Noam Chomsky: I would vote Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent 1 day ago   22:43

BBC Newsnight
Noam Chomsky is not just one of the world's most famous academics, he is also one of the world's most famous supporters of the political left. Evan Davis talked to him about Donald Trump, populism in Europe and Julian Assange.

Newsnight is the BBC's flagship news and current affairs TV programme - with analysis, debate, exclusives, and robust interviews.


Comments 3184 Comments

Ann Pretorius
Thank goodness for Noam Chomsky! A sane voice in this world of political nonsense.
"Many progressives ppl have looked at wiki leaks and said this organization is on the wrong side of history " - there is literally not one progressive organization saying that about Assange.
Be Nice80
Such a maverick
Paul Phillips
There wasn't storm troopers in the beginning Noam. Fascism will not come wearing jack boots...
Mysti Bush
Brilliant Noam. Thank you Assange. We will always be in debt to you and Chelsea Manning for waking us all up to the truth. We needed to see into the minds of our elite politicians and lobbyists turned presidential advisor, as well the DNC's fraud of the peoples' funds .....on on on on We needed to know, or how long would we be in the same position? Complacent and ..or gone on blindly to the corruption and divisive Pay to Plays, etc. All in bed with each other in one manner or other.,
CHOMSKY: (explains how the US electoral system is bought)

BBC: "Yes, but the *truth* is that Trump won the election."

Note the use of the word "truth" there. That's not what the word "true" is for.

Though I suppose we should be glad that the BBC platforms Chomsky at all.
Unelected Bureaucrat
Gnome Chumpsky just waffles and croaks on without getting to a succinct point yet is hailed by the left as some sort of revolutionary
think a person with an agenda (left or right), in his case lifelong hatred of
the US,
is not worth listening to because they will include in their argument only that
which serves their argument. This multi-millionaire who never met a leftist
dictator he didn’t like lives in the USA, buys American stocks (the type
of stocks he criticized others previously for buying), raised his speaking fees
right after 9/11, etc. If he at least lived in a leftist country like Cuba I would
say fine but of course he never would. He is the worst hypocrite I have come
across. While Tony Paul (Death of a Gentle
Land) and others were
writing the truth about Pol Pot, Chomsky could never attack a leftist no matter
what, even a monster like Pol Pot, and claimed western media was involved in a
"vast and unprecedented propaganda campaign" against the Khmer Rouge.  I find this asshole more disgusting than
Trump, Hillary, etc.  I thought when he
was asked about Antifa, at last he might agree that they were horrible but, no,
he wiggled out of it by saying only that “I think this is a gift to the
right(wing).”  He can never bring himself
to criticize the left, he rationalized the 9/11 attack into claiming the West
has done worse, and during the Cold War while people were desperately fleeing
from the Iron Curtain countries, in his mind the fault was always with the
West.  For his legion of fanatical
devotees he serves their ideological interests and they will always adore him
no matter what.
And these bleeding heart liberals and leftists will always rush to his
defense.  He is their icon of radical
dissent, their sacred cow.  They forget
that sacred cows make great hamburger.
T Green
Chomsky is intelegent as every one is claiming on here! But he is also being dishonest about all the media coverage about the antisemitism.
What he is holding back on is the real reason for the attacks upon Labour. The modern Labour Party is dangerous, for it no longer believes in democracy or the true workings of our constitutional freedoms, that our once free nation enjoyed. The reason is the financial control of the Saudi government and the (MBH) The Muslim Brother Hood. The Jewish community are aware that Jeremy Corbyn is far to appeasing to the Islamic world, as is to some degree the Tory government, who are without doubt the modern world danger. I am not talking as a member of the Jewish community but from having Romany Gypsy ancrstory. It would be wise for the nations of the world to be realistic that the Muslims were during the first and second World Wars, the main drive for the extermination of both the Jewish and Gypsy populations of not only Western Europe but the Balkan states of the past Ottoman Empire. This is why both Hungary, Slovakia and Poland in particular, do not want Muslims coming into their countries.
We have a mayor of London who is a Muslim and a self confessed freind of Islamic terrorists. As Chomsky rightly says there is antisemitism every where to various degrees but he is dishonest as to the reasons why Labour have been targeted. One other reason is revenge for the trumped up charge that has seen Tommy Robinson jailed, who is looked upon as a true freind of Isreal. In fact it would not surprise me to learn in the future that he receives the Star of David medel. People need to look beyond these Politically motivated individuals such as Chomsky, for their agenda is to mislead the general public but he has not taken into account for the clear insight of the Romany.
Nissim Levy
Of course chomsky would vote for an anti semite like Corbyn. Chomsky is a self hating jew.
Da Choppah
Chumpsky is wrong. Man is an insignificant speck. Climate Change is a hoax by the govt in an attempt to control the private sector. Chumpsky, you old fool.
Da Choppah
Chumpsky is wrong. Man is an insignificant speck. Climate Change is a hoax by the govt in an attempt to control the private sector. Chumpsky, you old fool.
Da Choppah
Trump won because Liberals would not prosecute Hillary. In her place , Voters of all persuasion held the Democrat Party responsible for all her nefarious activity. The Party was damn near obliterated. Hillary not only wouldnt go away- she orchestrated the DOJ FBI CIA to attempt to have Trump removed from Office. For this treason the Dem party will pay once again. Trump will win 45 states in a 2020 landslide.
Da Choppah
Trump won because Liberals would not prosecute Hillary. In her place , Voters of all persuasion held the Democrat Party responsible for all her nefarious activity. The Party was damn near obliterated. Hillary not only wouldnt go away- she orchestrated the DOJ FBI CIA to attempt to have Trump removed from Office. For this treason the Dem party will pay once again. Trump will win 45 states in a 2020 landslide.
Carol Vogelman
She must have been scared maybe ordered to be tough on him! But I think it's.hard not to go for Bernie when he wants you to! Bernie has charm and sex appeal and he is comfy! He is also a natural leader, utterly unafraid of hard word has casual but just lovely manners and I bet he can waltz; he was an athlete! Because he is such a hammer as a politician, his virtues as a statesman aren't brought forward!
That charm is invaluable in a leader, ask FDR, who had loads of it! He can be so comforting, so nourishing, so kind we forgive a man who has a powerful intellect if he gets crabby at times; his real pain is seeing suffering he knows could so easily be remedied! He hates that!

His prejudices are entirely financial; we must decide if any single person should be allowed to own more money that a few States or not! My guess is not!
Carol Vogelman
About Bernie's second interview; ended real well and she was charmed by him; he says I was just gettin' wound up!
Mr Dub Crazy
Pls Note,* Always turn up the volume when Noam Chomsky's speaking.
I love the guy too but in this interview I would argue that age is catching up with his mental acuity such are the number of repetitions and stumbles on display. Sad.
James Konzek
We really should download Chompskys brain, we can summon him like a hologram so future generations can reference his takes and ideas.
Add Reply

Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent Noam Chomsky: I would vote 1 day ago   25:46

There is an exquisite and oft-quoted moment in an interview between BBC journalist Andrew Marr and Noam Chomsky in which Marr asks: "How can you know that I'm self-censoring?".

"I'm not saying you're self censoring. I'm sure you believe everything you're saying. But what I'm saying is that if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting."

Wry as ever, Chomsky exposed the slightly delusional pretensions of the journalistic establishment - and not far behind, the complicities of the media industry with political power.

Harsh? Perhaps. True? All too often.

For many of us who work at The Listening Post, Chomsky's ideas on the media in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media have provided us with a guide, full of cautionary tales and ideas that are still controversial to this day.

The book was published in 1988 - a year before the end of the Cold War when it was announced that western liberal democracy had triumphed, heralding the end of ideology, authoritarianism, and propaganda.

In the past 30 years, we have seen the mass communications industry multiply, providing an illusion of choice, echoing the rhetorics of freedom - of press, of expression - but not necessarily yielding the pluralism liberal democracies had promised.

In that way, the book continues to resonate.

But like all revered texts, Manufacturing Consent also calls upon us as active readers, journalists, citizens to interrogate its premises. Does the book's denunciatory tone risk overstate the power of the media establishment? Does it underestimate the critical faculties of the public? Is the media so homogenous an entity that power can be wielded top-down? Where are the lapses, the blind spots? Where do journalists find pockets of power that serve to disrupt?

We spoke to three journalists who have their careers being disruptive and asked them about the ideas that had influenced them in Chomsky and Herman's book: Matt Taibbi, whose reporting for Rolling Stone has provided one of the most critical accounts of US political history in recent years; Indian editor-in-chief Aman Sethi who questions the premises of Chomsky's book and Amira Hass, the Haaretz correspondent for the Occupied Territories.

The first thing we asked Hass was what she thought about Chomsky's statement: "the general population doesn't know what's happening, and it doesn't even know that it doesn't know".

"This is a very humanist and optimistic statement," she responded. "The belief that when people are informed they may act, things may change. In Hebrew, the words knowledge and awareness are all made of the same root. Yedda and Mudaoot. And so awareness is connected to Mudaoot in Hebrew. And this is how I started working in Gaza, aware that the Israeli public knows nothing about the occupation and what it means. But the people do not pick up this information. They have access to it but they choose not to access it."

Hass has been covering Palestine for the best part of 30 years - in that time, sources of information have multiplied, but public outrage?

"Today we have so much access to information in other ways that we are on a collision with the fact that people are not interested in what does not serve immediately their interest," she said, with resignation, "and this is a very sad realisation."

Aman Sethi put it like this:

"It's easy to say that people believe what they believe because their consent has been manufactured. But what if people know exactly what's going on and still believe what they believe, right? Then that's terrifying."

More from The Listening Post on:

YouTube -
Facebook -
Twitter -
Website -

- Subscribe to our channel:
- Follow us on Twitter:
- Find us on Facebook:
- Check our website: