I met each of them at different times in the early 1980s
after I returned to college thanks to a radical professor who knew many of the
same radicals from the 1960s as I did.
Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky became the rock stars of the anti-establishment movement of the early 1980s, featured frequently in underground media such as the Pacifica radio network, where they pontificated theories carried over from the height of the radical left movements two decades earlier.
Both, by sheer endurance, have evolved to become the darlings of mainstream media which celebrates them as heroes of anti-racism when their real aim is not racial diversity by a desire to bring about the race war Karl Marx said would be necessary to bring down capitalism in America.
Most of the misinformation that woke operates on comes through their literature especially Zinn – hairbrained theories no more valid now than when they were conceived in the early to mid-20th Century by the people from whom these two stole all their ideas.
Very few serious scholars took these ideas seriously back then, but in today’s climate, these two have become massively influential in steering scholarship away from legitimate study and into the never never land of conspiracy theory. While both of these men talk about systemic racism, their real motivation is to use race conflict as a cover for their agenda to destroy western culture in order to create a Marxist state.
Neither one of these two actually is qualified to do what they claim to be doing. Chomsky was a brilliant in linguist, overstepped his professional credits to take on ideas and philosophies of Marxism of which he had very little qualification to espouse.
But he was a brilliant public speaker, a powerful orator who could captivate an audience and sway it -- provided there was no one to actually challenge his ideas while he's doing it.
He became the patron saint of extreme radicals such as WBAI and other Pacifica stations that unceasingly aired his diatribes.
Once confronted with actual experts Chomsky tended to shrivel up unable to manipulate the audience when there was a more objective point of view.
Zinn is to writing what Chomsky is the oratory, able to manipulate language to seem reasonable while he is manipulating you into thinking he actually knows what he's talking about.
Despite Zinn ability in rhetoric, his history is extremely weak and the fact that people are so gullible that to accept this as truth, says something about contemporary society that Zinn zealots by taking advantage of.
For the most part, Zinn repeats conspiracy theories long ago debunked by legitimate scholars, whose work unfortunately – thanks to Zinn’s popularity – is largely unavailable for contemporary readers to consult.
Like Chomsky, Zinn is completely unqualified as a historian and yet for some reason has been taken seriously after having stolen almost all of his material from other sources or worse made up and manipulated real history to support his Marxist philosophy.
The goal of these two men is not to make better race relations but to make them worse. to inspire an uprising that will ultimately lead to the overthrow of capitalism. Their goal is to tear down the icons of American culture in order to pave the way for a Soviet-like state that Marx envisioned.
This requires a total breakdown of contemporary society in order to build the foundations of socialism on in the rubble.
As with a lot of woke people inspired by Rules for Radicals, anything goes as long as the ultimate aim is achieved, explaining much of the last four years where Woke influenced Democrats and Woke controlled media spouted lies and deception to advance their aims.
Both of Zinn and Chomsky would be utterly laughable (and were for several decades) until they began to inspire a new generation of young people who did not have the expertise or even the education to see through there smoke and mirrors.
Although they pretend to be Scholars neither one really is they just build their case on misinformation and repackaged ideas from the 1960s knowing that the new generation have not heard this rhetoric before.
Zinn zealots, of course, have infiltrated the schools and media reshaping the landscape more conducive to their idea of revolution.
A once-close friend actually authored several books to simplify and justify the theories of these two quacks. I quote a journal entry about my friend from ten years ago
“He treats Zinn as if the word of god, desperate to bring back the long-discredited sixties, not quite mouthing the word ‘comrade’ but strongly implied, still waving his Marxist flag the way Hanoi Jane waved one from the Viet Cong. He is driven by the desperate need to save his faith the way Columbus once did when he discovered America, my friend needing to be part of that revolution we all craved when we were kids, but which most of us grew out of, not him. He lives in perpetual self-delusion, grasping at light weight pseudo intellectuals like Zinn and Chomsky, to show how he differs from his father and his father’s father. He props up this phony ideology because it props him up, telling him he’s still the cool rebel we all admired, looking at himself in the mirror thinking how this belief allows him to stand apart from the bourgeoisie when all he is doing is conforming to a lesser and degraded faith, a godless except for self-declared gods like Zinn and Chomsky, pretending his is a free thinker because he cannot see his chains.”
The fact that almost all of what Zinn and Chomsky are proposing is based on a lie and the ultimate goal has nothing to do with improving the world but destroyed Western Civilization in which they offer nothing positive except in their own twisted logic.
They are tearing down statues figuratively of icons that stands in the way of their ultimate goals.
They hide behind the shadow of movements that tear down Confederate statues and icons claiming they are racist, then suddenly shift so that they also teardown legitimate icons of Western Civilization such as Columbus, Lincoln, Washington and other founding fathers who helped create the dynamic that eventually brought down slavery and created a much fairer world for everybody.
