Start in the small, boycotting the things you feel is wrong. Share the anger! We need a global thought about society not something based around jews or romans greed or others copy paste of that. We are being opressed by capitalism and all the lies within. Banks and their notes.. and their many words for an eksponentiel function. The same idea sold again and again. We need to stop lying, acting and believing. We need to know or don't know, nothing in between. We need to help eachother without blame but with understanding. The value of an apple in coins is all of them + an apple.
Thinking critically: why doesn't that same reasoning apply to the negation (e.g., re: Iran)? *So what* if "the rest of the world" is unanimous in their disagreement with US foreign policy? (Moreover, isn't that, generically, what one ought to expect to find?) The results of some survey of the general populations of the world (or even of their governments) needn't have any bearing, in fact, in the truth/falsehood/meaningfulness of some proposition. In some cases the crowd is wise; in some others, (apparently) not. How does one distinguish one case from another?
@@danielsteel5251 I think the abstract can be applied anywhere. The Mark Twain quote above specifically extricates morality(rightness) from that equation especially. Noam is poking at the groupthink bubble of the United States and its foreign policies by comparing it to a much larger one outside itself. I do believe though Chompsky thinks there is a innate general morality in the human species beyond a group mentality enforcing it.
@@alixmordant489 yes nothing good comes out of sick power structures even human goodness/morality is a means to its ends. Noam is very good deconstructing these structures. When innate morality is being studied it focuses on human behavior or natural compassion, how we have visceral reactions to others pain and so on....
@@heatherwhitehead3743 True, and that does give me some hope. On the other hand, there is also evidence for "natural" aggression. Have you heard about remote tribes who kill all strangers "on sight"? There are studies suggesting that the rate of people dying a violent death is actually much higher in so called tribal societies than even the US. There is, studies suggest, a general trend through time, maybe connected to the reach and power of seemingly "oppressive structures" like the State, of a great decrease in violence and death through the hands of our neighbours. There are many idealistic myths about "wholesome" (small scale) communities and their "self rule"... Have you heard about "tribal marks" etc.? Humans are very inventive in distinguishing between the "us" and "them", in creating barriers (language is a big one) - and to have compassion with a person who is a "them" is often seen as some kind of "treason".
@@alixmordant489 yeah how to maintain a healthy indivual identity and group identity at the same time steering away from the fear of the 'other' is a perceptual problem for us. How to exploit the best sides of human nature has not nearly been investigated as much as how to uphold a power structure using the cheapest tricks on our wretched shortcomings. Still there are examples, Farming communities where land is passed through the maternal side and walking marriages give hope. Seems so simple, nobody wants their child to starve and we all need food and shelter...simple, lol? May the spirit of nurturing rule the earth. I don't think we have a choice to play any other game anymore.
Mr. Chomsky, I've never been a fan of yours. And when a friend of mine sent me a link to a recent commentary of yours, I had to force myself to watch it. How refreshing it was to hear your intellectually honest appraisal of the Mueller investigation. And here I am back, a couple weeks later, curious to hear what you have to say on this timely subject. (To your continuing good health.)
Fascinating FACTS this gentleman always puts out for us to know.......I’ve fallowed your work for some time now I thank you for your knowledge and taking the time to do what u do ........... enlighten bless you my fine sir.(O.V)
It feels humble to submit to groupthink. This is exactly how the most atrocious and megalomaniac ideas can grow without anyone being truly aware of what's happening. Besides, if anyone is aware of it for a moment, no one is responsible since only everyone is responsible.
Our subordination into groupthink is engineered into us, the former part of compound word being operative. The key to power is to take control of whatever abstract unit (Nation, Religion etc.) forms the group, and therefore the group’s values. Once that’s accomplished the ascent to power is relatively perfected because any grumbling from the Proles subsequently becomes little more than the narcissism of small differences. Creating a standardized citizenry - a simple task really - is key, because the people can’t revolt against people whose values they share, or at least have been programmed to believe they share. It explains Trump and it explains Obama -- and all the rest for that matter. Recall that Socrates later expanded upon “Know thyself” with “An unexamined life is not worth living.” Once we are appropriately programmed in the human equivalent of the BIOS, examination of our lives falls within those parameters at a very subconscious level and so the assessment is really little more than building a personalized case for a status quo someone else has created.
