Chomsky on Trump

[Beef Oven!]

(a) Thanks, I will. If you don't think it's significant that such a person has just assumed the position he has that's up to you. (b) But not so staggering that you actually mentioned it before people started posting about Trump! The mistake you make here is to imagine that what people post on this forum represents the whole or even a significant part of their opinions on issues such as this. You might just as well ask: why is everyone here posting about insignificant things like classical music when there's so much injustice in the world? Er, because that's what this forum is principally for. Nobody spends their whole life on it.

No, you are wrong in your assertion, I don’t imagine that what people post on here represents the whole or a significant part of any issue under discussion.

On the contrary, the reason why I make the accusation of ambivalence and, let’s say disingenuousness in this case, is precisely because people do know so much more about this subject and they choose to ignore it. The omission being the most significant part of it.

Your twice reference to, and defence of post #140 (which for me is not the main issue), shows the mistake you are making in your thinking. Mr GG tells us repeatedly, that he finds it difficult not to be extremely rude about someone who thinks that sexual assault is somehow acceptable; to those people who seek to normalise this; to those people who seem to think we have to display respect for people who think that it's fine to commit sexual assaults on women because they are “powerful” etc.

Well no. It’s not true, is it? He has maintained perfect decorum and total silence on the most evil examples of misogyny that have and are happening on a daily basis - his lips have been sealed on this matter for the last five and a bit years that he’s been on the forum.

What it really shows is that MrGG doesn’t like Trump, nothing wrong with that, and can’t express himself without being extremely rude. I’m not sure I like Trump either, by the way.

[jean]

No, you are wrong in your assertion, I don’t imagine that what people post on here represents the whole or a significant part of any issue under discussion.

On the contrary, the reason why I make the accusation of ambivalence and, let’s say disingenuousness in this case, is precisely because people do know so much more about this subject and they choose to ignore it.

You are making the assumption that not mentioning something when the issue is not under discussion is the same as ignoring it.

[Mr GG] has maintained perfect decorum and total silence on the most evil examples of misogyny that have and are happening on a daily basis - his lips have been sealed on this matter for the last five and a bit years that he’s been on the forum.

So have everyone else's. These matters have not been raised in conjunction with any discussion related to the output of Radio 3.

This thread was always clinging on here by the skin of its teeth, but began as an exploration of Ideas & Theory, only afterwards edging dangerously near to being a political discussion.

[teamsaint]

I don't like trump, and I don't like lies.

But something that always worries me about the media is the distractions. While the media is focusing on, and the Liberal left is deploring, trump and his personal and political failings, the financial and military establishment has the focus on it removed.
And, as others have said, the financial elites have had ever more favourable conditions to build their wealth at the expense of the rest of us , under governments of all types in America, Britain, and in Europe.

[Beef Oven!]

You are making the assumption that not mentioning something when the issue is not under discussion is the same as ignoring it.

You’ve totally missed my point.

So have everyone else's. These matters have not been raised in conjunction with any discussion related to the output of Radio 3.

I gave the context.

[Beef Oven!]

The way the current events are related to each other - and to many other areas of life is sobering.

How do you mean?

(The rest of your post was very interesting, but I haven’t any comment to make!)

[jean]

You’ve totally missed my point.

You've hidden it very well indeed, then.

I gave the context.

Which was?

[jean]

But something that always worries me about the media is the distractions. While the media is focusing on, and the Liberal left is deploring, trump and his personal and political failings, the financial and military establishment has the focus on it removed.
And, as others have said, the financial elites have had ever more favourable conditions to build their wealth at the expense of the rest of us , under governments of all types in America, Britain, and in Europe.

But was the focus ever on the financial and military establishment in the first place?

It's not Trump who has displaced a discussion that was never there in the first place.

If it had been, we might have had a better alternative than Trump.

.

[teamsaint]

But was the focus ever on the financial and military establishment in the first place?

If it had been, we might have had a better alternative than Trump. But that discussion never took place.

But that is my point. That is the discussion that ought to take place, ( and I'm not saying that trump's failings should just be ignored).

