DO NOT READ THIS chomsky INTERVIEW


http://u2r2h.modblog.com /
In the 19th century, the United States had something kind of approximating a market system.
Now we have nothing like a market--they may teach you [that] in economics courses, but that's not the way it works. And one of the signs of the decline of the market is advertisement. So if you have a real market you don't advertise: you just give information. For example, there are corners of the economy that do run like markets--for example stock markets. If you have ten shares of General Motors that you want to sell, you don't put up an ad on television with a sexy model holding up the ten shares saying "ask your broker if this is good for you; it's good for me," or something like that. What you do is you sell it at the market price. If you had a market for cars, toothpaste, or whatever, lifestyle drugs, you would do the same thing. GM would put up a brief notice saying here's the information about our models. Well, you've seen television ads, so I don't have to tell you how it works. The idea is to delude and deceive people with imagery. And the same has happened to the print media. Take the New York Times for example. They have
...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Positively nutty. Advertising and marketing are perfectly legitimate components of a free market system and have been around in one form or another since the beginning of time. That said, if your goal is to point out inequities and defects in our modern markets, there are certainly plenty to choose from.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

you understand nothing.
your mental illness is perfectly legitimate, too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@gmx.net wrote:

Oh please. It's not mental illness to be confused by all the noise in the signal. Maybe you're trying to draw an analogy to Chomsky's "healthy" mid-nineteenth century market, calling the current one a neurosis?
er
--
email not valid

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Do not feed the trolls....
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Re: http://u2r2h.modblog.com /

You are suffering from Cognitive Dissonance.
You seem to be able to have a REAL MARKET (without distortions, feeding on people's neurosises) where there is a NON-MARKET, (i.e. corruption and lies guide buyers)
at the same time...
but never mind. They trained you that way.
Winning by failing... "The Bush Way"
http://u2r2h.modblog.com /
oh yes, oh ah, morals are soo old fashioned...
now we whities can mass-kill and we are good at the same time.
Truth is not absolute, its just relative. Everyone has her/his own truth. Nothing is real, opposites are the same..
WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@gmx.net wrote:

You seem to be unable to read well enough to recognize that I am a sympathizer. You are also a very poor parrot of Chomsky.
I'll give you a D-
er
--
email not valid
[followups reset to an appropriate forum]
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Other than Chomsky's writings on linguistics, about which he is truly gifted, I would not waste my time reading anything he either writes or wrote. His views and perspectives on politics, especially socialist politics, turn my stomach. In his view, Cuba, Viet Nam and China are free societies, and our society is one of repression in comparison.
Glen
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Except for himself. Despite his proclamation of how disinterested he is in material things and his hatred of the military-industrial complex, he has amassed a fortune, a significant portion of that came through Pentagon research grants. While denouncing capitalism, he is himself a capitalist, occupying that eeevil top 10% tax bracket (he's actually in the top 2% in terms of wealth) and is worth millions. He has money in the stock market he denounces and money in at least one tax shelter that will enable his heirs to avoid paying the inheritance taxes that he so vigorously claims that everybody else should be paying. He owns a home worth over $850k and a vacation home in Wellfleet, MA valued in excess of $1.2M.
Is there anything wrong with someone having this amount of wealth? No, but for someone who vigorously preaches an egalitarian, socialist society in which wealth is evil and disparities in income an indication of racism and inequality and further denounces the evils of capitalist society and then turns around and utilizes the same institutions he denounces to assure he has a high standard of living compared to those around him is the very definition of elitism. The best way to remove the hypocrisy from these people statements is to add the phrase, "for me" to all of their radical statements. Basically, he advocates a true two-tier society, the leaders such as himself who will be entitled to the wealth and prestige that come with such a position based upon their obvious superiority to the rest of us, and the rest of us, the benficiaries of their utopian society. No thanks.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
how much good you could do if you would not write rot
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Actually I enjoy Mark's(?) writing. I hope he writes whenever he has something to say.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 27 Dec 2005 15:00:31 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

Interesting, I write facts, you respond with ad hominem.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dos lenguas mejor que uno
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What do you know, Glen?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

