; Do you believe in private property?


I have to admit, I tried reading one of Chomsky's books, and got a headache lol. Vidal, on the other hand, is a far better and more interesting writer. Buckley, I've yet to read.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 8:55:17 PM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline 		Of the three...

Buckley is the only one with a sense enough to throw in some comic relief.

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 9:01:17 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline 		A better vid clip of Buckley/Vidal - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li73RRLEyW8

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 9:02:31 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Of the three...

Buckley is the only one with a sense enough to throw in some comic relief.


I'd say Vidal has a quite good sense of humor; Chomsky either hides his well, or has less of it than I have hair on my head.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 9:39:06 PM   
SugarMyChurro


Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline 		Re: Buckley v Vidal

I see Buckley as less conservative and more fascistic. He clearly supports an undemocratic, pro-corporate, pro-aggression position. He doesn't favor self-rule, he favors control - people under the thumb of himself (rhetorically) and his buddies (in political actuality).

Vidal is not liberal. He is pro-democracy, anti-corporate, and anti-aggression. Vidal is more circumspect. I take that to mean that his general philosophy is to first do no harm to anyone else.

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/8/2007 9:46:09 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

I thought the politicos here might enjoy this blast from the past:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt-GUAxmxdk



I watched this a while ago.

That Buckley bloke - what a wanker. He's not in Chomsky's league, so he resorts to talking over him and generally trying to disrupt the discussion.

Sound ideas and supporting facts from Chomsky as per usual, 'shame about the other bloke.



_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 6:40:34 AM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

Re: Buckley v Vidal

I see Buckley as less conservative and more fascistic. He clearly supports an undemocratic, pro-corporate, pro-aggression position. He doesn't favor self-rule, he favors control - people under the thumb of himself (rhetorically) and his buddies (in political actuality).

Vidal is not liberal. He is pro-democracy, anti-corporate, and anti-aggression. Vidal is more circumspect. I take that to mean that his general philosophy is to first do no harm to anyone else.


On Vidal:

"Although frequently identified with Democratic causes and personalities, Vidal has written:

"[t]here is only one party in the United States, the Property Party...and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt—until recently... and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."

--from Wikipedia

He also seems to be a bit of a conspiracy theorist, talking about how FDR goaded the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor, and that the government at the very least allowed 911.


_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 7:15:25 AM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline 		People always talk over Noam Chomsky when they try to debate him, and then when they cannot debunk him they go for the "Those people that are against us, we know you love them Noam" approach...

Interesting to say the least

BTW, it is always interesting to hear someone put forward their ideas using a rational choice materialist paradigm, and Noam is a master of it

Edited for my use of a homophone... ugh

< Message edited by juliaoceania -- 6/9/2007 7:20:44 AM >

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 7:18:26 AM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

People always talk over Noam Chomsky when they try to debate him, and then when they cannot debunk him they go for the "Those people that are against us, we know you love them Noam" approach...

Interesting to say the least

BTW, it is always interesting to here someone put forward their ideas using a rational choice materialist paradigm, and Noam is a master of it


Now julia, I'm going to have to google that paradigm thingamajig........ that's one reason me and Professor C never meshed...... too much googling, or grabbing a dictionary.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 7:23:13 AM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline 		laughing level... I remember watching Manufacturing Consent my first year of anthro classes, it was very eye opening to me... one of the more difficult courses that I have ever had... deconstructing how people argue their theories... punching holes in their theories. Noam uses rational choice often, and it is very hard to poke holes in. It would be worthwhile to look it up

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Level)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 7:56:25 AM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline 		Okay, julia, let's see: looking up the rational choice part, I came up with: "In particular, it assumes that the rational decision is always the decision that will maximise gain and minimise pain for each individual."
 
And for materialist paradigm: "Working-in-order-to-eat (giving-in-order-to-receive) implies a materialist paradigm in which existence is seen as being substantially physical and its resources limited. It implies a "dog eat dog" world, "red in tooth and claw," in which all facets of life are conditioned by economic considerations and governed by hierarchies of power that regulate the distribution of scarce resources. It is a world where we end up either as wage slavers or as wage slaves."
 
Does any of that fall into what Chomsky espouses?
 
We keep this up, I'll be able to write a "Chomsky for Dummies" book......

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 8:07:34 AM   
Quarry


Posts: 4
Joined: 7/1/2004
Status: offline 		Chomsky's said for decades that resources (i.e. oil, land, water, etc.) should be owned by the public and businesses by the people who work in them. The point here is to prevent power from accumulating in the hands of a small group of people. So Wal-Mart couldn't deny people work and oil production would be controled by everyone instead of by Exxon and Texaco.

As for the ownership of smaller stuff - say, your car, a house, jewelry - I don't recall ever having read anything he had to say on that subject. But then, he's usually concerned with big issues like why country A is at war with country B, so it's not surprising that stuff like that doesn't often come up. I suspect he'd say that as long as individuals couldn't accumulate so much wealth that it gave them power over others, then personal property would be fine. And I'm absolutely certain he'd say that it's impossible to work out ahead of time all the details of the society you intend to create; you have to try things, see if they work, then try other things, etc.

(in reply to juliaoceania)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 8:43:17 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

Re: Buckley v Vidal

I see Buckley as less conservative and more fascistic. He clearly supports an undemocratic, pro-corporate, pro-aggression position. He doesn't favor self-rule, he favors control - people under the thumb of himself (rhetorically) and his buddies (in political actuality).

Vidal is not liberal. He is pro-democracy, anti-corporate, and anti-aggression. Vidal is more circumspect. I take that to mean that his general philosophy is to first do no harm to anyone else.


Unless one owns stock in a company, how can one be "pro-corporate?"

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky - 6/9/2007 11:04:26 AM   
sophia37


Posts: 1433
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline 		    What I liked about going to that spot and watching it was, there were a bunch of other spots by Noam over to the left of the screen. I most definetly watched a few of them. And even the one by Chavez promoting his book. All very interesting and informative for sure.

   Interesting, in that you can watch Noam Chomsky debate and age, all in one sitting. I can definetly see some slippage in his recent casts. The debate with Buckley I thought was excellent. Damn is Chomsky good! That was super super good to watch. For that alone I thank you for your post.

   But what I think is informative, at least to me, is what I got from Chavez advertising Chomsky's book. Truthfully the caption said he was quoting Chomsky, yet the way he said it, sounded like he wasnt. Strange. Also, believe it or not, I felt a tinge of annoyance when listening to him. Now tell me what you think of this. To me, having Chavez tell me as an American, what it is I should be doing or how awful it is our kids watch video games, is like a white person calling someone a nigger.

   To me, you can only call someone a nigger if you are black. Do you get what I mean? I fail to see where someone who doesnt live in America, can come along and instruct us on our day to day behaivor. They may even be right! But that doesnt mean I will accept them at their word. So to hear Chavez telling me our kids shouldnt watch videos, while all the while I know damn well HIS kids are watching and playing videos as well, ...well, that just irked me instead of gaining my support for the man. As long as politicians from any country play us against them, we will never come to a clear understanding of anything.

   I guess what I got from Chavez might be, I guess anyone can pick up a book and get ideas from it that the author was not intending to promote.

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> 1969: William F. Buckley vs Noam Chomsky Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078