/lit/ - Literature

richard m weaver

>>16737336
Chomsky, as usual

Chomsky

>>16737336
Foucault BTFO'd both

>>16737336
Chom

>>16737336
Chomsky

I want to cum on every inch of Buckley's body but Chomsky

>>16737336
Zizek

chomsky

Didn't watch it what's the qrd?

>>16737336
Peterson

LOL Peterson admitted he only read the Communist Manifesto before hand, really embarrassing

>>16737336
History is not on the side of Chomsky's observations and predictions on the particular issues which they were debating here, though neither could be said to have won when this episode actually aired. Chomsky's indefensibly mistaken accounts and predictions surrounding Vietnam at this time when viewed with today's knowledge of history has done little to dissuade many of his assertions about such things both now and then, however.
The real losers here are those who are swayed by Chomsky's rationality and see it as a exempt from tests of empirical validity due to that sway. Most of what Chomsky asserts here fundamentally amount to extremely logical hypotheses about the origins and potential outcomes of political movements in Vietnam, hypotheses which have since been proven false by the outcomes of such movements and which would not be defended by Chomsky himself today, at least not in the same form and with the same presumptions which he asserts in this debate. Chomsky, however, actually understands what he is talking about in this debate, and thus would logically understand how his assertions could logically be demonstrably false, though he rationally sees no reason to suspect such a thing in the historical context of this debate. Those who do not understand the literal things which Chomsky is arguing, and thus do not understand how those things could be validated or invalidated by subsequent future events within Vietnam, are the only people who are technically incompetent or are at a loss on anything.

>>16739489
chad move, you wouldn't understand

>>16739489
If you can't derive whole Marxist theory on your own on the basis of the Manifesto alone you're a midwit and you're never going to make it

>>16737336
Zizek. He kicked Peterson's ass so bad he also won every other debate ever.

>>16737336
mmmmmvietnamesesociety

when he asked him "where are the marxists" I was like ohh shiieet got'eeeem

Chompsky is one of those fun guys who can easily tell you the truth by telling you the complete opposite of it, so he lost. On the other hand, Buckley wasn't taken off the stage and mobbed to death in minecraft, so really, it was the American people who lost.

lol is that even a question? Buckley is a glassy eyed brainlet motherfucker without any knowledge or intelligence, a total pseud with an arrogant tone of voice and tryhard manners. What a hack.

>>16741028
Jesus christ, is this how Anglos age?

>>16740938
Chomsky is a master bullshitter. When he talks he's not so much talking as he is framing the entire conversation in a way that it can't proceed without going down a path he wants it to. The one quote I distinctly remember from him is "There are Republicans and there are Republicans who call themselves Democrats." A lot of people feel the Neo-Cons and Dems are cut from the same cloth, and this quote basically takes that sentiment and throws it entirely on the republican's side. If he said it in an argument the argument would devolve into whether or not Dems are real Dems, not whether or not their philosophy is inherently flawed and the fight is entirely around the republicans philosophy.

When I first read this quote I immediately thought of Chomsky.

>>16739063
Final debate of the Half-Century Bogdanoff Foreign Policy Conference between Chomsky and Buckley. There was no winner as both Bogdanoffs, who traditionally announce a winner immediately after the debates, abruptly left the audience and no one knows why till this day. Leading theory is that the first academic paper on cryptocurrency was published, which frightened the Boggs due to it being the supposed final prophecy which signaled the birth of their enemy, Boy Sminem. All rumors tho.

>>16741115
Goebbels truly was the Jew Whisperer.

basedly of course.

>>16737336
Foucault.