 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Two lies used to link Chomsky to deniers | ||||||||||||||||||
| p. ? | ||||||||||||||||||
| this page in process!!! | ||||||||||||||||||
| The purpose of Chapter ? in The Anti-Chomsky Reader is obviously to persuade readers that Chomsky (1) is in agreement with holocaust denier's regarding the holocaust, (2) is seen by denier groups as a valuable resource helping them spread anti-semitism, (3) has many links to denier groups, and friendly relations with many individual deniers |
||||||||||||||||||
| On page ? author ? says: | ||||||||||||||||||
| original main text | ||||||||||||||||||
| The corresponding notes on p. say this: the two notes Observe: both notes refer to page 294 of The Chomsky Reader. That page is the only page in the whole book that says anything at all about Thion. These three sentences hence are the only words in the whole book that say anything about Thion. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Serge Thion analyzes the ideology of the Khmer Rouge as "very close to Maoism," and very far from Marxism, with "an ideology which rationalizes the substitution of the radical intelligentsia" for the working classes; a similar (and quite accurate) critique of Leninism is familiar in Left-Marxist and anarchist work. Thion holds that central authorities had little control over the economy or the "state power system". Anthony Barnett takes issue with this view, arguing against Thion and Vikery that "the Pol Pot gropu always managed to retain the initiative after 1975, and it used its power to impost and consolodate its rule," and that regional variations fell within centrally determined uniformities." | ||||||||||||||||||
| Obviously, what Chomsky says about Thion does not at all match what author ? said Chomsky said. I therefore regard both ?'s claim that Chomsky wrote somewhere that Thion is a "libertarian socialist" and that Chomsky is a friend of Thion as lies. | ||||||||||||||||||