I am unaware of this talk and am not aware of the full context, but I wonder how many people who were there disagreed with what Chomsky was saying, and whether or not they themselves were engaging unconsciously in groupthink, perhaps nodding when they disagreed? I don't disagree with anything he says here, but when an authority figure such as Chomsky speaks I wonder how strong the tendency is to accept his opinion on a topic over our own, because he must know better right? I would think he would welcome the alternative perspective if only everyone thought rationally, critically and openly. I am not against experts, but I am interested to see how others react around them, some listen intently and do not question what is fed to them, others repel everything the expert says, especially if they identify with a group that thinks the way they do. There are a precious few that hear what the expert has to say, will respect the information given yet question it when they think it might be wrong, and engage in a dialogue from which all parties gain knowledge.
This is such an interesting point, I was wondering this about myself, as I had been sort of nodding along throughout the video and through the Iran example. I do tend to agree with Noam Chomsky on most issues I've heard his opinion on. However, once he started the North Korea example I did find myself disagreeing. The reason I believe I saw reported the most: the deal with North Korea wasn't celebrated was because evidence/reporting showed and continued to show that DPRK had no intention of *honoring* the deal. I don't understand why this wasn't mentioned. I was actually going to see if I could find any other videos where he discussed this subject to see if he explains more lol.
"People who refuse to accept vaccines, I think the right response for them is not to force them to but rather to insist that they be isolated," Naom himself was clearly a victim of group think.
And the crazy part is Venezuela only has less then 30 percent of GDP as public sector and the rest private . Infact it's oligarch driven speculation , black market and hoarding of general goods to artificially drive prices high that started the crisis , same is true in Nicaragua . Of all the above only Cuba can be accurately called socialist where many poor Americans go for healthcare and to study
Is Prof. Chomsky suggesting that Iran, with all its centrifuges, is not trying to develop nuclear weapons? And what is his source for saying every country but Israel and the US is in favor of an enforceable nuclear free Middle East? I think this video is an example of everyone just nodding in agreement with the great sage. Couldn't be group think, could it?
Exactly. Groupthink is a problem - on all sides of the political spectrum. It is hard to be a free, objective, critical and independent thinker. Too many people take solace in following a "guru", a "wise person". Chomsky is that person for the left; but the right is just as bad, if not worse...
UN votes. Check them. Check unalied movement meetings. And yes, the rest of the world definitely thinks the USA is totally crazy about the Iran hysteria, judging the people more than politicians, because they are blatantly lying (if you didn't know it, it was also totally obvious for the invasion of Iraq) for oil. Check UN reports, JOCPA reports. Europe regular declarations against Bolton or the other obese man. It's groupthink if you didn't already know that (if so, change your way of informing yourself). But groupthinking is here to believe very poor news medias, apparently.
Chomsky is wrong about one thing - the world doesn't think the US is insane. The world KNOWS the US is insane. And here you are, demonstrating the reasons why.
He said that everyone is susceptible to group think, and that there is group think across the whole media and political landscape... How did he in any way imply that this is a strictly right wing fenomona ?
He is 1 of the biggest critics of the left wing democratic establishment, the"left" corporate media (cnn, msnbc, nbc,...) and neoliberal elite class as a whole for that matter...
I am well aware of the (sometimes horrible) failures of US policy. But to think that e.g. a decision is wrong just because the majority of nations is against it, is nonsense. Just take a look at the world and its countries and e.g. how they treat their citizens, which ideas they promote. "Popular" rule which follows the wishes and whims of the masses is not necessarily benevolent. The opposite can be true (as proven by the Nazis). There are good and bad decisions coming from the UN, too. Why? Because all the dictatorships, "people`s republics", and even theocracies are allowed to have a vote in it. (E.g. allowing the Saudis and Iran to have a word about women`s issues is ridiculous.) Just to name a few "pan-human" failures that were and are quite "popular": ethnocentrism, misogyny, antisemitism, homophobia, racism (which is closely bound to "ethnocentrism"). Sometimes, it takes a few people to advocate for progress, while the mass is defending the "olden ways". Without those free thinking few, we would all still think that a witch hunt is justified or that burning people with different opinions is necessary. Noam Chomsky, focusing completely on the wrong-doings of the US, forgets that there are many places on earth, where women are third class citizens and/or victims of habitual sexual violence, homosexuals are put to a gruesome death, "blasphemy" may kill you etc. Hitler was a popular leader, Germans loved him. Where was the "general morality"? We cannot bank on it`s existence. Therefore, Chomsky`s dreams of a better world by more direct "democratic" rule could easily turn into a nightmare of mob rule. "Community" is a nice sounding word; but "community" has an ugly side. To mention the Nazis again: they were promoting the "community of the German people", die "Volksgemeinschaft". The results: Humans, who were not accepted as part of that community (like the Jews) were killed.
