What do you think?
Rate this book
Chronicles of Dissent
Originally published as three short books, Chronicles of Dissent, Keep the Rubble in Line and Class Warfare, by independent publisher Common Courage Press in the USA, this new omnibus edition forms a vital and accessible overview of Noam Chomsky's political thought.
In sixteen extended talks with David Barsamian, Noam Chomsky ranges across world history, from Columbus to the Gulf War, returning always to the key elements of political ideas, including: the perversion of language by propaganda; the pervasiveness of American imperialist designs; the endemic complicity in this of much of the media and intelligentsia; and the "war on drugs" as a war on poor people.
Widely recognized as one of the most original and important thinkers of our age, Chomsky's trenchant analysis of current events is a breath of fresh air in a world more and more polluted by mainstream media.
In sixteen extended talks with David Barsamian, Noam Chomsky ranges across world history, from Columbus to the Gulf War, returning always to the key elements of political ideas, including: the perversion of language by propaganda; the pervasiveness of American imperialist designs; the endemic complicity in this of much of the media and intelligentsia; and the "war on drugs" as a war on poor people.
Widely recognized as one of the most original and important thinkers of our age, Chomsky's trenchant analysis of current events is a breath of fresh air in a world more and more polluted by mainstream media.
688 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 1992
64 people are currently reading
837 people want to read
About the author
Noam Chomsky
977 books17.4k followersAvram Noam Chomsky is an American professor and public intellectual known for his work in linguistics, political activism, and social criticism. Sometimes called "the father of modern linguistics", Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science. He is a laureate professor of linguistics at the University of Arizona and an institute professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Among the most cited living authors, Chomsky has written more than 150 books on topics such as linguistics, war, and politics. In addition to his work in linguistics, since the 1960s Chomsky has been an influential voice on the American left as a consistent critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, and corporate influence on political institutions and the media.
Born to Ashkenazi Jewish immigrants (his father was William Chomsky) in Philadelphia, Chomsky developed an early interest in anarchism from alternative bookstores in New York City. He studied at the University of Pennsylvania. During his postgraduate work in the Harvard Society of Fellows, Chomsky developed the theory of transformational grammar for which he earned his doctorate in 1955. That year he began teaching at MIT, and in 1957 emerged as a significant figure in linguistics with his landmark work Syntactic Structures, which played a major role in remodeling the study of language. From 1958 to 1959 Chomsky was a National Science Foundation fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study. He created or co-created the universal grammar theory, the generative grammar theory, the Chomsky hierarchy, and the minimalist program. Chomsky also played a pivotal role in the decline of linguistic behaviorism, and was particularly critical of the work of B.F. Skinner.
An outspoken opponent of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, which he saw as an act of American imperialism, in 1967 Chomsky rose to national attention for his anti-war essay "The Responsibility of Intellectuals". Becoming associated with the New Left, he was arrested multiple times for his activism and placed on President Richard M. Nixon's list of political opponents. While expanding his work in linguistics over subsequent decades, he also became involved in the linguistics wars. In collaboration with Edward S. Herman, Chomsky later articulated the propaganda model of media criticism in Manufacturing Consent, and worked to expose the Indonesian occupation of East Timor. His defense of unconditional freedom of speech, including that of Holocaust denial, generated significant controversy in the Faurisson affair of the 1980s. Chomsky's commentary on the Cambodian genocide and the Bosnian genocide also generated controversy. Since retiring from active teaching at MIT, he has continued his vocal political activism, including opposing the 2003 invasion of Iraq and supporting the Occupy movement. An anti-Zionist, Chomsky considers Israel's treatment of Palestinians to be worse than South African–style apartheid, and criticizes U.S. support for Israel.
Chomsky is widely recognized as having helped to spark the cognitive revolution in the human sciences, contributing to the development of a new cognitivistic framework for the study of language and the mind. Chomsky remains a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, U.S. involvement and Israel's role in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and mass media. Chomsky and his ideas are highly influential in the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist movements. Since 2017, he has been Agnese Helms Haury Chair in the Agnese Nelms Haury Program in Environment and Social Justice at the University of Arizona.
Born to Ashkenazi Jewish immigrants (his father was William Chomsky) in Philadelphia, Chomsky developed an early interest in anarchism from alternative bookstores in New York City. He studied at the University of Pennsylvania. During his postgraduate work in the Harvard Society of Fellows, Chomsky developed the theory of transformational grammar for which he earned his doctorate in 1955. That year he began teaching at MIT, and in 1957 emerged as a significant figure in linguistics with his landmark work Syntactic Structures, which played a major role in remodeling the study of language. From 1958 to 1959 Chomsky was a National Science Foundation fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study. He created or co-created the universal grammar theory, the generative grammar theory, the Chomsky hierarchy, and the minimalist program. Chomsky also played a pivotal role in the decline of linguistic behaviorism, and was particularly critical of the work of B.F. Skinner.