Fair is not in their vocabulary although they frequently claim they are about social justice.
Main Menu
email to Al Sullivan
Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky became the rock stars of the anti-establishment movement of the early 1980s, featured frequently in underground media such as the Pacifica radio network, where they pontificated theories carried over from the height of the radical left movements two decades earlier.
Both, by sheer endurance, have evolved to become the darlings of mainstream media which celebrates them as heroes of anti-racism when their real aim is not racial diversity by a desire to bring about the race war Karl Marx said would be necessary to bring down capitalism in America.
Most of the misinformation that woke operates on comes through their literature especially Zinn – hairbrained theories no more valid now than when they were conceived in the early to mid-20th Century by the people from whom these two stole all their ideas.
Very few serious scholars took these ideas seriously back then, but in today’s climate, these two have become massively influential in steering scholarship away from legitimate study and into the never never land of conspiracy theory. While both of these men talk about systemic racism, their real motivation is to use race conflict as a cover for their agenda to destroy western culture in order to create a Marxist state.
Neither one of these two actually is qualified to do what they claim to be doing. Chomsky was a brilliant in linguist, overstepped his professional credits to take on ideas and philosophies of Marxism of which he had very little qualification to espouse.
But he was a brilliant public speaker, a powerful orator who could captivate an audience and sway it -- provided there was no one to actually challenge his ideas while he's doing it.
He became the patron saint of extreme radicals such as WBAI and other Pacifica stations that unceasingly aired his diatribes.
Once confronted with actual experts Chomsky tended to shrivel up unable to manipulate the audience when there was a more objective point of view.
Zinn is to writing what Chomsky is the oratory, able to manipulate language to seem reasonable while he is manipulating you into thinking he actually knows what he's talking about.
Despite Zinn ability in rhetoric, his history is extremely weak and the fact that people are so gullible that to accept this as truth, says something about contemporary society that Zinn zealots by taking advantage of.
For the most part, Zinn repeats conspiracy theories long ago debunked by legitimate scholars, whose work unfortunately – thanks to Zinn’s popularity – is largely unavailable for contemporary readers to consult.
Like Chomsky, Zinn is completely unqualified as a historian and yet for some reason has been taken seriously after having stolen almost all of his material from other sources or worse made up and manipulated real history to support his Marxist philosophy.
The goal of these two men is not to make better race relations but to make them worse. to inspire an uprising that will ultimately lead to the overthrow of capitalism. Their goal is to tear down the icons of American culture in order to pave the way for a Soviet-like state that Marx envisioned.
This requires a total breakdown of contemporary society in order to build the foundations of socialism on in the rubble.
As with a lot of woke people inspired by Rules for Radicals, anything goes as long as the ultimate aim is achieved, explaining much of the last four years where Woke influenced Democrats and Woke controlled media spouted lies and deception to advance their aims.
Both of Zinn and Chomsky would be utterly laughable (and were for several decades) until they began to inspire a new generation of young people who did not have the expertise or even the education to see through there smoke and mirrors.
Although they pretend to be Scholars neither one really is they just build their case on misinformation and repackaged ideas from the 1960s knowing that the new generation have not heard this rhetoric before.
Zinn zealots, of course, have infiltrated the schools and media reshaping the landscape more conducive to their idea of revolution.
A once-close friend actually authored several books to simplify and justify the theories of these two quacks. I quote a journal entry about my friend from ten years ago
“He treats Zinn as if the word of god, desperate to bring back the long-discredited sixties, not quite mouthing the word ‘comrade’ but strongly implied, still waving his Marxist flag the way Hanoi Jane waved one from the Viet Cong. He is driven by the desperate need to save his faith the way Columbus once did when he discovered America, my friend needing to be part of that revolution we all craved when we were kids, but which most of us grew out of, not him. He lives in perpetual self-delusion, grasping at light weight pseudo intellectuals like Zinn and Chomsky, to show how he differs from his father and his father’s father. He props up this phony ideology because it props him up, telling him he’s still the cool rebel we all admired, looking at himself in the mirror thinking how this belief allows him to stand apart from the bourgeoisie when all he is doing is conforming to a lesser and degraded faith, a godless except for self-declared gods like Zinn and Chomsky, pretending his is a free thinker because he cannot see his chains.”
The fact that almost all of what Zinn and Chomsky are proposing is based on a lie and the ultimate goal has nothing to do with improving the world but destroyed Western Civilization in which they offer nothing positive except in their own twisted logic.
They are tearing down statues figuratively of icons that stands in the way of their ultimate goals.
They hide behind the shadow of movements that tear down Confederate statues and icons claiming they are racist, then suddenly shift so that they also teardown legitimate icons of Western Civilization such as Columbus, Lincoln, Washington and other founding fathers who helped create the dynamic that eventually brought down slavery and created a much fairer world for everybody.
Fair is not in their vocabulary although they frequently claim they are about social justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment