Sorry for the spelling, it has just been a long day.
Henry
Just because you’re a heartless piece of shit doesn’t mean everybody else is. Maybe that’s why Russia is in such a mess right now–Russian capitalists haven’t yet gained any humanity.
They don’t have dictionaries in Russia?! Try www.dictionary.com where you can look up words online. It’s easy. Look up “empire” and compare that with a word like “hegemony”. See, the U.S. doesn’t have supreme control over other nations, in fact, it doesn’t even have supreme control over itself! It does seem to have a predominant influence (and not always for the better). Hence, the U.S. is a hegemon and not an empire.
You see, one of the neat things about words is that they have these things called meanings. That is, a word signifies something, or in some cases several things, specifically. That’s how we communicate: we give arbitrary symbols meanings which they do not inherently possess, and use them to refer to objects in the real world. Of course, we as individuals do not establish or change the symbol-meaning association by personal fiat. Instead, a generally accepted set of associations is established and is codified in a reference, often known as a dictionary. You can then use a “dictionary” to look up the “meaning” of a “word”, which is an example of an arbitrary symbol. If the real world thing you are referring to does not fit the “meaning” of the “word”, then it is inappropriate to apply the “word” to the object. See how easy it is!:rolleyes:
I’m mostly unqualified to analyze the content of the debates that Chumsky is in, so I’m confining myself to questions of equality of treatment.
Since we have December on the right and his annoying, cite-deprived posting style, I hardly think folks should get so worked up about the lesser faults of Chumsky.
But I agree with ya on the entertaining part.
Disagreeing with popularly held views? How shocking. Someone should really do something about such unacceptable behaviour. :rolleyes:
Since when does the fact that a view is popularly held mean ipso facto that it is right?
Please don’t put words in my mouth. Didn’t say the above, nor did I say that disgreement, in and of itself, is unacceptable behavior. What I DID was simply observe that Chumpsky seems to disagree with just about every single thing he reads here, and provide citations in support of that view.
In any event, who or what he disagrees with is no issue here. I agree with some of the other posters that he’s a great source of entertainment, through his total inability to refrain from hyperbole and editorializing in every discussion that he joins. OTOH, that he routinely makes makes wild, unsupported assertions, then browbeats the hell out of anyone who has the temerity to disagree with HIM, IMO is an issue.
AoS: Since we have December on the right and his annoying, cite-deprived posting style, I hardly think folks should get so worked up about the lesser faults of Chumsky.
I think Chumpsky is every bit as bad as december is, though I’m much more likely to agree with his positions than with december’s. (Like luc said, it’s weird to see a poster who makes ME seem conservative. I still maintain, though, that his choice of username is clever and funny; I expected great things of him at first on the strength of it. Too bad.)
And consider the number of Pit threads we’ve had about december’s shortcomings as a debater, I don’t think it’s unfair if folks want to pile on Chumpsky for a bit.
I don’t think Chumpsky is the only poster who can be accused of using highly biased sources of information to “validate” his assertions - I can think of quite a few posters who routinely do the same.
Yes, it’s frustrating when a poster refuses to even consider that a viewpoint other than their own might have any validity. They aren’t seeking to debate an issue, they just want everyone to acknowledge that their opinion is the right one.
I tend to skip over the posts of people who engage in this style of debate and pay most attention to the posts of people who are truly interested in an exchange of ideas.
Hmmmm, now that you mention it, Comrade Kimstu I begin to suspect an agent provocatuer Better give him the test:
Chumpksi!
Which is the correct form? Trostkyist or Trotskyite?
Who was the author of the New Economic Plan?
A. Lenin B. Stalin C. Bukharin D. Trotsky
Who was the real author of the New Economic Plan?
A. Lenin B. Stalin C. Bukharin D. Trotsky
Quien es el mas macho? Lavrenti Beria o Felix Dzerzhinsky?
What is the correct interpretation of the phrase “dictatorship of the proletariat”? (Essay)
Lonnsdale defeated Hampton Greens to win the Cup in what year?
I personally consider him my entertaining misguided squeeze toy. Press his tummy and get a line from Das Kapital. Hours of fun!
Out of the four links cited in the OP, two of them, pertaining to scientific research and racism are in fact being debated right now. It might be a stretch to find them outright falsehoods.
Then, there is the statement that the US leadership is more dangerous than the NK leadership… well…hyperbole? Sure looks like it!
js_africanus
The fraze: “…I can give a shit what is the level of salaries inside Russia.” Does not mean that I give a shit about the salaries.
And yes, You can easily teach me in the English language, but You do seem to read a little bit “hasty”, don’t You think?
But I can “see how easy that is”. 
Btw. I pay more than two times higher salaries than the neighbouring saw-mill, and have had some remarks about this from my most beloved investors.
And if You think that those guys gives a shit about the level of the salaries…, yes they do. They think like this: “The only reason why we put money in Russia is that the labour is so cheap. And let us keep it that way”.