An outspoken opponent of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, which he saw as an act of American imperialism, in 1967 Chomsky rose to national attention for his anti-war essay "The Responsibility of Intellectuals". Becoming associated with the New Left, he was arrested multiple times for his activism and placed on President Richard M. Nixon's list of political opponents. While expanding his work in linguistics over subsequent decades, he also became involved in the linguistics wars. In collaboration with Edward S. Herman, Chomsky later articulated the propaganda model of media criticism in Manufacturing Consent, and worked to expose the Indonesian occupation of East Timor. His defense of unconditional freedom of speech, including that of Holocaust denial, generated significant controversy in the Faurisson affair of the 1980s. Chomsky's commentary on the Cambodian genocide and the Bosnian genocide also generated controversy. Since retiring from active teaching at MIT, he has continued his vocal political activism, including opposing the 2003 invasion of Iraq and supporting the Occupy movement. An anti-Zionist, Chomsky considers Israel's treatment of Palestinians to be worse than South African–style apartheid, and criticizes U.S. support for Israel.
Chomsky is widely recognized as having helped to spark the cognitive revolution in the human sciences, contributing to the development of a new cognitivistic framework for the study of language and the mind. Chomsky remains a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, U.S. involvement and Israel's role in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and mass media. Chomsky and his ideas are highly influential in the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist movements. Since 2017, he has been Agnese Helms Haury Chair in the Agnese Nelms Haury Program in Environment and Social Justice at the University of Arizona.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
August 15, 2025
Ik heb de Nederlandse vertaling, een ingekorte versie die ongeveer half zo dik is, gelezen.
Hoewel de gesprekken 24-32 jaar oud zijn, zijn ze vaak toch nog leerrijk. Ten eerste is het belangrijk om een historisch beeld te hebben op hoe het toen liep. Ten tweede is zijn analyse van de (Amerikaanse) staat en van staatsterreur nog altijd inzichtelijk.
Wat neem ik mee uit mijn lectuur?
1. Chomsky, zelf ook van Oost-Europese joodse afkomst, heeft het vaak over Israël en Palestina. Het is altijd goed om opgefrist te krijgen hoe in het verleden al de Palestijnen gepest werden en hoe de Verenigde Staten al decennia Israël financieel steunen, om invloed te hebben in het Midden-Oosten. Zeker na de val van de sjah in Iran is Israël erg belangrijk voor de VS geworden. Maar daarmee steunen ze impliciet ook alle illegale bezettingen en is Israël een ontwikkelingsgebied van Amerikaanse wapens. In 1979 zou de helft van de Amerikaanse buitenlandse steun naar Israël gegaan zijn. Het maakt me benieuwd hoeveel het op dit ogenblik zou zijn.
Verder gaf Chomsky me ook het inzicht (al zegt hij het niet zo letterlijk) dat we het land Israël als een laatste, maar meteen ook meest geëvolueerde Europese kolonie moeten zien. Het Europese racisme is mee verhuisd en de roep naar dekolonisering zou topprioriteit moeten zijn.
2. Een groot land als de VS heeft een vijand nodig en doet er alles aan om die te cultiveren, met hulp van de media. Het is noodzakelijk om mensen bang te maken, zodat ze het aanvaarden dat we bedrijven rijker laten worden. Het nationale belang is maar al te vaak die van het bedrijfsleven. (MAGA, ofwel: Make the American Industry Great Again, ten koste van alles).
Maar een groot land als de VS zal nooit die grote vijand zelf aanvallen, maar enkel kleine landen die te zwak zijn om zich te verzetten.
3. Als je maar twee minuten zendtijd krijgt om een opinie te delen, dan moet je mening aansluiten bij wat we al kennen/weten. Er is geen tijd voor een volledige afwijkende mening, want dan moet je het gaan uitleggen en argumenten kunnen geven en met feiten kunnen zwaaien. Daar heeft de mainstreammedia geen tijd voor, want er moet ook nog reclame gebracht worden. Omdat Chomsky te veel praat, wordt hij niet door de mainstreammedia gevraagd.
4. Een rechter zei ooit over rechtszaken: als je de feiten niet aan je kant hebt, richt je dan op de wet. Als je de wet niet aan je kant hebt, richt je dan op de feiten. Als je beide niet aan je kant hebt, maak dan je tegenstander zwart. Als er alleen maar vuilspuiterij over je wordt geschreven en gezegd, is dat teken dat men geen argumenten meer heeft voor een goed debat. Ga er niet op in, vuilspuiterij is het niet waard. (Maar ondertussen zijn we met valse feiten weer een stap verder in de manier waarop elk rationeel debat wordt onderuitgehaald om de angst maar te laten regeren.)
