This will be news to many a cool hipster: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/noam-chomsky-donald-trump_us_58385d81e4b000af95ee1fda
Chomsky has no competition because there's no such thing as left wing politics in America. He can say whatever he wants and nobody will listen, but he just keeps on talking to himself and whoever else is out there that thinks someone is listening.
Noam Chomsky says Hillary Clinton doesn't give a shit about whether or not allies like Israel violate International Law. He was right about that.
Anyone who says you should have voted, much less voted for Hillary Clinton, instantly loses credibility with me. Not that Chomsky had any credibility in my eyes. I know he's a darling of the left, and because he's an academic, he must have all the answers, but to me the guy is just another mouthpiece.
I thought it would be kind of fun to force people who choose an intellectual hero (in this case, Chomsky) to confront the fact that he is endorsing a woman whom he also accuses of backing Israel's flagrant violation of International law.
Noam Chomsky has brilliant insights and deep understanding of facts which has been admitted even by his rivals. He is a modern day Socrates riling and irritating those in power with his cold facts and logic which they have no answer for other than reviling him and launching personal attacks on him .
He is seen as an intellectual and not as a philosopher. As for the intelligence part, I would dismiss it as an another 'personal jibe.'
You should have voted for Hillary though Trump has already backed down on a lot of big promises that well he knew werent going to be possible Voted in for by the working class who fell for all the talk You have a lame duck president thats going to be more interested in high society dinners than anything else, and you all know it
Socrates was famous for usually being as quiet as a church mouse and merely asking questions or repeating the same lame jokes. He did not spout "cold logic", but used a complex form of what I like to describe as "mental judo" where he used his own opponents words to illustrate any contradictions in their reasoning. That does not describe Chomsky who tirelessly spouts opinions left and right and is famous for quite aggressively attacking any criticism. If he were a politician in his younger years he would have literally foamed at the mouth while addressing his audience, although, he seems to have mellowed a bit in his later years. Not to mention, his theory of grammar being inherited has turned out to be demonstrably false and his philosophy no longer has a leg to stand on.
What do you think would have happened if Socrates and Chomsky debated with each other on whether it was right or wrong on the part of the Athenians to poison Socrates for his critical views ! What do you think would have been the result of the debate?