08-11-2009, 01:27 PM
Peter Presland Wrote:The Chomsky thing is especially illustrative in that he is still regarded with reverence by people that I have great respect for - The 'Media-Lens' organisation being a case in point.
Baffles me, Pete, why such otherwise courageous and perceptive observers as Media Lens continue to turn a Nelsonian eye to the blatant absurdities of Chomsky, but there we are. As ever, we must look at the horror and the deceit squarely and not shirk from the obligations imposed by the evidence, however saddening, uncomfortable or unexpected.
The deeper point - by which I mean the point beyond this individual intellectual secret policeman - is one that can be readily apprehended by most: trade-offs.
At the root of the work of Chomsky, Zinn et al, is the notion of "giving-to-get" - one concedes ground on the generality of US/Israeli/European exterminism to protect a few key, strategic assets. The underlying, unifying principle to be resisted at all costs is conspiracism, resistance to which is vital to sustaining the illusion - more accurately, the monstrous lie -that we live in a democracy & that our mainstream politics has meaning. This is the rampart defended to the last left-gatekeeper.
A new generation is now in place: For IF Stone and MS Arnoni, read Glenn Greenwald & Noami Klein. Nor is this confined by any means to the defence of Israel at the deepest level (as even the most cursory inspection of the career of Alexander Cockburn, the man who blew details of Arnon Milchon's role as Mossad disinformationist, reveals.) What the Chomsky deception illustrates so powerfully is the densely intertwined connection between the Anglo-American MIC, Israel, and western spookery, a relationship far more profound than superficial examination of the neo-cons would have us believe.
It's a battle we can't win, but then they're always the only ones worth engaging in.
Paul