Meteen na het uitlezen van dit boek las ik een recensie van een boek van Maarten Boudry door Thomas Decreus. De overeenkomsten zijn frappant. Decreus zal zeker ook Chomsky gelezen hebben.
Hoewel de gesprekken 24-32 jaar oud zijn, zijn ze vaak toch nog leerrijk. Ten eerste is het belangrijk om een historisch beeld te hebben op hoe het toen liep. Ten tweede is zijn analyse van de (Amerikaanse) staat en van staatsterreur nog altijd inzichtelijk.
Wat neem ik mee uit mijn lectuur?
1. Chomsky, zelf ook van Oost-Europese joodse afkomst, heeft het vaak over Israël en Palestina. Het is altijd goed om opgefrist te krijgen hoe in het verleden al de Palestijnen gepest werden en hoe de Verenigde Staten al decennia Israël financieel steunen, om invloed te hebben in het Midden-Oosten. Zeker na de val van de sjah in Iran is Israël erg belangrijk voor de VS geworden. Maar daarmee steunen ze impliciet ook alle illegale bezettingen en is Israël een ontwikkelingsgebied van Amerikaanse wapens. In 1979 zou de helft van de Amerikaanse buitenlandse steun naar Israël gegaan zijn. Het maakt me benieuwd hoeveel het op dit ogenblik zou zijn.
Verder gaf Chomsky me ook het inzicht (al zegt hij het niet zo letterlijk) dat we het land Israël als een laatste, maar meteen ook meest geëvolueerde Europese kolonie moeten zien. Het Europese racisme is mee verhuisd en de roep naar dekolonisering zou topprioriteit moeten zijn.
2. Een groot land als de VS heeft een vijand nodig en doet er alles aan om die te cultiveren, met hulp van de media. Het is noodzakelijk om mensen bang te maken, zodat ze het aanvaarden dat we bedrijven rijker laten worden. Het nationale belang is maar al te vaak die van het bedrijfsleven. (MAGA, ofwel: Make the American Industry Great Again, ten koste van alles).
Maar een groot land als de VS zal nooit die grote vijand zelf aanvallen, maar enkel kleine landen die te zwak zijn om zich te verzetten.
3. Als je maar twee minuten zendtijd krijgt om een opinie te delen, dan moet je mening aansluiten bij wat we al kennen/weten. Er is geen tijd voor een volledige afwijkende mening, want dan moet je het gaan uitleggen en argumenten kunnen geven en met feiten kunnen zwaaien. Daar heeft de mainstreammedia geen tijd voor, want er moet ook nog reclame gebracht worden. Omdat Chomsky te veel praat, wordt hij niet door de mainstreammedia gevraagd.
4. Een rechter zei ooit over rechtszaken: als je de feiten niet aan je kant hebt, richt je dan op de wet. Als je de wet niet aan je kant hebt, richt je dan op de feiten. Als je beide niet aan je kant hebt, maak dan je tegenstander zwart. Als er alleen maar vuilspuiterij over je wordt geschreven en gezegd, is dat teken dat men geen argumenten meer heeft voor een goed debat. Ga er niet op in, vuilspuiterij is het niet waard. (Maar ondertussen zijn we met valse feiten weer een stap verder in de manier waarop elk rationeel debat wordt onderuitgehaald om de angst maar te laten regeren.)
Meteen na het uitlezen van dit boek las ik een recensie van een boek van Maarten Boudry door Thomas Decreus. De overeenkomsten zijn frappant. Decreus zal zeker ook Chomsky gelezen hebben.
March 19, 2022
It still amazes me how relevant Noam's works and interviews are even 30 years after the fact. In a series of interviews, Chomsky lays out so much information about world order, economics, trade, war, inequality and so much more. Some answers do cross over into a little bit of repetition but in a good way where answers become more expanded or help to give an updated take on the questions subject matter.
The coverage over Australia's criminal exploitation of East Timor's oil is amazing considering even the press here now fails to bring up previous reports when talking about the recent Bernard Collaery whistleblower case and the current government is trying to silence hold the case in secret.
The coverage over Australia's criminal exploitation of East Timor's oil is amazing considering even the press here now fails to bring up previous reports when talking about the recent Bernard Collaery whistleblower case and the current government is trying to silence hold the case in secret.
June 5, 2014
Top notch. This is by far my favorite of the Chomsky books I've read so far. No one has a better grasp of how power and propaganda work in modern America than Noam Chomsky. This book is more than 20 years old, but still perfectly encapsulates so much of what's happening right now. Chomsky believes, like I do, that things happen for a reason. So when he explores questions about the media or US policy on Israel, he is looking for explanations for why things happen the way they do. Then, he clearly outlines these reasons in simple language. Read this book if you want a better understanding of international power and how the world really works.
