Noam Chomsky vs. William F. Buckley Debate : Part 1 of 2

Back


From 1969, but still very relavent today.

Noam Chomsky debates William F. Buckley.

Part 2 is here


Who is Noam Chomsky?


Who is William F. Buckley?


Channel: Howto & Style
Uploaded: April 26, 2006 at 10:35 pm
Author: Proverbs13i16

Length: 00:10:29
Rating: 4.90
Views: 433124

Tags: Noam Chomsky Buckley debate 1969 terrorism terrorist Iraq Bush

Video Comments:
4ourthofjuly (September 4, 2008 at 5:36 pm)
Who was just arrested.

"What a country".
4ourthofjuly (September 4, 2008 at 5:35 pm)
You must be a performance artist.
joeglimmix (September 4, 2008 at 8:24 am)
uh-oh...i have to write a report on this video and it is due tomorrow. does anybody know what language this is?
rusty98um11 (September 4, 2008 at 6:01 am)
In today's age this is what we call getting PWNED. Let's me put this debate in football terms.

Buckley = Tom Brady, Chomsky = Matt Cassell.
connorchapman1 (September 4, 2008 at 1:41 am)
The vacuous rhetoric of Buckley and his device
of interruption to divert listeners from hearing the truth is embarrassing. Had this been a boxing match the referee would have stopped the fight in round one to save Buckley from total humiliation.
zetoazulbide (September 3, 2008 at 4:06 pm)
Chomsky balances the impredictability of his quotes with their own weakness (his sources are ludicrous, he quotes bulletins and official reports, not insider information) - and also of his arguments... his generalizations are marvellous and dazzle at their simplicity... but also at their "sophism"... I'm sure all his followers are completely satisfied with their role in society - "fat paid mourners"!
mammers11 (September 4, 2008 at 1:33 am)
Are you going to cry?
maryellen728 (September 3, 2008 at 3:23 pm)
Chomsky reveals that Buckley is grossly ignorant of history, incapable of critical thought.
TheLogicJunkie (September 3, 2008 at 9:35 am)
Even though his ideas may have content validity, I hate to say that Buckley's whole manner makes my skin crawl.
herbzilla12 (September 3, 2008 at 8:14 am)
"Fortunately, history has proven Buckley correct and Chomsky's views now seem like a far-left relic."

There is nothing that Chomsky says that is not correct and simultaneously based on facts, and nothing that Buckley says that is not incorrect and simultaneously based on lies/nothing at all

Your deep seeded emotional/psychological need to believe that the right is always right and the left is always wrong is baffling.

Your emotions completely override you ability to tell truth form fiction.