Did anyone happen to catch the Washington Post’s fawning profile of Noam Chomsky in the Sunday Style section? Man, for a guy who’s supposed to be censored by the corporate media, he sure seems to get a lot of coverage.
Of course, Chomsky is a crank. He’s the L Ron Hubbard of our time. In a more coherent world he’d be loitering out front of the White House wearing a sandwich board covered in 10pt text and mumbling about an implanted homing device.
But in our oppressive police state, he’s a celebrity professor at one of the nation’s most prestigious universities, a prolific author, and the subject of a lengthy soft-focus article in a major newspaper.
Check out this passage:
Noam Chomsky believes in the redemptive power of logical thinking and coming to Chomskyan conclusions about the world. He is a white-hot contrarian, a distinguished linguist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who "tends to be quite conservative" and is devoted to "simple moral truisms."
Holy smokes! Censored? This guy isn’t even being questioned.
When Chomsky claims to be “quite conservative” what is that supposed to mean? Is he Pinochet-conservative? Kim il Sung-conservative? Stalin-conservative? What could the term “conservative” possibly mean to a man whose mind is so dense it is able to warp the very political spectrum.
Hell, if he thinks he’s “quite conservative,” what would he make of me? I must be like some sort of jackbooted trilobite, a mean-spirited Mesopotamian slave auctioneer, a particularly backward Coelacanth, a Moai from one of the less cosmopolitan parts of Easter Island.
A casual stroll through the Barnes & Noble on Union Square turns up no less than four different Chomsky books displayed on three floors. Yet, in any other country he’d be sharing a cell with Lyndon LaRouche.
God Bless America!