November 15, 2017
A Witness to Power’s Mendacity
by Mark Chmiel
A while back I reread David Barsamian’s first collection of interviews with Noam Chomsky, entitled Chronicles of Dissent. Actually, I first heard the material starting in the mid-1980s, listening to Barsamian’s cassette tapes of interviews as I drove around Louisville and back and forth to Cincinnati and Chicago in the often grim days of the second Reagan Administration. Since then, Chomsky’s readership has expanded considerably; even in his late eighties, the linguist still produces two or three books a year. I’ve lost count of the number of collaborative works he’s done with Barsamian.
Something I’ve found refreshing about Chomsky’s lectures and interviews is he speaks pretty much in plain English. There’s no academic jargon. And there’s no cheerleading for American Exceptionalism. Here’s one terse example: “When the guys we don’t like do it, it’s terrorism. When the guys we do like do it, it’s retaliation.” When ISIS beheads people, it’s barbarism. When Israel uses white phosphorus on people in Gaza, it’s self-defense.
The media play a key role in focusing attention in how we as US citizens and those of our allies suffer or are harmed. Here’s Chomsky commenting on an issue form the mid-80s : “There’s a big fuss and there should be, about American veterans who have suffered under Agent Orange. However, there’s a slight observation that might be made, and that is that the people of Vietnam suffered a thousand times as much, and we’re certainly not trying to help them, in fact we want to increase their suffering.” U.S. veterans finally came to be seen as “worthy” of care and consideration; what the U.S. did to Vietnam and its people is “unworthy” of U.S. compassion, much less reparations.
I remember Mev saying that people she met in the Brazilian Base Christian Communities, some of whom had very little formal education, could run circles around Harvard professors when it came to explaining how the world really works. Chomsky observed, “you find a good deal more sophistication among people who learn about the world from their experience rather than those who learn about the world from the doctrinal framework that they are exposed to and that they are expected as part of their professional obligation to propagate.”
It is a common to hear people say that education is the way out of poverty and yet, education can be, in significant measure, indoctrination. In a Humanities class I teach, I ask the students each early October how many of them have heard of Christopher Columbus. Almost all have (exceptions being international students). Then I ask how many of them know the name Bartolomé de las Casas. In the last several years, one student knew of the Spanish priest who denounced the conquerors of the “New World.” In theory, institutions of higher learning would say that promoting “critical thinking” is paramount. In practice, though, such critical thinking is going to come up against one or another kind of authority, as Chomsky explains, “Any form of authority requires justification; it’s not self justified. And the justification can rarely be given. Sometimes you can give it. I think you can give an argument that you shouldn’t let a three-year old run across the street. That’s a form of authority that’s justifiable. But there aren’t many of them, and usually the effort to give a justification fails. And when we try to face it, we find that the authority is illegitimate. And any time you find a form of authority illegitimate, you ought to challenge it. It’s something that conflicts with human rights and liberties. And that goes on forever. You overcome one thing and discover the next.”
Former Czech dissident Vaclav Havel once wrote, “Glucksman says the role of the intellectual is to warn, to predict horrors, to be a Cassandra who tell us what is going on outside the walls of the city. I share this notion…. I too think the intellectual should constantly disturb, should bear witness to the misery of the world, should be provocative by being independent, should rebel against all hidden and open pressure and manipulations, should be the chief doubter of systems, of power and its incantations, should be a witness to their mendacity. For this very reason, an intellectual cannot fit into any role that might be assigned to him, nor can he ever be made to fit into any of the histories written by the victors. An intellectual essentially doesn’t belong anywhere; he stands out as an irritant wherever he is; he does not fit into any pigeonhole completely.” This is a pretty good description of what Chomsky’s been doing for the last fifty years. I’m grateful for David Barsamian’s dedication in sharing Chomsky’s perspectives to more audiences throughout the U.S. and beyond.
by Mark Chmiel
A while back I reread David Barsamian’s first collection of interviews with Noam Chomsky, entitled Chronicles of Dissent. Actually, I first heard the material starting in the mid-1980s, listening to Barsamian’s cassette tapes of interviews as I drove around Louisville and back and forth to Cincinnati and Chicago in the often grim days of the second Reagan Administration. Since then, Chomsky’s readership has expanded considerably; even in his late eighties, the linguist still produces two or three books a year. I’ve lost count of the number of collaborative works he’s done with Barsamian.
Something I’ve found refreshing about Chomsky’s lectures and interviews is he speaks pretty much in plain English. There’s no academic jargon. And there’s no cheerleading for American Exceptionalism. Here’s one terse example: “When the guys we don’t like do it, it’s terrorism. When the guys we do like do it, it’s retaliation.” When ISIS beheads people, it’s barbarism. When Israel uses white phosphorus on people in Gaza, it’s self-defense.
