Customer Reviews

Pirates and Emperors, Old and New: International Terrorism in the Real World

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Chomsky starts with the premise that the United States has fewer restrictions on its press than any other contry in the world. At the same time, it has the most effective system in the world for restricting what its citizens think.

Focusing on the Israel-Palestine dispute (but with forays as far abroad as Hiroshima, Guatemala, Afghanistan, and--most relevantly for today--Iraq), Chomsky proves over and over again that the US version of terrorism is completely one sided. After all, he argues, it is the US that has killed more civilians in more attempts to influence enemies through terror than any other country.

Chomsky gives short shrift to those who argue endlessly over the legal meaning of various UN Resolutions to determine what the legalities are of various conflicts. Applying his philosophical theories to politics, Chomsky says that words mean exactly what those with the power to act say they mean, nothing more and nothing less.

Chomsky's bottom line is that if the US really wants to combat terrorism, the first thing we ought to do is stop practicing it, and stop supporting others who do so.

Chomsky certainly has a point of view that one hears all too infrequently in this country. My main criticism is that the book repeats the same examples several times in different chapters to make the same point. This results from the fact that the book is actually a loosely connected series of essays and talks, not originally wirtten at the same time, let alone with a book in mind.

I am someone who actually worked on this book when it was published years ago. When I read the manuscript in preparation for publication, I was thrilled. Unlike the Zionist critics, or those afraid to see the world as it is, I was not afraid of the damning analysis of my country and of my ethnic breatheren. Though I may be a Jew, I do not not hold with Zionism and its hatreds. I love this book. We should be thankful that Chomsky stands where does, shoots for the truth, and challenges us to lay down our biases while on the joureny to enlightenment.

Professor Noam Chomsky deserves a literary award for this scholarly treatise that exposes the hypocrisies and selective standards the big powers use with respect to the
word "terrorism." Chomsky brilliantly illustrates that by the internationally accepted definition of the word terrorism, the Western powers are guilty of state sponsored terrorism by their support of attrocities against Third World peoples such as the
Palestinains, Kurds, East Timorese, and others.

The convenient countries that are targeted for sanctions against terrorism are Iraq, Iran, Syria, Cuba, and North Korea. Chomsky argues that should a leader who supports
Western expansionism and domination such as the Shah of Iran or Ferdinand Marcos of the Phillipines
arise, the countries will be termed "friendly" and "moderate" like the Gulf potentates and Indonesia.

I thorougly enjoyed reading this book and others by the same author. Chomsky consistently points out the mistakes and fallacies of policy makers through his superb
mastery of polemics and prose. His style is entertaining and never loses my interest. I suggest any prospective student in international relations be required to read this text by
one of America's leading dissident voices, particularly in this time of "war on terror," which has been advocated and advanced by the Bush Administration.

I am personally flabbergasted at Susan Norton's review. It's utter twaddle. Did she read the book? Chomsky, in case after case, many times using the mainstream "free" press as a source, conveys the absolute savagery and hyorcrisy of the U.S.'s #1 client state regime, Israel. One might be skeptical of what he is saying when one begins to read the book, but when he uses, perhaps, over 100 hundred cases that prove his points then it really becomes hard to refute what he is saying. Did Susan Norton take a look at just how incredibly extensive Chomsky's sources are? They're astronomically broad! They range from independent sources such as Amnesty International, and other human rights groups, declassified U.S. documents, the American and Israeli Commissar class, and others from the heart of the American Empire! (Just to name a few).

This book really helps put the Arab-Israeli conflict into a proper political context. Remember this is not necessarily a history book per se, but a record of terrorism committed by ISRAEL and the UNITED STATES and how their terrorism far outweighs Palestinian terrorism. Conventional wisdom would have you believe the opposite and Chomsky provides the reasons why.

I was very surprised to see that some people (few as they were) bashing Chomsky for Pirates and Emperors. UNsurprisingly, though, their attacks carry only the usual Fox-news-Ann-Coulter-Mark-Levin "you're anti-american and anti-semitic", with complete (intentional) disregard of the myriad of uncontroversial (just inconvenient) facts that Chomsky presents.

This book is about 240 pages, the last 60 of which are footnotes. I have verified about 20% of them, and couldn't find a single untrustworthy source.

It is no surprise that the attacks levelled at Chomsky are all ad-hominom, given the fact that he rarely expresses his opinion, but simply states facts and quotes, and leaves you to draw your own conclusions. This is a man who comes from a scientific background and knows how to present a FORMAL argument, without falling in the usual logical fallacies intended to appeal to people's emotions. Not only are these attacks baseless, but they're also self-contradicting. The VAST majority of his sources are, in fact, American and Israeli sources (American presidents and newspapers, Israeli politicians and journals, etc). It is simply mind-blowing that these attackers can't see the fallacy of their own arguments (or do they?).

This book is over 20 years old now, but is still as relevant as it ever was. Definitely a recommended read.

"We will understand very little about the world if we neglect the relevant historical context, commonly ignored or suppressed in the official doctrine."
Pirates and Emperors, page 111.

It interesting to see how the critics of Mr. Chomsky might my call him by several nasty names, but fail to present evidence to contradict its presentation of the facts about why USA and Israel are among the largest terrorist actors in the world responsible of merciless and cinical killings of thousands of civilians.

Suprinsigly he does not accomodate the definition of what is a terrorist or a terrorist act to fit its conclusions. He gets there using the definition coinded by the US government.