Blah. I'm trying to be a skeptic, freethinker- and these so-called dissidents talk ineffective jargon, while lacking the courage of Gandhi, Mohammed Ali, ... Ugh. Talk is cheap and whiskey costs money!
Yeah, because college students are somewhat naive but on the right track for the most part. They take the time to handle data and information first hand, unlike people who have no education outside of the internet and sit online arguing on videos, thinking that they understand the world. Chomsky is like the naive student who was on the right track, except he lost the naivety by completing his education. Think of a student who has spent a decade doing research in a scholarly environment and engaging in rigorous peer review, then compare that level of work with your own. It's difficult to understand how you have the nerve to condescend him.
May the force be with you Master Noam.
Fuckwit.
Bruh, Noam IS the force
Four minutes well worth our time. It's tragic that we live in a dominant culture hell bent on not understanding it. And that's not accidental.
Start in the small, boycotting the things you feel is wrong. Share the anger! We need a global thought about society not something based around jews or romans greed or others copy paste of that. We are being opressed by capitalism and all the lies within. Banks and their notes.. and their many words for an eksponentiel function. The same idea sold again and again. We need to stop lying, acting and believing.
We need to know or don't know, nothing in between. We need to help eachother without blame but with understanding.
The value of an apple in coins is all of them + an apple.
Apple = any need, human or not.
'Just because an idea is popular doesn't mean it's right....
Thinking critically: why doesn't that same reasoning apply to the negation (e.g., re: Iran)?
*So what* if "the rest of the world" is unanimous in their disagreement with US foreign policy? (Moreover, isn't that, generically, what one ought to expect to find?)
The results of some survey of the general populations of the world (or even of their governments) needn't have any bearing, in fact, in the truth/falsehood/meaningfulness of some proposition.
In some cases the crowd is wise; in some others, (apparently) not. How does one distinguish one case from another?
@@danielsteel5251 I think the abstract can be applied anywhere. The Mark Twain quote above specifically extricates morality(rightness) from that equation especially. Noam is poking at the groupthink bubble of the United States and its foreign policies by comparing it to a much larger one outside itself. I do believe though Chompsky thinks there is a innate general morality in the human species beyond a group mentality enforcing it.
@@alixmordant489 yes nothing good comes out of sick power structures even human goodness/morality is a means to its ends. Noam is very good deconstructing these structures. When innate morality is being studied it focuses on human behavior or natural compassion, how we have visceral reactions to others pain and so on....
@@heatherwhitehead3743 True, and that does give me some hope. On the other hand, there is also evidence for "natural" aggression. Have you heard about remote tribes who kill all strangers "on sight"? There are studies suggesting that the rate of people dying a violent death is actually much higher in so called tribal societies than even the US.
There is, studies suggest, a general trend through time, maybe connected to the reach and power of seemingly "oppressive structures" like the State, of a great decrease in violence and death through the hands of our neighbours.
There are many idealistic myths about "wholesome" (small scale) communities and their "self rule"...
Have you heard about "tribal marks" etc.? Humans are very inventive in distinguishing between the "us" and "them", in creating barriers (language is a big one) - and to have compassion with a person who is a "them" is often seen as some kind of "treason".
@@alixmordant489 yeah how to maintain a healthy indivual identity and group identity at the same time steering away from the fear of the 'other' is a perceptual problem for us. How to exploit the best sides of human nature has not nearly been investigated as much as how to uphold a power structure using the cheapest tricks on our wretched shortcomings. Still there are examples, Farming communities where land is passed through the maternal side and walking marriages give hope. Seems so simple, nobody wants their child to starve and we all need food and shelter...simple, lol? May the spirit of nurturing rule the earth. I don't think we have a choice to play any other game anymore.