The more we buy into the media focus on him and his personality , the further we get from the discussion that I think you and I would both like to see, which of course does involve his relationship with those power groups. And large parts of the media play along with this, for whatever reason.

[Beef Oven!]

But that is my point. That is the discussion that ought to take place, ( and I'm not saying that trump's failings should just be ignored).

The more we buy into the media focus on him and his personality , the further we get from the discussion that I think you and I would both like to see, which of course does involve his relationship with those power groups. And large parts of the media play along with this, for whatever reason.

Well said. All the jumping up and down to the mainstream mass media drum beat, distracts from the real issues.

[french frank]

But that is my point. That is the discussion that ought to take place, ( and I'm not saying that trump's failings should just be ignored).

The more we buy into the media focus on him and his personality , the further we get from the discussion that I think you and I would both like to see, which of course does involve his relationship with those power groups. And large parts of the media play along with this, for whatever reason.

1. It isn't an either/or

2. Some may feel the threat represented by, for example, the election of Trump (a wider issue than Trump's degenerate character) is a more immediate threat. Hang on, before we tackle that we have to overthrow capitalism and establish world peace.

[Beef Oven!]

1. It isn't an either/or

2. Some may feel the threat represented by, for example, the election of Trump (a wider issue than Trump's degenerate character) is a more immediate threat. Hang on, before we tackle that we have to overthrow capitalism and establish world peace.

But it’s the media that tells us about Trump’s 'degenerate' character and was unable or unwilling to tell us about Bill Clinton’s (pretty much agreeing with you about what you said earlier about Trump v Bill Clinton).

[french frank]

The way the current events are related to each other - and to many other areas of life is sobering.

How do you mean?

I mean, in this instance, the way, in this person's mind, the decline of Radio 3 was linked to 'the Liberal, Progressive, Marxist, Socialist, Trotskyist tendency - call it what you like'; and that was linked to changes in society (especially linked to equality - which he seemed to disapprove of); and that was linked to the rise in and electoral 'success' of right-wing parties throughout Europe (which he approved of); and that is linked to the election of a politician like Donald Trump: forget his personality, just concentrate on his stated policies.

But it also illustrates the key, delusional aspect of 'post-truth'. Not the telling of lies where public affairs demand truth, but the willingness of people to believe in a distorted vision. That a group like FoR3 is fighting the same political battle against progressives as he is: that the Remain campaign was a 'torrent of lies and scare-stories' (and the Leave campaign?). The ability of millions of people to brush facts aside if they conflict with their vision of what is right. That is what I meant was 'sobering'.

[teamsaint]

1. It isn't an either/or

2. Some may feel the threat represented by, for example, the election of Trump (a wider issue than Trump's degenerate character) is a more immediate threat. Hang on, before we tackle that we have to overthrow capitalism and establish world peace.

1. You'd be forgiven for thinking it was,looking at the headlines.

2. Its a question of the most important underlying issues. One person's "immediate threat" is another persons distraction from another issue.

But it isn't, as you said, an either /or.

[french frank]

But it isn't, as you said, an either /or.

And here on this thread, we have a discussion which has wide implications. It's not focused on the Referendum, or Brexit, or the Last General Election. So here, if people have ideas which go beyond 'Trump is nasty', let's discuss them.

If people have ideas beyond capitalism is the root of all evil; it's immoral to manufacture and sell arms to illiberal regimes like Saudi Arabia - again, let's discuss them.

If the issue is the media and what it chooses to publish and not publish, highlight or downplay: comments, please: your own or those of professional commentators.

[Beef Oven!]

But it also illustrates the key, delusional aspect of 'post-truth'. Not the telling of lies where public affairs demand truth, but the willingness of people to believe in a distorted vision. That a group like FoR3 is fighting the same political battle against progressives as he is: that the Remain campaign was a 'torrent of lies and scare-stories' (and the Leave campaign?). The ability of millions of people to brush facts aside if they conflict with their vision of what is right. That is what I meant was 'sobering'.

Millions of certain people, or all people?