That is why the reaction of his critics is so emotional, nobody likes it what its dark side is exposed.

By the way he does not argue that the guys on the other side are the good ones, he simply points out how sad it is that neither USA, Israel can claim to be innocent victims of terrorism when a maniac blows himself and several bystanders in a burger joint or takes down a bulding with a plane.

Now in a newly updated edition, Pirates And Emperors, Old And New: International Terrorism In The Real World by Noam Chomsky (an internationally acclaimed philosopher, scholar, and political activist). Chomsky's critical analysis of America's role in the Middle East and how the media tends to manipulate the beliefs of the public is presented with the addition of new chapters focusing upon the second Palestinian Intifada which began in October 2000, as well as the harsh impact that September 11 has had on the formation and conduct of American foreign policy. Pirates And Emperors, Old And New is a very highly recommended and timely addition to Contemporary International Studies reading lists and reference collections.

I recently came across a 1986 ed. of this book by way of a co-worker. Essentially this loose collection of essays is a bloated attempt at proving that government controlled linguistics directly shape perception of Middle Eastern political events, a la George Orwell. In other words America and Israel are the real terrorists, yet because they control the media they are able to deflect blame and portray the innocent Arabs as criminals. Chomsky's thesis rides on his misconception that:

"From a comparative perspective, the United States is unusual if not unique in
its lack of restraints on freedom of expression. It is also unusual in
the range and effectiveness of the methods employed to restrain freedom
of thought."

Chomsky's anti-American, anti-Israel rhetoric is not restrained, indeed his leftest views are generally accepted as gospel throughout much of academic intelligentsia. The mere fact that so many champion Chomsky's views in this "psychologically bonded" nation essentially refutes his thesis outright. Noam Chomsky and his followers will always support the "underdog" regardless of moral convictions. Instead of accepting that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a series of cyclical retributional violent actions he instead places the blame at the doorstep of Zionists, Americans and Imperialists. The same culprits who protect his "restrained" freedom of speech. Chomsky believes that Palestinian terrorism is perceived through an unfair bias controlled by Israeli/American propaganda. That old argument... "They aren't terrorists! They are freedom fighters!"


A lot of what Chomsky argues is true. Language does create a bias in the understanding of a conflict. However, Chomsky continuously bashes the U.S. and Israel instead of rightly arguing that perception is arbitrary and "right and wrong" are shaped by individual perception. Instead of a natural unbiased opinion, Chomsky continuously stresses that "much of this (history) has been eliminated from history, in journalism and scholarship." He neglects inter-Arab conflicts and atrocities while simultaneously portraying Yassir Arafat as nothing more than an innocent "freedom fighter".

These essays are aimless exercises in semantics that allow Chomsky to lament his hatred for his peoples homeland and the nation that allows him to freely express his treacherous opinions.
I recommend Sandstorm: Middle East Conflicts & America, an essay collection edited by Daniel Pipes for a more pragmatic companion piece to Mr. Chomsky's essays.

For me, the most interesting aspect of Pirates & Emperors is much of what Chomsky desired came true. The PLO is recognized as the sole representative of the Palestinian people. World media has focused a negative lens on almost all Israeli action. The Palestinian cause has seamlessly integrated its Leftist politics in harmony with Islamists hearts and minds. America has been demoralized by their "barbaric" war on terror, while the threat of Islamic terrorism continues unmolested by media or public scrutiny. Further proof that Mr. Chomsky's Leftist ideas are not "restrained".

I understand that later editions (2000, 2003) include commentary on the second intifada and other contemporary events.

http://counterjihadinitiative.blogspot.com/2009/02/book-review-pirates-emperors-by-noam.html

Noam Chomsky has thrived greatly in this great country of his, yours, and mine - the United States of America. He has made millions of dollars teaching, lecturing, selling his books, and investing. His world-wide fame in psycholinguistics is well-deserved. His infamy is merited for his lack of loyalty to his own Jewish ethnicity and the U.S., in spite of the fruits he has received by being a citizen of the United States. He has repaid this country in bile with his incredibly biased analysis of American foreign policy. He goes way beyond a balanced multiculturism, when he always ranks the U.S. and Israel as foremost among the terrorist forces in the world now, and even in history. His distrust of any authority, benign or otherwise, is reflected in his dogmatic and unexamined support of the "underdog," even if that underdog is a suicide bomber or a major terrorist organization such as Al Queda or Hezbollah.

Yet since 1955, hypocrite Chomsky has worked for the "overdog" Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which has actively and enthusiastically participated in the development of weapons of War and mass destruction, and continues to this very day.

Chomsky trumps his own potential for gifted analytic objectivity with his simple hatred of the United States and the Jewish State.

If he were not so attached to the freedom of making money, earning the adulation of the American Left, and freedom to express himself, he might be able to give more direct and personal support for our enemies and his friends by taking up residence in North Korea, Iran, or Syria. Let us hope he retires outside of our homeland that he hates so much, the United States of America.

God Bless America, which will continue to give Chomsky the right to speak, teach, and make lots of money.

Rayboy

If has been said (by the late Australian political scientist Frank Knopfelmacher) that as one swallow doesn't make a summer, so one Noam Chomsky doesn't make a sewer. After reading this I'm nor so sure. A warped, twisted rant against the institutions of a free society, against America's brave role in protecting the Jews of Israel from a second, terminal, holocaust, and in general against civilization. Sad and bizarre. I would recommend the works of Danial Pipes, Samuel Hungtington or almost anyone else in preference.