Talk:Chomsky and anti-semitism

I've been following this debate for some time, and actually found it quite amusing. I make no claim whatsoever to knowing much about Chomsky's credentials as either a linguist or political thinker, however, the way this debate has been going, I doubt whether that is especially relevant, so I may as well get my feet wet too. It seems to me that there are two major reasons for claiming Chomsky is anti-Semitic: his outspoken opposition to the State of Israel, and his supposed support for Holocaust deniers.

No, Chomsky is considered an anti-Semite by many people because he has spent his life hurling hatred at Zionists and helping neo-Nazis justify the legitimacy of Holocaust denial.

Similarly, there seem to be two major reasons for claiming Chomsky is not anti-Semitic: his defense of his position vis à vis the rights of Holocaust deniers to free speech, and the fact that he is himself a Jew and identifies as such.

Helping neo-Nazi authors spread hatespeech makes him not an anti-Semite? I think you made a typo, or left out a phrase. [[RK]]

Interestingly enough, his status as a linguist, an academic, and a scholar is entirely irrelevant to the debate, though it is sometimes introduced in couched terms to the larger discussion about Israeli and American policies, etc. It is not uncommon to hear something to the effect that "Noted scholar Noam Chomsky says so and so about so and so," when that particular topic has absolutely nothing to do with his professional field of inquiry. I may or may not agree with Chomsky's stance on the Khmer Rouge, but the fact that he is a professor at MIT is about as relevant to the argument as saying that "Charlton Heston supports the NRA and he is a famous actor." Yes, Chomsky has a political agenda, and that is undeniably his right, but it is his political agenda, rather than his academic background, that underlies his statements. I question how many people who freely flaunt Chomsky's name in their arguments would agree with the totality of the anarcho-syndicalist worldview from which it stems (or could even define anarcho-syndicalism, for that matter).

I agree. One thing has nothing to do with the other. I don't understand why others confuse these two issues. [[RK]]

You have got to be kidding. Chomsky is a political scientist first and foremost. Does the fact that he's an academic and scholar matter? You bet your ass it does! When people say "Chomsky, a linguist at MIT", they're just giving evidence that he is a scholar. It would be a different matter if Chomsky didn't use scholarship in his politics, but he does. And anyone who tries to deny, undermine or devalue that fact either knows nothing about his work as a political scientist (as the first author freely acknowledges) or hates Chomsky (as RK does). -- ark

So, is Noam Chomsky anti-Semitic? Let's look at the claims. It could not be because of his outspoken criticism of the State of Israel because there are many Jews (including many who identify as Zionist), who share his criticism. In Israel itself, a leading intellectual such as the late Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz coined the term Judeo-Nazis to describe what he thought were Israeli excesses in the West Bank.

I agree. But no one is claiming that it is anti-Semitic to criticise the State of Israel. See the entry on Anti-Semitism for more information on this point. [[RK]]

Now you're kidding. That entry gives the impression that the American Jewish Congress, and the American Jewish community in general, can't be anti-semitic. When it's pretty clear they are. After all, isn't it anti-Semitism to advocate policies for Israel which lead it to be at war with all of its neighbours and are directly responsible for innumerable casualties throughout Israeli society?

Practically the entire American Jewish community are supporters of (and in a sense, are) Judeo-Nazis. This is of course due to the indoctrination of American Jewish children. Things like "the Palestinians aren't a people", "the West Bank was empty before Jews settled there" and many other things. The essential symmetry between Arab hatred of Jews and Jewish hatred of Arabs is never mentioned, making it a very unbalanced entry. -- ark

As a result, Leibowitz became a darling of the Left, though many of his "supporters" failed to realize where his ideology originated. In fact, Leibovitz was an Orthodox Jew and a scholar of Maimonides, who based his political perspective on a much wider worldview of Jewish law (halacha) in the modern world. He could often be abrasive and was known for his sharp tongue (sounds familiar?), and he was even condemned for treason by far-right circles, but never for being anti-Semitic. As far as defending Holocaust-deniers, this is no proof of anti-Semitism either. Chomsky himself explains that if someone did not know the history of twentieth century Europe and denied that the Holocaust happened because he did not believe that people could possibly be so inhumane, he would not be anti-Semitic, i.e., Holocaust-denial is not anti-Semitic per se.

But that is not why he considered anti-Semitic. You are rebutting arguments that no one is making. If that was all Chomsky ever did, no one would be mad. I certainly don't have a problem with that. Its the other things Chomsky did that caused many Jews to consider him an anti-Semite: For instance, Chomsky wrote that neo-Nazi Holocaust denial is not anti-Semitic. That is nonsense. Holocaust denial is one of the most insidious anti-Semitic techniques that Jew-haters in Europe and the Arab world today use to attack the Jewish people. [[[user:RK|RK]]]

Yeah, yeah. That old refrain again. And you fail to perceive the other guy's point. Chomsky is an academic prone to using words very exactly. In this case, he probably used words in a way only an ivory tower academic would have. This doesn't make him anti-Semitic. An additional argument is that if Chomsky actually lived in Israel, no one would dare call him anti-Semitic yet nothing would have changed. -- ark

Furthermore, Chomsky is certainly in the unfortunate position of being latched onto by various historical revisionists (virtually all of whom are also anti-Semitic), who misquote him, misunderstand his position, and would certainly be opposed to him if they knew the full extent of his ideology.

That is incorrect. Most do not misquote him; they often quote him accurately and fairly. [[RK]]

You must spend a lot of time reading what neo-nazis say. Why is that? -- ark

The fact that he defends their right to free speech makes him no more anti-Semitic than the Jewish lawyers from the ACLU, who defended the rights of Nazis to march in Skokie in the late 1970s. "I may hate what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Sigh...that is a separate issue.

Finally, can a Jew be anti-Semitic? Certainly. Back to Skokie, Frank Collins, the Nazi leader, was the son of two former Jewish inmates of Dachau. The question is, what makes someone anti-Semitic? It is not being opposed to Israeli policy, nor is it being pro-freedom of speech for people whose views are particularly abhorrent to Jews. Chomsky goes so far as to ask whether questioning the historicity of the Holocaust (something he does not do) would make someone anti-Semitic. Simply raising this question, however, does not qualify him as anti-Semitic either.

Finally, Chomsky may not be a pleasant man and his views may be far out of the mainstream. He is a linguist best known to the general public for his views on America, the Vietnam War, and Israel. He is often misquoted, including by many who claim to side with him, largely because his views are so unconventional and complex that they pick up sound bytes without hearing their context. Sorry, RK, but as an active Jew and Zionist, I have far more problems with the Christian right than with Chomsky. I do not see the benefit of this article and discussion to Wikipedia and vote that they be deleted. Danny

You don't see the use of an entry, so you want it deleted? Wikipedia doesn't work that way. There are many articles I personally find superfluous or useless, but I am not attempting to delete them. And your views on the Christian right-wing may or may not be valid, but they would fit in better under a separate topic. [[RK]]

I think the entry should remain if only to clear Chomsky's name. There are too many people who think Chomsky is anti-semitic based on rumours and nonsense. Perhaps this will help them. Perhaps they are idiots. Who can say? -- ark

Chomsky's handling of his book intro reminds me of Groucho Marx saying, "Quote me as saying I was misquoted." Except that Groucho was nutty as a fruitcake, while Chomsky's just a nut case. Ed Poor, Friday, May 24, 2002

Dan, it seems there is some grounds for the charges of anti-semitism. Nonetheless, let's be sure to adhere to NPOV in reporting those charges. Not "this evidence proves X" but rather, "A cites B as evidence of X". I'll look at the article again tomorrow. Thanks for you help. (You, too, 24...) Ed Poor, Wednesday, May 29, 2002

In a later debate with philosophy professor Robert Nozick, Chomsky denied that he ever authorized the essay in Faurisson's book, and claimed that he had never had any interest in anti-semitic Holocaust revisionism. Nozick then claimed to recall an earlier conversation with Chomsky on this topic well before Chomsky gave accolades to Faurisson's book; in response Chomsky insulted and berated him, and then physically shoved him in front of witnesses.

After moderately extensive Google-searching, I could find no discussion of this debate. If anybody knows more about this particular debate and where this summary of it came from, could you please cite the source?

It is from a very recent article by Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz, which has been reprinted in full on a number of Usenet newsgroups. [[RK]]