This channel is an asset to humanity
Mr. Chomsky, I've never been a fan of yours. And when a friend of mine sent me a link to a recent commentary of yours, I had to force myself to watch it. How refreshing it was to hear your intellectually honest appraisal of the Mueller investigation. And here I am back, a couple weeks later, curious to hear what you have to say on this timely subject. (To your continuing good health.)
Fascinating FACTS this gentleman always puts out for us to know.......I’ve fallowed your work for some time now I thank you for your knowledge and taking the time to do what u do ........... enlighten bless you my fine sir.(O.V)
Dang.. what he said about Iran really put things into perspective...
It feels humble to submit to groupthink. This is exactly how the most atrocious and megalomaniac ideas can grow without anyone being truly aware of what's happening. Besides, if anyone is aware of it for a moment, no one is responsible since only everyone is responsible.
He truly is a great thinker but that's what comes with wisdom from a lot of years of Experience
I wish we could say that for everybody
My man, wearing Yeezys.
Our subordination into groupthink is engineered into us, the former part of compound word being operative. The key to power is to take control of whatever abstract unit (Nation, Religion etc.) forms the group, and therefore the group’s values. Once that’s accomplished the ascent to power is relatively perfected because any grumbling from the Proles subsequently becomes little more than the narcissism of small differences. Creating a standardized citizenry - a simple task really - is key, because the people can’t revolt against people whose values they share, or at least have been programmed to believe they share. It explains Trump and it explains Obama -- and all the rest for that matter.
Recall that Socrates later expanded upon “Know thyself” with “An unexamined life is not worth living.” Once we are appropriately programmed in the human equivalent of the BIOS, examination of our lives falls within those parameters at a very subconscious level and so the assessment is really little more than building a personalized case for a status quo someone else has created.
I am unaware of this talk and am not aware of the full context, but I wonder how many people who were there disagreed with what Chomsky was saying, and whether or not they themselves were engaging unconsciously in groupthink, perhaps nodding when they disagreed? I don't disagree with anything he says here, but when an authority figure such as Chomsky speaks I wonder how strong the tendency is to accept his opinion on a topic over our own, because he must know better right? I would think he would welcome the alternative perspective if only everyone thought rationally, critically and openly.
I am not against experts, but I am interested to see how others react around them, some listen intently and do not question what is fed to them, others repel everything the expert says, especially if they identify with a group that thinks the way they do. There are a precious few that hear what the expert has to say, will respect the information given yet question it when they think it might be wrong, and engage in a dialogue from which all parties gain knowledge.
This is such an interesting point, I was wondering this about myself, as I had been sort of nodding along throughout the video and through the Iran example. I do tend to agree with Noam Chomsky on most issues I've heard his opinion on.
However, once he started the North Korea example I did find myself disagreeing. The reason I believe I saw reported the most: the deal with North Korea wasn't celebrated was because evidence/reporting showed and continued to show that DPRK had no intention of *honoring* the deal. I don't understand why this wasn't mentioned. I was actually going to see if I could find any other videos where he discussed this subject to see if he explains more lol.
He's like bloody Doctor Bernasky he knows everything
what was this from? What was the event called and is there a full video?
The source is in the description.
"People who refuse to accept vaccines, I think the right response for them is not to force them to but rather to insist that they be isolated," Naom himself was clearly a victim of group think.
These observations are self evident. I wonder why such a vast majority of people don't know these things.
Noam turned into a medical fascist when c o v I d started. He us a prime example of group think.
3:30 if only he remembered this during the pandemic, intit? _JC
And the crazy part is Venezuela only has less then 30 percent of GDP as public sector and the rest private . Infact it's oligarch driven speculation , black market and hoarding of general goods to artificially drive prices high that started the crisis , same is true in Nicaragua . Of all the above only Cuba can be accurately called socialist where many poor Americans go for healthcare and to study
174-0
Pol... Prof... ...Pol... Prof... ...Pol... Prof... POL PROF!! #DeadKennedys :-D
What would Noam Chomsky think about the group think during pandemic and forcing people to get these vaccines that do nothing to stop the spread.
Chomsky's message is like being told you shouldn't eat bacon. You know the message is right but you just don't want to believe it.
Is Prof. Chomsky suggesting that Iran, with all its centrifuges, is not trying to develop nuclear weapons? And what is his source for saying every country but Israel and the US is in favor of an enforceable nuclear free Middle East? I think this video is an example of everyone just nodding in agreement with the great sage. Couldn't be group think, could it?
Exactly. Groupthink is a problem - on all sides of the political spectrum. It is hard to be a free, objective, critical and independent thinker. Too many people take solace in following a "guru", a "wise person". Chomsky is that person for the left; but the right is just as bad, if not worse...
UN votes. Check them.
Check unalied movement meetings.
And yes, the rest of the world definitely thinks the USA is totally crazy about the Iran hysteria, judging the people more than politicians, because they are blatantly lying (if you didn't know it, it was also totally obvious for the invasion of Iraq) for oil.
Check UN reports, JOCPA reports. Europe regular declarations against Bolton or the other obese man.
It's groupthink if you didn't already know that (if so, change your way of informing yourself).
But groupthinking is here to believe very poor news medias, apparently.
Chomsky is wrong about one thing - the world doesn't think the US is insane. The world KNOWS the US is insane. And here you are, demonstrating the reasons why.
Hey could u guys share your thoughts and advice on my progressive content? I would love meaningful feedback and ideas!!!
Who is the woman wiggling her foot? She seems bored with Chomsky.
Only stupid people think that the generalised banality that Chomsky spouts out is philosophy.
Luckily, there is no "group think" on the left. Ugh.
He said that everyone is susceptible to group think, and that there is group think across the whole media and political landscape... How did he in any way imply that this is a strictly right wing fenomona ?
He is 1 of the biggest critics of the left wing democratic establishment, the"left" corporate media (cnn, msnbc, nbc,...) and neoliberal elite class as a whole for that matter...
The segment even ended with him stating "its not just the others, it's all of us"
Chonsky's actual left, not US democrat "left".
I am well aware of the (sometimes horrible) failures of US policy. But to think that e.g. a decision is wrong just because the majority of nations is against it, is nonsense. Just take a look at the world and its countries and e.g. how they treat their citizens, which ideas they promote. "Popular" rule which follows the wishes and whims of the masses is not necessarily benevolent. The opposite can be true (as proven by the Nazis). There are good and bad decisions coming from the UN, too. Why? Because all the dictatorships, "people`s republics", and even theocracies are allowed to have a vote in it. (E.g. allowing the Saudis and Iran to have a word about women`s issues is ridiculous.)
Just to name a few "pan-human" failures that were and are quite "popular": ethnocentrism, misogyny, antisemitism, homophobia, racism (which is closely bound to "ethnocentrism"). Sometimes, it takes a few people to advocate for progress, while the mass is defending the "olden ways". Without those free thinking few, we would all still think that a witch hunt is justified or that burning people with different opinions is necessary.
Noam Chomsky, focusing completely on the wrong-doings of the US, forgets that there are many places on earth, where women are third class citizens and/or victims of habitual sexual violence, homosexuals are put to a gruesome death, "blasphemy" may kill you etc.
Hitler was a popular leader, Germans loved him. Where was the "general morality"? We cannot bank on it`s existence. Therefore, Chomsky`s dreams of a better world by more direct "democratic" rule could easily turn into a nightmare of mob rule.
"Community" is a nice sounding word; but "community" has an ugly side. To mention the Nazis again: they were promoting the "community of the German people", die "Volksgemeinschaft". The results: Humans, who were not accepted as part of that community (like the Jews) were killed.
Blah. I'm trying to be a skeptic, freethinker- and these so-called dissidents talk ineffective jargon, while lacking the courage of Gandhi, Mohammed Ali, ... Ugh. Talk is cheap and whiskey costs money!
He sounds like an immature college student who never grew up.
You sound like a nazi, so what is your point!
How so?
Yeah, because college students are somewhat naive but on the right track for the most part. They take the time to handle data and information first hand, unlike people who have no education outside of the internet and sit online arguing on videos, thinking that they understand the world. Chomsky is like the naive student who was on the right track, except he lost the naivety by completing his education. Think of a student who has spent a decade doing research in a scholarly environment and engaging in rigorous peer review, then compare that level of work with your own. It's difficult to understand how you have the nerve to condescend him.
That is why we need to lower the age for entry into all political offices... AOC 2024!!
@ One Card Short. Or raise it.