From my readings of Chomsky his main standpoint is one that those with power need to be held accountable for their actions. He see that intellectuals have a responsibility, due to their privelidge, to expose 'wrongdoings' in whatever form.
I have gained a great deal from reading Chomsky over the years and am struck by his compassion and his optimism.
Being polite I think some members are being rather too simplistic and fall into the trap that Chomsky himself writes about extensively.
The view seems to go something like this - if you are against US/UK intervention in Afghanistan that means you are pro-Taliban - which is clearly absurd.
Yes, killing 6,000 people is appaling. But two wrongs don't make a right.
I was struck by, prior to the invasion of Kuwait, how 'our' (USA/UK) favoured 'puppet' in the Middle East Saddam Hussain was able to carry out huge human rights abuses. The major voices of dissent was not the USA/UK mainstream but 'freethinkers' such as Chomsky. So when 'we' got annoyed that he used all the weapons we sold him against our interests - primarily the oil - he started to be the big evil. All his wrongdoings were rolled out - even though they were widely known beforehand. Yes he was evil for using Chemical Weapons against the Kurds. He was the second person to do that - any guesses on who was the first?
The list has been aired in previous mailings.
6,000 dead is appalling, so is the Taliban treatment of women, as is the ever increasing death toll in Afghanistan, as is the treatment of women in numerous other states which are 'our' friends (therefore glossed over - as is their un-democratic nature). Still they are on our side so that's okay.
So as 'intellectuals' we should stand-up for human rights abuses wherever they are.
jon
|