Noam Chomsky's View Of The Coup

[jumnien]

Beware of state power

Noam Chomsky is the world's leading critic of US power. He has been voted the most important intellectual of the 20th century and has published more than 30 leading political works, many of them bestsellers. In his first ever interview with the Bangkok Post, Professor Chomsky discusses regional and global issues with GEORGE MCLEOD.

George McLeod: As you know, Thailand's Thaksin government was deposed in a military coup. Thaksin was criticised for undemocratic rule and corruption. Can you comment on the Thai coup? Do you believe that it is possible for a coup to bring about democratic change?

Noam Chomsky: In principle the answer is yes, almost anything is possible, but the burden of proof for using force to overthrow a government is very high. There has to be a very heavy burden of proof and they have to demonstrate conclusively strong arguments that the use of force is legitimate.

For example, there is plenty of corruption in Washington - there is favouritism and headlines one day after another, but that doesn't justify a military coup.

In the case of Thailand - and let me say that I do not have a detailed, specialised knowledge of it - I did not think that the burden of proof was met.

My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it.

[ThaiFelix]

[

I thought it was a very interesting article/interview. I have always liked Noam's work.

[Tony Clifton]

So have I, but his opinions about the coup are no better than yours or mine when he says ''let me say that I do not have a detailed, specialised knowledge of it ''.

[Tilokarat]

I have never respected this man. Remember when the first refugees escaped from Cambodia into Thailand and Vietnam during the Pol Pot era, Mr. Chomsky criticised them because, he argued, they should have been good citizens and followed the instructions of Angka. He also discounted their stories about the hate-filled holocaust, which was rule under the Khmer Rouge. Later, of course, he never admitted that he had made any mistakes about what he had written, and advised, about life in Democratic Kampuchea under Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.

Some critic recently exposed Mr. Chomsky as a heavy investor in the American stock market. In other words, the guy is a hypocrite because he has been supporting the same very big corporations that he has told his followers to avoid. In response, Mr. Chomsky said that education for his children is expensive, and he has retirement to consider.

Right on. Chaiyo!!!

[Ulysses G.]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

[JacknDanny]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

Whats up UG?

Did he borrow a book and not return it?

[jdinasia]

Beware of state power

Noam Chomsky is the world's leading critic of US power. He has been voted the most important intellectual of the 20th century and has published more than 30 leading political works, many of them bestsellers. In his first ever interview with the Bangkok Post, Professor Chomsky discusses regional and global issues with GEORGE MCLEOD.

George McLeod: As you know, Thailand's Thaksin government was deposed in a military coup. Thaksin was criticised for undemocratic rule and corruption. Can you comment on the Thai coup? Do you believe that it is possible for a coup to bring about democratic change?

Noam Chomsky: In principle the answer is yes, almost anything is possible, but the burden of proof for using force to overthrow a government is very high. There has to be a very heavy burden of proof and they have to demonstrate conclusively strong arguments that the use of force is legitimate.

For example, there is plenty of corruption in Washington - there is favouritism and headlines one day after another, but that doesn't justify a military coup.

In the case of Thailand - and let me say that I do not have a detailed, specialised knowledge of it - I did not think that the burden of proof was met.

My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it.

No Parlaiment and No New Gov't in place for how many months? No new government in the foreseeable future ... and the potential for blood on the streets unless something changed fast ....

Does anyone think that IF there was no new elections and no new Gov't under Thaksin that it wouldn't have resulted in blood?

[JacknDanny]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

Whats up UG?

Did he borrow a book and not return it?

More to the point, its 1130 at night.

You are in Pattaya on a bit of R and R, and you are on Thai Visa talking about Chomsky

[Ulysses G.]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

Whats up UG?

Did he borrow a book and not return it?

More to the point, its 1130 at night.

You are in Pattaya on a bit of R and R, and you are on Thai Visa talking about Chomsky

Give me a break.

I'm recovering from my massage and in only moments I will be back on Walking Street!

[Boon Mee]

[

I thought it was a very interesting article/interview. I have always liked Noam's work.

Yes, I've always thought Naom Chomsky should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his fine work in advancing the human cause.

[qualtrough]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

For those who don't know, self-hating Jew is what Zionists call Jews who dare to criticize any aspect of Israel. Pointing this out makes me an anti-semite in their eyes as well.

