Hi Wim:
You wrote:
> I followed the link you provided 13/11 11:19 -0500
> (www.frontpagemag.com/guestcolumnists/chomsky10-10-01.htm) that
> supposedly exposed "Chomsky's lies and half-truths". Even though
> I don't like the style of this Frontpage Magazine (a header like
> "The Chomsky Menace" is clearly one-sided), I dived into the
> first debate, that of Hitchens vs. Chomsky in The Nation. In my
> experience the quality of that debate was very low, especially on
> the part of Hitchens, and the issue was not the factual basis of
> Chomsky's opinions, but the moral comparability of USA atrocities
> (which both agree on) and the 11/9 terrorist attacks.
> The introduction to the second link promised an "attempt to
> expose the Neo-Nazi connections of self-styled 'leftist'
> intellectual Noam Chomsky", which (being an ad hominem argument)
> isn't relevant to exposition of possible lies and half-truths
> either.
> After that, I didn't expect a lot of the other links on this
> webpage to other (less recent) criticisms of Chomsky.
>
> If you don't mind that I put your opinion of Chomsky away as
> unfounded (as yet), I am happy to proceed to discussing Pirsig.
I don't want to engage in a Chomsky argument, but you've left a false
impression that I feel obligated to correct. With a cursory glance at the
site I cited, one can find the following:
>From "A Rejoinder to Norm Chomsky"
Noam Chomsky does not rise much above the level of half-truth in his
comparison of the September 11 atrocities to Clinton's rocketing of
Sudan. Since his remarks are directed at me, I'll instance a less-than-
half-truth as he applies it to myself. I "must be unaware," he writes, that
I "express such racist contempt for African victims of a terrorist crime."
With his pitying tone of condescension, and his insertion of a deniable
but particularly objectionable innuendo, I regret to say that Chomsky
displays what have lately become his hallmarks.
>From "Chomsky Lies"
In the case of the Economist, there are no articles saying anything
resembling the things that Chomsky suggests. Presumably he refers
to a letter to the Economist that he cites shortly afterwards, a letter
replying to an entirely accurate article in the Economist, thus this letter
was indeed "made available" by the Economist but it is misleading to
invoke the authority and respectability of the Economist in reference to
a letter. On the contrary, the authority and prestige of the Economist
opposes Chomsky's claims.
Enough said about Chomsky. If you admire him, fine. As you say, let's not get
bogged down on that issue.
> The issue should be whether both the atrocities the USA is
> responsible for and the attack on the World Trade Center (however
> one compared them on a scale of relative immorality) are elements
> in the same static pattern of values (e.g. the pattern of might
> makes right, as Chomsky suggests) and whether we should try to
> break free from that static pattern of values (e.g. by not
> escalating violence, as Chomsky suggests).
I do not agree with your use of "atrocities" when referring to US actions,
nor do I buy the moral equivalency argument that all violence is evil.
> Now DON'T quote Pirsig on criminals being biologic and intellect
> having to side with society against biology again, PLEASE, but
> try to think along with me
Why do you object so vehemently to Pirsig's view? On what basis do
you dismiss it as unworthy?
> 1) what static patterns of value we can identify on the relevant
> (global) scale,
> 2) whether both types of atrocities might or might not be
> elements in each of these and
> 3) what change in such a pattern (if we can identify one) would
> be Dynamic Quality.
I'm afraid I don't understand the questions. And the implied
assumptions bother me. "Types of atrocities" again suggests a moral
equivalency between the attack of the U.S. and the response. Also
"What change . . . would be Dynamic Quality" suggests DQ is
something we can control or determine in advance. Would you care to
expand on where you are coming from and where you are going with
the discussion you propose?
Finally, I wonder if and when you will respond to my post to you of Nov.
9. Did I miss it, or, shall I assume you agree with everything I said? (-:
Best regards,
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:38 BST