That is how capitalism works = Money talks and we all have to obey. (Except Mr Chumpsky, he seem to be a free thinking artist. And I mean this in a positive way.)
I will come back to this. I used the word imperialistic. AFAIK it comes from the latin word “impera”. And empire is also coming from this word.
I do not know if Your cite is some kind of Bible among the dictonaries. I usually use Oxford, but even so, a dictonary those not always be helpful, because it is and has to be limited.
See eg. the word “marxism”, and I think You get a very short form of the meaning of the word.
But I will check this up later.
Anyhow, nobody means that the eg. US senate are speaking about and voting in some questions of the mine workers condition in eg. Brazil, or the Russian duma about Kasakhstan.
The clever thing is to have a control over the industry in different countries.
And if You think the US senate controls the business or anything outside the US, I think You are mistaken.
The capitalism does not work throug nationally elected organs.
They try to influence them, through lobbying, but the international business is a totally other game. There is no rules more than those in the jungle.
But, after work, yes here is no Christmas, I’ll come back to what is and what can be ment by the word “imperialistic”.
And if You are interested why people are so poor in Russia, I can just write about it in some more suitable thread, in order not to hijack the thread of spitting on Mr Chumsky, mostly by people that has never been living among the poors, in a poor country.
About the word
It’s a trick question - Lonnsdale have never won the Cup
Regards,
Shodan
Henry: language doesn’t matter. We can understand what you’re saying.
We just think it’s crap.
Here’s something I almost posted in the scientific research thread, but will now post here instead:
You need any sugar to help your own medicine go down, Chumpsky?
Bryan Ekers
And what part is crap, and why?
Could You kindly be more specific?
Not to speak for Bryan, but I would answer:
Ideas, exposition, phrasing, spelling and grammar.
All crap.
Merry Xmas. 
Then I misunderstood your intent and misjudged you. Please accept my apology.
Since this is the Pit, I’m not going to get into a debate about the merits of capitalism. I just want to note that characterizing it that way simply isn’t true. There are capitalists who think that way. But that doesn’t mean that the vast majority of people seek to engage in their daily business in a greedy and dishonest way. I know your view and you know mine, we can debate it elsewhere–though I’m leaving town in a couple of days so it had better wait.
Generally, no. I read what has been written. Unfortunately, since we are not great writers some interpretation is often in order, and by extension, sometimes we end up interpreting when it isn’t appropriate. That’s not a fault, that’s an honest misunderstanding.
**
I was hoping to teach you some debate, and since you seemed to be characterizing anybody who disagrees with Chumsky as mentally repressed, I had no interest in being nice about it. Terms need to be defined, and those definitions need to be used. That is a basic building block of any debate. Quite often long and involved arguments can be avoided if the participants just make clear what they are talking about. Since the dictionary is the arbiter of word meanings, it is an appropriate tool to accomplish such ends. If you had just gone to the site I provided and looked up “imperialistic”, you would have gotten
from the first dictionary source provided. Since I’ve already agreed that the U.S. seeks hegemony, then the U.S. could be said to have engaged in imperialistic practices. I would have been in a corner–trapped! I could have argued that only one dictionary out of many offer that term, and we could have discussed that, and so on. Whatever. The point is that cataloging the failings and nasty behavior of the U.S. doesn’t bear on the question of whether it is imperialistic, or an empire. If one wishes to make a catalog of American nastiness, then start a thread for it. If one wants to debate a factual point, don’t clutter it with important but irrelevant facts.
I had cancer. That doesn’t make me an expert on it. Turning a wrench on a factory floor, doesn’t make one an expert in running a factory. Being a private in the military doesn’t make one ready to general an army. Your point is moot. I have, however, learned from those who not only have been among the poor in a poor country, but who also made their lives the study of why such conditions exist and how to solve them.
BTW, it’s insulting when you characterize someone as enlightened because he agrees with your experience and world view, and those who don’t as closed minded and sheltered. Unless you have made a study of the broader issues, then you are just as sheltered as anybody else. To put it another way, living in Russia doesn’t make you any more enlightened than me for having lived in America.
Finally, Chumsky isn’t being slammed for his world view. He’s being slammed for his poor debating techniques and shoddy rhetorical style. He does his views no service when he engages in logical fallacies, avoids important points, and refuses to engage on key issues. He is very good at listing failings of America and business people, but those do not prove the points he asserts.
Finally, I hope the holiday (what’s left of it) goes very well for you. Please accept my very best wishes!
[sub]well, maybe I was slamming him a LITTLE for his world view…[/sub]
Well, I won’t speak to your first point, and the second is arguable, but when you start posting in (at least) your third language, then you will have the right to criticize **Henry’s ** English writing style.
Of course, if you are posting in your third language, then I apologize.
I agree. Considering how we Americans are such monoglots, I commend Henry for the grasp of the language that he does have. Hence, my previous apology for misunderstanding him and his intent.