I lost my remaining respect for the socialist Noam Chomsky when he told me, in 2008, that he would support the killer Hillary over the peacemaker Ron Paul. Why? Because Chomsky hates the idea of private property, and a society based on it (i.e., a civilization). But it gets worse for the admirer of the Khmer Rouge (who sought to abolish all private property, going beyond Lenin and Mao).
Writes Danny Sanchez:
3:18 pm on November 20, 2012 Email Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
Chomsky says that Ron Paul’s ideas are “savage.” For a true example of “savage ideas,” consider Chomsky’s support for murderous UN sanctions on Iraq during the Gulf War period.
Rothbard had Chomsky’s number when he wrote:
“It started with the Gulf War, when lifelong anti-war warriors, people like the Red troubadour Pete Seeger and the Reverend William Sloane Coffin, suddenly whooped it up for war. Even Noam Chomsky, left-anarchist and always a gutsy battler against American war, supported the Gulf War. The argument given by these people was that this was the holy ‘United Nations’ conducting the battle and not really the United States. In short, that the cause of a war-making world government is more important to them than anti-war principles. Showing that these people were not really against imperialism or foreign military intervention (they were always, of course, in favor of foreign economic intervention such as foreign aid), but in favor of world government imperialism, and war-mongering….”