Has the evil US military corporate complex appropriated Chomsky, the man and his linguistics, without Chomsky in the know? Nothing is impossible, as Chomsky says, but many things are unlikely.
Chomsky is one of the few intellectuals to insist to this day that we can neatly untangle complex webs of state and non-state, private and public, military and civilian.
This article continues our ongoing debate on whether military funding affected Chomsky's linguistics. The author contests the argument that, for the renowned linguist, such funding was always a non-issue.
There is no evidence that Chomsky’s research program has been driven by a desire to devise a theory that is devoid of any potential military applications.
Noam Chomsky’s choice was to launch himself as an outspoken anti-militarist activist even while remaining in one of the US’s most prestigious military labs. It came at a cost.
"There's a diversionary process underway... out of the spotlight, the most savage fringe of the Republican Party is carefully advancing policies to enrich their true constituency: the Constituency of private power and wealth."
"DiEM25's Manifesto is a bold effort to reverse the damage and restore the promise,” says Chomsky.
If the media lionises one and demonises the other, the favoured man must surely have been right on the big issues of the last 15 years. Right?
This week we lead with the alarming news that Irina Teplinskaya, friend of the openDemocracy Drug Policy Forum and renowned human rights activist currently undertaking litigation against the Russian Government, has been arrested while crossing the Russian border. Our lead article is an impassioned
