Forum Post: Noam Chomsky's call to the World about the Taksim Gezi Park Resistance
Posted 10 years ago on June 9, 2013, 2:21 p.m. EST by struggleforfreedom80
(6584)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Public Forum
2 comments 2 weeks ago by gsw
1 comments 4 months ago by factsrfun
5 comments 1 year ago by agkaiser
6 comments 1 year ago by grapes
15 comments 1 year ago by gsw
12 comments 1 year ago by BrentWeirick81
30 comments 1 year ago by ChicagoCitizen
48 comments 2 years ago by factsrfun
16 comments 2 years ago by factsrfun
2 comments 2 years ago by ChicagoCitizen
2 comments 2 years ago by ChicagoCitizen
8 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
7 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by grapes
6 comments 2 years ago by haightashbury98
51 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
5 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
14 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
7 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
1 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
6 comments 3 years ago by agkaiser
thanks for the report
All he is calling for is Solidarity, Violence and groupthink. Instead of encouraging those in Istanbul to think and act for themselves, he wants them to act in accordance with his beliefs about how the world should be run.
Self-determination is a vital part of freedom.
Listen to Noam the Communist second and yourself First.
Take a good look at which side started using violence first.
Does it matter?
Anyone and everyone who is violent is equally bad.
a violent socialist is just as bad as a violent capitalist.
Yes, it does. Carrying out justice often involves acts of violence and justice is the foundation of ALL good governance which is conducive to good living for people. Always remember to carry the sword when carrying out justice.
From the earliest code to the latest tweak, there were often acts of violence stipulated. To people who have administered justice, they understand that there are gradations of violence. It is not black and white. It IS many many shades of gray. That is why judicial judgment and experience is important in carrying out justice.
Killing a person in different ways for example can alternately be condoned, sanctioned, or condemned. Mutilating a corpse can carry penalties although the person is already dead. There is the concept of the sanctity of the dead persons.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Violence doesn't suddenly become good or right just because it benefits you or your state.
It is good that you see the absurdity of that original ancient code so yes, we have come up with better processes in more recent times. Your second statement is also correct but unfortunately we as human beings have not inherited from our ancestors the bonobos' sexual exploits for resolving conflicts so we are still in the "Might is right" stage (although we may only be choosing a different option from the bonobos because bonobos do sex instead of aggression and we may do aggression instead of sex after expressing our anger with sexual expressions).
Still, just because humans haven't evolved as far as bonobos doesn't male violence morally justified or effective.
The death penalty is still practiced today, while ahisma has been practiced for thousands of years.
Yes, the death penalty is still practiced today. If you look at our relatives, the primates and monkeys, and study their behaviors and lifestyles, you will discover that there are still many aggressive baboons, gang-killing chimpanzees, chest-thumping gorillas, and red-assed monkeys in homo asapiens. There seems to be a baboon dominance fight coming soon in the Middle East.
There are very few orangutans or bonobos in homo sapiens. Perhaps they are just ancient relics of ahisma.
Humans are by far the most violent of the Great Apes. We are the only ones who have invented and have used Nukes against eachother.
call me when a chimpanzee decides to nuke his/her neighboring group of chimps. okay?
It is not quite true that we are by far the most violent. It is simply that we are technologically more capable and if the chimpanzees had nuclear weapons, they would probably have used them already.
Human beings are far more variant and versatile than other primates or monkeys in what we are capable of. We do all kinds of things that were seen in the primates and monkeys and in addition many more things, from the most saintly to the most barbaric and downright depraved things.
Monkeys always are primates, but not always apes. Apes are always monkeys and always primates. Humans are Old World Monkeys, Apes, Great Apes and of course primates.
Kanzi the Bonobo is capable of more creative thought than most humans. and probally also knows more english than americans.
I see that we are caught up in taxonomic and linguistic ambiguities. Apes and human beings are not considered monkeys. That was why I had added "and monkeys".
American English was invaded much by scientific/technological definitions and usages and yet retained much of the heritage of common English. Symbolic logic's "and" and "or" differ from common English's "and" and "or". How an expression is perceived depends on the receivers' inclinations and educations. I struggled with whether to use ' or " and where to put the "." at the end of the next-to-last sentence, too, due to the invasion of computer-language usages into English grammar.
There are linguistic mutations in the usage of English that I can use for approximate dating of the age, public-/private-school education, socioeconomic status, and extent of online media usage of the writer such as "effect" vs. "affect", "principle" vs. "principal", "they're" vs. "there", etc.
I decided that languages' ambiguities could actually be useful, sometimes. The ambiguities can even transcend specificity to achieve generality and avoid fallacies as needed in modern mathematics. I am an "omnivore" as far as linguistic usage is concerned because languages are mediums of information exchange and as such can have different encoding and still convey the messages. Poetry, mathematics, sciences, computing, and technologies all have requirements on languages but the meanings can change when the boundaries are crossed. Where these boundaries are, both fortunately and unfortunately, depend on the intentions, education, socioeconomic status etc. of both the transmitter and the receiver. Noam Chomsky can probably weigh in with better ways of overcoming these boundaries to unite people as one and yet recognize and respect them as separate.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jun/21/chimpanzees-territory-killing-neighbours
I didnt say that Chimps werent violent. I said that Humans are FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR more violent than any other animal on the planet.
No other animal than Humans kill eachother with such regularity and with such efficiency.
Humans use Nukes. Chimps use sharpened sticks.
We've used them twice and I don't know if the monkeys use sticks or teeth, but I'm pretty sure that more animals kill each other ever single day. Actually, I don't care about that. The more I read about these monkey armies, the more fascinated I am.
Every once in a while groups of strong chimp males would form up and head north, toward the border between their territory and the land of the neighboring tribe. They'd move through the jungle silently and in a single-file line, with practically no eating, socializing, or masturbating allowed. They'd stealthily scavenge for signs of individuals from the other tribe, such as feces, abandoned termite-fishing tools, etc. When they found a member of the northern tribe off on his own, then they'd gang up on his ass and murder him, goddamn Sam Fisher-style. Then they did it again. And again. It wasn't just random animal-on-animal savagery; when the scientists studied the pattern of the attacks, they found the chimps were at war.
During the decade they watched the area, scientists saw 18 of these attacks, mostly all along the northern border, wiping out more than 13 rival chimps from a tribe of 100 (you don't get kill ratios like than in most human wars). And each time, they moved the border north. They were fighting over land, and doing it in a very organized way.
This isn't some freak occurrence, either. In Tanzania, researchers witnessed a chilling civil war when one tribe of chimps got angry and split off from a larger tribe. Over the next five years, the group of heretics destroyed the original tribe with a series of covert attacks. Previously it was thought that invasive human behavior was behind chimpanzee tribal violence, but now scientists are relieved to find out that chimps are just naturally prone to lethal, Splinter Cell-like military operations.
upwards of 250,000 humans died as a result of the atomic bombing in Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Chimps arent the only monkey species to use sticks and teeth, Humans do too. and Yes, humans are considered Old World monkeys as we do not have tails.
Wild Chimps in Senegal have been observed using sharpened sticks to hunt bush babies and other small animals.
And again, I reiterate, I did not say that Chimps are not violent. Chimps are very violent, but Humans are more violent by a magnitude of a 100 million.
No other animals on earth kill other members of thier own species with such regularity and efficiency.
We are the only animals on earth capable of pushing a button and killing millions of other humans on the other side of the earth. Humans dont even have to stop masturbating in order to kill millions of other humans.
Drones, nukes, robot soldiers. Humans are the MOST VIOLENT species on earth, BY FAR.