The media play a key role in focusing attention in how we as US citizens and those of our allies suffer or are harmed. Here’s Chomsky commenting on an issue form the mid-80s : “There’s a big fuss and there should be, about American veterans who have suffered under Agent Orange. However, there’s a slight observation that might be made, and that is that the people of Vietnam suffered a thousand times as much, and we’re certainly not trying to help them, in fact we want to increase their suffering.” U.S. veterans finally came to be seen as “worthy” of care and consideration; what the U.S. did to Vietnam and its people is “unworthy” of U.S. compassion, much less reparations.
I remember Mev saying that people she met in the Brazilian Base Christian Communities, some of whom had very little formal education, could run circles around Harvard professors when it came to explaining how the world really works. Chomsky observed, “you find a good deal more sophistication among people who learn about the world from their experience rather than those who learn about the world from the doctrinal framework that they are exposed to and that they are expected as part of their professional obligation to propagate.”
It is a common to hear people say that education is the way out of poverty and yet, education can be, in significant measure, indoctrination. In a Humanities class I teach, I ask the students each early October how many of them have heard of Christopher Columbus. Almost all have (exceptions being international students). Then I ask how many of them know the name Bartolomé de las Casas. In the last several years, one student knew of the Spanish priest who denounced the conquerors of the “New World.” In theory, institutions of higher learning would say that promoting “critical thinking” is paramount. In practice, though, such critical thinking is going to come up against one or another kind of authority, as Chomsky explains, “Any form of authority requires justification; it’s not self justified. And the justification can rarely be given. Sometimes you can give it. I think you can give an argument that you shouldn’t let a three-year old run across the street. That’s a form of authority that’s justifiable. But there aren’t many of them, and usually the effort to give a justification fails. And when we try to face it, we find that the authority is illegitimate. And any time you find a form of authority illegitimate, you ought to challenge it. It’s something that conflicts with human rights and liberties. And that goes on forever. You overcome one thing and discover the next.”
Former Czech dissident Vaclav Havel once wrote, “Glucksman says the role of the intellectual is to warn, to predict horrors, to be a Cassandra who tell us what is going on outside the walls of the city. I share this notion…. I too think the intellectual should constantly disturb, should bear witness to the misery of the world, should be provocative by being independent, should rebel against all hidden and open pressure and manipulations, should be the chief doubter of systems, of power and its incantations, should be a witness to their mendacity. For this very reason, an intellectual cannot fit into any role that might be assigned to him, nor can he ever be made to fit into any of the histories written by the victors. An intellectual essentially doesn’t belong anywhere; he stands out as an irritant wherever he is; he does not fit into any pigeonhole completely.” This is a pretty good description of what Chomsky’s been doing for the last fifty years. I’m grateful for David Barsamian’s dedication in sharing Chomsky’s perspectives to more audiences throughout the U.S. and beyond.
September 28, 2025
‘The role of the public, ‘the ignorant and meddlesome outsiders’… is to be ‘spectators’ and not ‘participants’”
‘Free markets for the poor and state socialism for the rich’
“What the public wants is called ‘politically unrealistic’, meaning… that the major centres of power and privilege are opposed to it”
An incredibly illuminating and humbling read. My first introduction to Noam Chomsky.
Through interviews with David Barsamian, Noam Chomsky provides a clear and succinct overview on his thoughts on topics such as democracy, race, propaganda, Israel/Palestine and capitalism. His aim is to identify and expose the relentless propaganda and indoctrination each of us receive by society. And to empower the general public , the ‘rabble’ to also question what they watch on the news, read in newspapers and see on social media, and hopefully use this to organise and engage politically.
‘Free markets for the poor and state socialism for the rich’
“What the public wants is called ‘politically unrealistic’, meaning… that the major centres of power and privilege are opposed to it”
An incredibly illuminating and humbling read. My first introduction to Noam Chomsky.
Through interviews with David Barsamian, Noam Chomsky provides a clear and succinct overview on his thoughts on topics such as democracy, race, propaganda, Israel/Palestine and capitalism. His aim is to identify and expose the relentless propaganda and indoctrination each of us receive by society. And to empower the general public , the ‘rabble’ to also question what they watch on the news, read in newspapers and see on social media, and hopefully use this to organise and engage politically.
January 14, 2012
This is the very first book I have read from Professor Chomsky. A mind more Powerful than anything I have seen, heard or read. I was humbled yet awakened softly to the happenings in the world around me.
He opened my eyes into understanding that things were not only NOT as they seemed, but the Opposite to what they were. I grew up, politically, spiritually and socially after reading what this great wonderful human being had stiched together.
I am describing more it seems of character but Academics isn't just about words and thoughts and facts, there is the human side that is drilled out of us. Professor Chomsky HAS that human side and the thurst for not just truths, but Honesty in How Those Truths tie together to tell us what is going on in the world, in a nonbias, Real, Human, Common sense and Same understanding.