I suggest you read the book _Do As I Say (Not as I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy_, by Peter Schweizer.
On the web, check out "The Sick Mind of Noam Chomsky: Part II Method and Madness", By David Horowitz , found at:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID 18
Some quotes, in his own words:
"China is an important example of a new society in which very interesting and positive things happened at the local level, in which a good deal of the collectivization and communization was really based on mass participation and took place after a level of understanding had been reached in the peasantry that led to this next step."
and "I dont accept the view that we can just condemn the NLF terror, period, because it was so horrible. I think we really have to ask questions of comparative costs, ugly as that may sound. And if we are going to take a moral position on thisand I think we shouldwe have to ask both what the consequences were of using terror and not using terror. If it were true that the consequences of not using terror would be that the peasantry in Vietnam would continue to live in the state of the peasantry of the Philippines, then I think the use of terror would be justified."
Talking about the "wonderful" governments of Pol Pot and Khmer Rouge (whom he supported vociferously) after their atrocities became undeniable' "Refugees are frightened and defenseless, at the mercy of alien forces. They naturally tend to report what they believe their interlocutors wish to hear. While these reports must be considered seriously, care and caution are necessary. Specifically, refugees questioned by Westerners or Thais have a vested interest in reporting atrocities on the part of Cambodian revolutionaries, an obvious fact that no serious reporter will fail to take into account." . . . "the deaths in Cambodia were not the result of systematic slaughter and starvation organized by the state but rather attributable in large measure to peasant revenge, undisciplined military units out of government control, starvation and disease that are direct consequences of the US war, or other such factors."
I could go on and on and on...
Glen
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If you idiots read HOROWITZ
(this guy is a joke. No Facts, just fabrications!!)
you cannot be helped.
you must belong to the 48% of clinically insane US-Americans, who still believe CIA propaganda (saddam=911) .. which in by books is MUCH WORSE than what delusions Germans carried during the 1930s.
Because YOU CAN actually read up...
but it is MUCH easier to go along with the MAINSTREAM, for FEAR that you shit you pants, being confronted with the truth... that the USA is the most criminal, murderous and hypocrit state ever.
You shat-in-the-brain apologists will grasp ANY STRAW to denounce those who but question your fantasy planet.
Sizeable Minorities Still Believe Saddam Hussein Had Strong Links to Al Qaeda, Helped Plan 9/11 and Had Weapons of Mass Destruction
(all 100% untrue, but in the USA corporate media pushed this propaganda... aggressively in the USA ... using well known cognition/conformity PSYCHO tricks... as described in the famous Asch conformity experiments: http://www.answers.com/topic/asch-conformity-experiments )
However, the numbers have fallen substantially this year
(but still near half of USA adults are clinically insane!!)
More than four years after the attacks of September 11, 2001, many U.S. adults still believe some of the justifications for the invasion of Iraq, which have now been discredited,
(hah!)
according to a new Harris Poll. For example:
Forty-one percent (41%) of U.S. adults believe that Saddam Hussein had "strong links to Al Qaeda."
Twenty-two percent (22%) of adults believe that Saddam Hussein "helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11."
Twenty-six percent (26%) of adults believe that Iraq "had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded."
Twenty-four percent (24%) of all adults believe that "several of the hijackers who attacked the United States on September 11 were Iraqis."
However, all of these beliefs and others have declined sharply since the questions were asked in February 2005. For example:
Those who think Saddam Hussein had strong links to Al Qaeda have fallen from 64 to 41 percent.
Those who believe that Iraq was a serious threat to U.S. security are down from 61 to 48 percent.
(48 % are insane!)
Those who think Saddam Hussein helped plan 9/11 are down from 47 to 22 percent.
Those who think Iraq had weapons of mass destruction are down from 36 to 26 percent.
Those who think Iraqi hijackers attacked the United States on 9/11 have fallen from 44 to 24 percent.
Although public support for the war in Iraq has been waning, a 56 percent majority of all adults believe that "the Iraqis are better off now than they were under Saddam Hussein."
(the PRESIDENT of Iraq said, for most it was WORSE than under saddam, only an elite has profited.)
However, this has also fallen from 76 percent since February.
These are the results of a nationwide Harris Poll of 1,961 U.S. adults surveyed online between December 8 and 14, 2005 by Harris Interactive.
These new poll findings and trends show how slowly most people change their minds once they believe something to be true. Nevertheless, they also show that, over time, beliefs can change greatly.
TABLE 1
WHAT THE PUBLIC BELIEVES TO BE TRUE
"Do you believe that the following statements are true or not true?"
Percent saying "true"
Base: All Adults
The Iraqis are better off now than they were under Saddam Hussein.
October 2004 76 February 2005 76 December 2005 56
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was a serious threat to U.S. security.
October 2004 63 February 2005 61 December 2005 48
Saddam Hussein had strong links with Al Qaeda.
October 2004 62 February 2005 64 December 2005 41
Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001.
October 2004 41 February 2005 47 December 2005 22
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded.
October 2004 38 February 2005 36 December 2005 26
Several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11 were Iraqis.
October 2004 37 February 2005 44 December 2005 24
TABLE 2 WHAT THE PUBLIC BELIEVES TO BE TRUE AND NOT TRUE
"Do you believe that the following statements are true or not true?"
Base: All Adults
The Iraqis are better off now than they were under Saddam Hussein
True 56 Not True 16 Not Sure 25 Decline To Answer 3
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was a serious threat to U.S.
True 48 Not True 35 Not Sure 15 Decline To Answer 2
Saddam Hussein had strong links with Al Qaeda
True 41 Not True 33 Not Sure 24 Decline To Answer 2
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.s. invaded
True 26 Not True 50 Not Sure 22 Decline To Answer 2
Several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11 were Iraqis
True 24 Not True 42 Not Sure 31 Decline To Answer 3
Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001
True 22 Not True 46 Not Sure 30 Decline To Answer 2
Methodology
The Harris Poll was conducted online within the United States between December 8 and 14, 2005 among 1,961 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents propensity to be online.
In theory, with probability samples of this size, one could say with 95 percent certainty that the overall results have a sampling error of plus or minus 2 percentage points of what they would be if the entire U.S. adult population had been polled with complete accuracy. Unfortunately, there are several other possible sources of error in all polls or surveys that are probably more serious than theoretical calculations of sampling error. They include refusals to be interviewed (nonresponse), question wording and question order, and weighting. It is impossible to quantify the errors that may result from these factors. This online sample was not a probability sample.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=623
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.