Edited April 2, 2007 by qualtrough

[Johpa]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

And of the ten most cited authors in academic literature, ranging from Shakespeare to Einstein, he is the only one alive today. His insights have revolutionized studies ranging from linguistics to information sciences. His political views are indeed controversial, yet insightful. I suppose that if he were on fire you would probably place his books upon him to burn too to show your disdain for your own inability to argue against a greater intelligence. Your opinions on the man are Kristal clear.

[Ulysses G.]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

And of the ten most cited authors in academic literature, ranging from Shakespeare to Einstein, he is the only one alive today. His insights have revolutionized studies ranging from linguistics to information sciences. His political views are indeed controversial, yet insightful. I suppose that if he were on fire you would probably place his books upon him to burn too to show your disdain for your own inability to argue against a greater intelligence. Your opinions on the man are Kristal clear.

Actually, I sell his books every day.

He may be a liar, a phoney and hypocrite who supported the Khmer Rouge, but a lot of naive, psuedo-intellectual geeks think that he is really the cat's meow.

[Tilokarat]

I wonder if Mr. Chomsky gives investment tips on the big corporations so that his followers can 'get rich quick' and build up their portfolios while they are marching up and down the street protesting against the same global imperialists he supports with his hard-earned American dollars.

[Ulysses G.]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

For those who don't know, self-hating Jew is what Zionists call Jews who dare to criticize any aspect of Israel. Pointing this out makes me an anti-semite in their eyes as well.

I am not a "Zionist", I am a lapsed Catholic, however, for those who don't know, a "Zionist" is what many anti-Semites call Jews other than Noam Chomsky.

[qualtrough]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

For those who don't know, self-hating Jew is what Zionists call Jews who dare to criticize any aspect of Israel. Pointing this out makes me an anti-semite in their eyes as well.

I am not a "Zionist", I am a lapsed Catholic, however, for those who don't know, a "Zionist" is what many anti-Semites call Jews other than Noam Chomsky.

Hello, thanks for proving my point in bold above so quickly. Zionism is a political movement founded by Theodor Herzl with the goal of establishing a Jewish state in Palestine. Calling someone who follows the principles of that movement or supports its aims a 'Zionist' is not anti-semitic in any way, shape, or form--it is a statement of fact. This is moving off-Thailand rapidly so it will be my last post on this thread.

[meadish_sweetball]

It is impossible to discuss Chomsky without our resident left and right wingers getting into their worn-out trenches. Whatever you think of the man, he continues to influence people and provoke debate.

Thaivisa is a Thai forum for things Thai, so please bear this in mind before you steer things off topic.

The thread has a chance if it stays civil and related to Thailand. If it does not, it will be closed.

[PeaceBlondie]

Regarding Thailand and the coup, the professor of linguistics (while honestly and non-hypocritically and non-anti-Semitically admitting to knowing very few details about it) says, "My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it." That sounds about right.

[Johpa]

Regarding Thailand and the coup, the professor of linguistics (while honestly and non-hypocritically and non-anti-Semitically admitting to knowing very few details about it) says, "My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it." That sounds about right.

Yep, for a guy who admits to not knowing alot about Thailand, he certainly hits the nail on the head.

[Boon Mee]

^

Pretty smart guy.

[0Mix1up]

I'm no intelectual but isn't this is obvious to everyone?

This would happen everytime theres a coup or a rigged election.

Its happening in most countries, the concentration of wealth/power that is.

except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it.

Edited April 3, 2007 by 0Mix1up

[Ulysses G.]

I'm no intellectual but isn't this is obvious to everyone?

This would happen everytime theres a coup or a rigged election.

Its happening in most countries, the concentration of wealth/power that is.

except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it.

You don't need to be very smart. Anyone could have figured this out.

Even Chomsky.

Edited April 5, 2007 by Ulysses G.

[steveromagnino]

Regarding Thailand and the coup, the professor of linguistics (while honestly and non-hypocritically and non-anti-Semitically admitting to knowing very few details about it) says, "My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it." That sounds about right.

I disagree.

The wealth distribution under the pseudo democracy of Taksin had far more concentrated wealth distribution to a select few than now. Much as i like the writings, he falls into the same category as the Economist; spouting generalities without understanding the issues underneath; I'd expect that from someone admitting not to really know; more of a surprise from the Economist who have really stuffed up their coverage on this one.

[samran]

Regarding Thailand and the coup, the professor of linguistics (while honestly and non-hypocritically and non-anti-Semitically admitting to knowing very few details about it) says, "My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it." That sounds about right.

I disagree.

The wealth distribution under the pseudo democracy of Taksin had far more concentrated wealth distribution to a select few than now. Much as i like the writings, he falls into the same category as the Economist; spouting generalities without understanding the issues underneath; I'd expect that from someone admitting not to really know; more of a surprise from the Economist who have really stuffed up their coverage on this one.

Thats right. Nowhere near a scientific survey, but friends of friends of the family have reported that contracts etc were concentrated into the hands of a chosen few. Before that, corruption existed, but it was more 'democratic' and competitive.

Under Thaksin, if you wanted in, under the table cuts went up 10% in their sector (govenrmnet construction contracts). The inflation on backhanders was pretty high. One only had to view the number of sychophants surrounding Thaksin. Being a major supporter of TRT was a key way of doing so. One reason I don't drink a certain brand of coffee anymore.

You could argue that Thailand was headed towards a Singapore type model, where Harry Lee and family always seem to be in the running for anything worthwhile (clean everywhere, except at the very top). Instead, under Dear Leader, I'd argue that Thailand was actually headed towards a Philippines or Indonesia type model, where EVERYTHING is controlled by a few families only.

[steveromagnino]

You could argue that Thailand was headed towards a Singapore type model, where Harry Lee and family always seem to be in the running for anything worthwhile (clean everywhere, except at the very top). Instead, under Dear Leader, I'd argue that Thailand was actually headed towards a Philippines or Indonesia type model, where EVERYTHING is controlled by a few families only.

Well, not everything.

They never wanted anything to do with the shipping industry for instance.

Or my apartment.

Or my 'good time luvin' (offered to Yingluck and the daughter, not the one that looked like the old man).

But yeah, they pretty much took everything else they could. Pretty brazen about it too. I guess you can do that when you own the media AND have a limitless warchest.

Speaking of chests, did you see the body on Mint Ardawadee's mum? Blimey, shiver me timbers, that's no pirate's sunken chest, a vast behind too mateys! Somehow she profited from that lot for a while; I think Chalerm was the big Versace shirt wearer right? Well that gravy train didn't last long.

[aussiestyle1983]

Chomsky is a liar, a hypocrite and self-hating Jew who is traitor to both his religion and his country.

If he was on fire, I wouldn't urinate on him to put it out.

PMSL

I wouldn't urinate on anyone if they were on fire

[PeaceBlondie]

Ulysses, if I'm in the book store and you're burning to death, I'll put the fire out with Noam Chomsky's books, okay?

Seriously, why does the Bangkok Post interview someone who doesn't know about Thailand? Why not interview him about linguistics, or the best linguini in Boston?

[Ulysses G.]

Seriously, why does the Bangkok Post interview someone who doesn't know about Thailand? Why not interview him about linguistics, or the best linguini in Boston?

Are you really trying to get logical about THAILAND?

TIT!

[dukkha]

Does Intellectual Critique have geographical border??

[Johpa]

Regarding Thailand and the coup, the professor of linguistics (while honestly and non-hypocritically and non-anti-Semitically admitting to knowing very few details about it) says, "My expectation was that the outcome of the military coup would be a system that was worse than the one it overthrew, except for small sectors of the population that were privileged and wealthy and may benefit from it." That sounds about right.

I disagree.

The wealth distribution under the pseudo democracy of Taksin had far more concentrated wealth distribution to a select few than now. Much as i like the writings, he falls into the same category as the Economist; spouting generalities without understanding the issues underneath; I'd expect that from someone admitting not to really know; more of a surprise from the Economist who have really stuffed up their coverage on this one.

Although I do not always agree with Chomsky's political views, I find his thoughts are almost always well informed and insightful. As for the Economist, there journalistic job is too understand and explain the underlying issues. As an intellectual, Chomsky's job is to look at the overlaying issues.

I didn't read Chomsky's statement as focusing upon wealth concentration. I for one thought the coup would change things little other than who had access to the biggest piece of the pie, the traditional focus of Thai politics. But other aspects of society have indeed gotten worse ranging from poor fiscal policy, to increased anti-foreigner resentment, to increased censorship, to harsher applications of existing laws.