It was once I finished this book, I switched off my TV and began to decompress from the processed media's like CNN, FOX, BBC, CBC, and other mainstream media and I then basically only depeneded on his interputation of the Facts around me. I also listened to other enlightened REAL NEWS PEOPLE as well, but never again would I allow my self to be subjected to main media I listed above. Main Medis IS DANGERIOUS to not only our contries, but our species.
I couldn't understand why many of the profesional Academic Class were against his reading, sometimes even angry...I know why, the truth threatens this Class of people who feel above the rest, where War is about Honor and Justice is about Hanging, these are the sickest people on the face of the earth...Sorry getting carried away. You Eleite Academics that disrespect Professor Chomsky are Cowards who speak of Honor but have none...THIS MAN has more Honor than all of you self ritchious cowards combined!
This man is going to go down in history forever and I am honored that he is alive in my time.
READ CHOMSKY!!! Everything else is just a JOKE! Hear that mainstream media, man you guys are a Worse than my spelling.
He opened my eyes into understanding that things were not only NOT as they seemed, but the Opposite to what they were. I grew up, politically, spiritually and socially after reading what this great wonderful human being had stiched together.
I am describing more it seems of character but Academics isn't just about words and thoughts and facts, there is the human side that is drilled out of us. Professor Chomsky HAS that human side and the thurst for not just truths, but Honesty in How Those Truths tie together to tell us what is going on in the world, in a nonbias, Real, Human, Common sense and Same understanding.
It was once I finished this book, I switched off my TV and began to decompress from the processed media's like CNN, FOX, BBC, CBC, and other mainstream media and I then basically only depeneded on his interputation of the Facts around me. I also listened to other enlightened REAL NEWS PEOPLE as well, but never again would I allow my self to be subjected to main media I listed above. Main Medis IS DANGERIOUS to not only our contries, but our species.
I couldn't understand why many of the profesional Academic Class were against his reading, sometimes even angry...I know why, the truth threatens this Class of people who feel above the rest, where War is about Honor and Justice is about Hanging, these are the sickest people on the face of the earth...Sorry getting carried away. You Eleite Academics that disrespect Professor Chomsky are Cowards who speak of Honor but have none...THIS MAN has more Honor than all of you self ritchious cowards combined!
This man is going to go down in history forever and I am honored that he is alive in my time.
READ CHOMSKY!!! Everything else is just a JOKE! Hear that mainstream media, man you guys are a Worse than my spelling.
June 24, 2017
ترجمة تعسة لكتاب قديم . لا جديد هذه المرة .. تسليط الضؤ على ممارسات الولايات المتحدة و اسرائيل القمعية و الاستبدادية وتدخلهم في الشؤون الداخلية وفق مصالحهم تحت مسميات مهذبه تتبع الى حد ما (قاموس ارويل) -
طبعا في بلادنا حيث لا وزن على الإطلاق للشعب .. فهم حتى لا يكترثون للغة. ( سياسة كس ام اي حد )
طبعا في بلادنا حيث لا وزن على الإطلاق للشعب .. فهم حتى لا يكترثون للغة. ( سياسة كس ام اي حد )
August 18, 2019
Well this one is for sure the winner. It took me quite some time to finish, because every time I see a topic or a case being discussed and I'm not fully aware of it. I will binge watch videos or binge read article to educate myself about it, so I can understand their point of view. A really fascinating read and informative. I enjoyed every minute of reading it
October 29, 2013
هل تملكون جرأته، هل تستطيعون الوقوف في وجه التيار العام، وحتى الجماعة الخاصة التي تنتمون إليها هل تجرؤون على تسفيه كل ما تعمل من أجله؟
هذا هو الانشقاق، هذه هي قدرة الفرد الباحث عن الصواب المالك للمعرفة على مواجهة عالمه وخوض معركته ضده ثم الخروج منتصراً
من منا يستطيع ذلك؟
هذا هو الانشقاق، هذه هي قدرة الفرد الباحث عن الصواب المالك للمعرفة على مواجهة عالمه وخوض معركته ضده ثم الخروج منتصراً
من منا يستطيع ذلك؟
March 7, 2022
مقالة نقدية ادت الى دفع صاحب النيويورك تايمز بان هناك خطا في التعليمات والاوامر التي كان يصدرها لموظفيه في الصحيفة فيما يتعلق بحقيقة الاخبار .
مقابلات ديفيد بارساميان مع نعوم تشومسكي
كتاب تشتريه وتحتفظ به
ولا تنس ان تقرا المقدمة التي كتبها ألكسندر كوكبورن
مقابلات ديفيد بارساميان مع نعوم تشومسكي
كتاب تشتريه وتحتفظ به
ولا تنس ان تقرا المقدمة التي كتبها ألكسندر كوكبورن
November 26, 2009
Chomsky know;edgable like no other man match and always tells the truth about the control of mind and powers of our world.
November 20, 2011
I hate reading, I mean I HATE READING, but this wasn't reading this was medicine for the soul as well as the head. Professor Chomsky is my News. Just historic intelictualism with soul.
February 23, 2016
الترجمة الحرفية السيئة جعلتني أعاني الأمرين وأنا اقرأ هذا الكتاب!
October 29, 2023
Somewhat dated but the ever rambling on Chomsky makes some valid points. Chomsky is allowed to speak freely without being challenged; the volume would’ve benefitted from a more critical interlocutor.
May 29, 2025
Took me a while, but that's ok! This book and I had a 5-month-long relationship, and that's a lifetime in my world, babes. Let me preface this by saying that I purchased a physical copy of this book at HPB for $3, which was $29.99 originally, and I literally ran to the checkout counter with this in my hand.
Everything that he talks about in this book -- every single topic -- can be said in today's climate because history rhymes. History may not repeat itself necessarily, but it will mimic the sound it made decades earlier to create an echo today. I made it a habit to write down the date on which I was reading a specific paragraph, any time he mentioned something that was happening in the 90s or earlier (which was when the interviews were being conducted with David Barsamian), I wrote the date to document that 1. What he was saying is happening in their time still applies to today's climate, and 2. What he was saying would happen in the future is currently happening right now.
This book really isn't great for anyone's mental space. I say this not to sway your decision to read this book (because you should), but my blood pressure was probably not the best when digesting what Chomsky said. Simply due to the fact that he says everything very clearly, and you don't want to accept that you live in a messed-up world where everything he mentioned shouldn't have happened. There is no justification for why the problems he talks about should exist. It was so depressing reading this actually, because I live in a country that has been the mastermind in creating most of the troubles in the world (if not all). I am so deeply ashamed of this country. And the stuff he talks about isn't even in full detail, but why should he when he can get the point across in a few words? I feel like if I were to write every one of my thoughts while reading this, I would get arrested, or maybe I would get a PhD. I'm just kidding about the latter. But seriously, what the fuck. The gist of this is that the BS that has been fed to you doesn't nourish you, but nourishes those who feed you. You are being fed lies--the entity that is feeding you and saying "Here comes the plane" is the devil in a suit. Or God. There's not really an in-between anymore.
I'm really glad to be finished with this book. It truly is my baby. This baby helped me learn a lot. Propaganda will be the death of this world, and I will leave you with this quote I underlined from this book: "The kind of hostility that you have in this country is interesting. There's hostility toward the media, toward Congress, toward just about every institution except one, namely the corporate system. No hostility toward that. That tells you exactly who runs the country. It's perfectly OK to criticize the media, congressmen, the courts, and the cops. You can say the president's a clown. You can do anything except criticize the actual center of power. You're not even allowed to know that it exists. It's invisible." And a couple of paragraphs down when Chomsky is talking about personality and politics: "If Massachusetts has a serious economic crisis, who do people hate? Take a look at this morning's Boston Globe. It talks about the popularity of the governor after his cutback of services. Why? Because he's attacking the people who everyone hates the most, namely state employees and the poor. That's who everybody hates. Are they the cause of economic problems? Or is there some other factor involved in what happens in the New England economy besides the poor and state employees? Of course, people hate the media, too. You're allowed to hate them. In fact, you're allowed to hate everyone except the people who don't exist, namely the ones who, in fact, run the show, the ones who have concentrated decision-making power, who make investment decisions, who set the framework within which the government operates, who own the media, control them, and set the conditions under which they work. Part of the propaganda system promotes the idea that corporations are comprised of people just like us."
Ignorance really is bliss. But also don't be ignorant. Wake up and take care.
Everything that he talks about in this book -- every single topic -- can be said in today's climate because history rhymes. History may not repeat itself necessarily, but it will mimic the sound it made decades earlier to create an echo today. I made it a habit to write down the date on which I was reading a specific paragraph, any time he mentioned something that was happening in the 90s or earlier (which was when the interviews were being conducted with David Barsamian), I wrote the date to document that 1. What he was saying is happening in their time still applies to today's climate, and 2. What he was saying would happen in the future is currently happening right now.
This book really isn't great for anyone's mental space. I say this not to sway your decision to read this book (because you should), but my blood pressure was probably not the best when digesting what Chomsky said. Simply due to the fact that he says everything very clearly, and you don't want to accept that you live in a messed-up world where everything he mentioned shouldn't have happened. There is no justification for why the problems he talks about should exist. It was so depressing reading this actually, because I live in a country that has been the mastermind in creating most of the troubles in the world (if not all). I am so deeply ashamed of this country. And the stuff he talks about isn't even in full detail, but why should he when he can get the point across in a few words? I feel like if I were to write every one of my thoughts while reading this, I would get arrested, or maybe I would get a PhD. I'm just kidding about the latter. But seriously, what the fuck. The gist of this is that the BS that has been fed to you doesn't nourish you, but nourishes those who feed you. You are being fed lies--the entity that is feeding you and saying "Here comes the plane" is the devil in a suit. Or God. There's not really an in-between anymore.
