Noam Chomsky, come clean II

Noam Chomsky should come clean

What we are seeing now with the lynching struggle is that over a long period of many years, the left-wing of parasitism simply cannot move independently of the “New York Times.” If the “New York Times” says the Mumia case does have issues, then thousands of radicals can mobilize with more radical themes regarding Mumia. They will pop up in all organizations calling themselves to the nominal left of the “New York Times.” If the monopoly capitalist media had not mentioned Mumia, then none of these alleged “radicals” would be able to act.

In the RCP the problem is mostly zombies led by a few sinister people who advise befriending everyone, saying nice things and then backstabbing as the preferred strategy. I’m afraid Chomsky is among those who because of his incorrect analysis of political economy is predisposed to the RCP’s friendliness instead of the substance of questions.

In MIM itself we had people who could not recruit, because they were unwilling to make a campaign of lynching and turn it into a strong point. If someone is relegated lower than Willie Horton, we lack in the United $tates anyone capable of doing independent work to check into that. That is why we stressed “creating public opinion and the independent institutions of the oppressed to seize power,” while the RCP front for the government has “create public opinion; seize power.”

Despite writing many good books, Noam Chomsky shows the following signs of being a participant in government recruiting:

  • He endorsed Senator Kerry (1) who is connected to the RCP since Vietnam days. The Vietnam Veterans against the War Kerry was in formed a splinter led by the RCP.
  • Early in the campaign Chomsky referred to Obama as a “blank slate” in an inversion of Maoist terminology:

    “Obama has cultivated a style of presenting himself as engaging and friendly, and as a blank slate, on which his audience can write their hopes and wishes, believing, if they choose, that he is ‘on our side.'”(2)

    “Blank slate” is a phrase Mao used to refer to China’s vast quantities of apolitical people yet to converge on national norms and customs.
  • Chomsky has done talks for RCP.
  • I find it unlikely Chomsky did not see the Internet pre-annoucement of the release of the “family jewels” of the CIA. And if he did miss it for some reason he can check with Ward Churchill who saw it. Therefore, I also conclude that Chomsky is fully aware that the infiltration gambit was not an infiltration, because it was not secret.
  • Any doubts that the infiltration was not up to snuff should have died when a) the Mideast failed to reach agreement; b) the lynchers failed to come up with anything else.
  • Nonetheless, Chomsky foolishly denied fascism.(3)

    So what we have instead is this. It was people including Noam Chomsky responsible for putting in office the following: 1) A lyncher. 2) A popular face for corporatism. 3) An excuse worth covering up the truth years on end and gutting the potential for a real Left.

    This was done after 1) The Reichstag fire of 9/11; 2) the Patriot Act; 3) invasions of Islamic countries which the RCP favored in practice since the late 1990s despite its words and which the RCP’s Iran and Afghan affiliates favor in words to this day.

    The left-wing of parasitism accomplished all this after more than a decade in racist denial that there is no exploited legally working working class in the United $tates. Racist judgment on MIM’s third cardinal question turned to racism on lynching and that in turn cleared the way for turning an opportunist blind eye to corporatism. In other words, just as MIM said all along, it was the left-wing of parasitism clearing the way for fascism, YES, INCLUDING THE TORTURE IN ABU GHRAIB AND GITMO. Gitmo is not closed and still our left-wing of parasitism lacks any means of drawing conclusions without the “New York Times” or Congress telling it.

    I’m not saying Noam Chomsky(4) and Ward Churchill did everything wrong. I’m saying those that know owe more to those that don’t and I’m most concerned about secrets kept from international readers, not self-deluded racist Amerikkkans. By getting right with the international proletariat, we can then turn to what opportunities that do exist including popping Ponzi bubbles.

    Even the RCP=CIA has turned around to criticize Obama. Criticism is not enough, because it’s just camouflage when not implemented with the corresponding strategy. It’s false fronting for the government and the international proletariat needs to know that. I see Ward Churchill attending RCP talks and frankly I consider that a racist act given what he knows. That’s not to say Churchill has not done other things correctly.

    It was not just the KGB or just the RCP involved in the lynching. There were multiple people at the CIA involved and Obama owes his gonads over Gitmo. Understand that there are a total of three links to this web page when we had thousands before. I have no objection to people steering clear because they themselves need to run cells, but I fail to see why Wikipedia writers do not link for example. And I need to lean on older people with better contacts and less naivete.

    I find it very useful to re-read Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent, the chapter on the Propaganda Model. It came out in 1988. All that was evident already in 1988 and here we are in 2010 and it’s time to draw a conclusion about reforming the government by recruiting people into it. Here is just one relevant selection:

    “The motives that cause these individuals to switch gods, from Stalin (or Mao) to Reagan and free enterprise, is varied, but for the establishment media the reason for the change is simply that the ex-radicals have finally seen the error of their ways. In a country whose citizenry values acknowledgment of sin and repentance, the turncoats are an important class of repentant sinners. It is interesting to observe how the former sinners, whose previous work was of little interest or the object of ridicule to the mass media, are suddenly elevated to prominence and become authentic experts. We may recall how, during the McCarthy era, defectors and ex-Communists vied with one another in tales of imminence of a Soviet invasion and other lurid stories. They found that news coverage was a function of their trimming their accounts to the prevailing demand.”

    Some people read this and want to be turncoats. That’s the problem we need to be aware of.

    I’m saying Chomsky knows what is going on with the RCP front. It’s not enough to criticize Obama. That’s just camouflage if you are not for building independent institutions of the oppressed. That requires exposing phony infiltrations.

    Chomsky also endorsed Obama:
    3. Chomsky took the standard liberal Democrat line on Fox News and conservative Liberals, which is not surprising given Chomsky’s delusions about the left-wing of parasitism.
    Someone who did not deny liberal Democrat fascism was
    4. A statement like is not wrong, just not enough given what Chomsky knows. Likewise,


  • %d bloggers like this: