[–] ardvarcus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I never listen to Noam Chomsky, for only one reason -- he is such an incredibly poor speaker, I can't stand trying to understand what he is saying. His voice is weak, he pauses, he mumbles, he goes on forever without making a point.

[–] BakedMofoBread 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

This is true, plus he's a piece of shit and a commie. (Sorry for the redundancy)

But his analytical methods moved the field of linguistics forward significantly, somehow, despite being completely full of himself and intentionally obtuse.

[–] NoisyCricket 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Completely true but "manufactured consent" is a correct theory.

[–] Gopherurself 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Crrect

[–] 1Sorry_SOB [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

"The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power."

That extract isn’t a joke or a parody. Instead, it’s the entirely serious academic prose that won the feminist scholar Judith Butler first prize in a Bad Writing Contest back in 1998. Butler is a gasbag and a bullshitter. She’s also Jewish like Noam Chomsky.

[–] Thisismyvoatusername 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I’ve never understood why Chomsky appeals to people. His writing is as bad stylistically as the ideas he writes about.