I'm really glad to be finished with this book. It truly is my baby. This baby helped me learn a lot. Propaganda will be the death of this world, and I will leave you with this quote I underlined from this book: "The kind of hostility that you have in this country is interesting. There's hostility toward the media, toward Congress, toward just about every institution except one, namely the corporate system. No hostility toward that. That tells you exactly who runs the country. It's perfectly OK to criticize the media, congressmen, the courts, and the cops. You can say the president's a clown. You can do anything except criticize the actual center of power. You're not even allowed to know that it exists. It's invisible." And a couple of paragraphs down when Chomsky is talking about personality and politics: "If Massachusetts has a serious economic crisis, who do people hate? Take a look at this morning's Boston Globe. It talks about the popularity of the governor after his cutback of services. Why? Because he's attacking the people who everyone hates the most, namely state employees and the poor. That's who everybody hates. Are they the cause of economic problems? Or is there some other factor involved in what happens in the New England economy besides the poor and state employees? Of course, people hate the media, too. You're allowed to hate them. In fact, you're allowed to hate everyone except the people who don't exist, namely the ones who, in fact, run the show, the ones who have concentrated decision-making power, who make investment decisions, who set the framework within which the government operates, who own the media, control them, and set the conditions under which they work. Part of the propaganda system promotes the idea that corporations are comprised of people just like us."
Ignorance really is bliss. But also don't be ignorant. Wake up and take care.
May 4, 2024
Since it's interviews, there's a lot of redundancy, and lot of discussing current events, some of which are superseded later in the book. Of course, much of the Middle East discussion feels contemporary, because the same problems are perpetually at play. Chomsky is the emblematic American leftist and it's refreshing to read his stances on violence, the economy, and media. Some notable conclusions: corporations are fascist entities (and sites of democratic struggle!), Israel is in a way forced to be a hostile militarized state largely controlled by Pentagon interests, the NYT is conservative, American media is less balanced than other places (like Israel), socialism for the rich and rugged free enterprise capitalism for the poor, US industries are largely subsidized. But Chomsky's sort of scientific positivism lacks all system or abstraction, he rarely explains anything just accretes details, his crude understanding of ideology doesn't account for why spreading truths doesn't always lead to progress (as opposed to Zizek, say, who understands ideology is less about belief and facts and more about what people actually do). It's no wonder he struggles to say what we should do ("organize").
April 11, 2025
Revelatory about Chomsky's commitment to expose authoritarianism, his early development, his methods, and so on. I think he is too paranoid but he might be right about many of these 1984-like government actions. The way you view things as an activist and intellectual is different compared to a more comprehensive view of a policymaker and government official, which means that judging from the former's standard then this is a great book, but judging from the latter, I find it wanting. You definitely don't want a guy like Chomsky to run a PR campaign or even worse, foreign policy. He only knows how to criticize, just like a consultant. It also does get repetitive as you read many of his books.
July 23, 2025
He vuelto a leer este libro con tanta o más admiración que la primera vez. Este libro trae implícita una forma alternativa de interpretar la sociedad norteamericana, que pone en evidencia los engaños de los poderosos. Yo trato de aprehenderla y aplicarla en otras sociedades. El formato de libro-entrevista hace que la lectura sea muy amigable. Es el mejor libro de entrevistas a Chomsky. En posteriores libros, supongo que por decisión de los editores, las respuestas son más cortas. Aquí las respuestas son extensas y se siente mejor la fuerza arrolladora de los argumentos del autor. Ojalá se difundiera más este libro.
December 10, 2025
I will need to revisit this and listen again. As interesting, educational and relevant a read now as when the interviews were conducted 40 years ago.
Biggest lesson - client states. Wow - opened eyes to what UK and USA need to sanction before the sale of their weapons to other countries get used.
Biggest lesson - client states. Wow - opened eyes to what UK and USA need to sanction before the sale of their weapons to other countries get used.
August 30, 2022
Wrong on Eastern Europe and Russian -
Want to read
July 20, 2023P85.C47 C46 2022 Memorial Library
April 29, 2024
Clear, concise but he really does have some better pieces out there 😱
May 3, 2012
It was interesting to read an early Chomsky. These interviews are from late 80's, early 90's. I think that Chomsky has gotten more sarcastic in his writing since this book. Most interesting thing I took away from this book is that the analysis he does, anyone can do, he mentioned that a few times. Thanks Sherri for the lend.
July 16, 2012
The great truth-teller.
August 8, 2022
Pretty good at noticing and discussing false assumptions about our modern political system. I always enjoy some Chomsky in the morning.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews