Transcripts of emails exchanged between Sam Harris and Noam Chomsky

[A Real Human Bean]

source

About week or so ago Sam Harris posted on twitter about his desire to arrange a formal debate with linguist and scholar Noam Chomsky, on topics such as U.S. foreign policy, religion etc. This is a transcript of him and Noam exploring some of their disagreements and clarifying misunderstandings.

For decades, Noam Chomsky has been one of the most prominent critics of U.S. foreign policy, and the further left one travels along the political spectrum, the more one feels his influence. Although I agree with much of what Chomsky has said about the misuses of state power, I have long maintained that his political views, where the threat of global jihadism is concerned, produce dangerous delusions. In response, I have been much criticized by those who believe that I haven’t given the great man his due.

Last week, I did my best to engineer a public conversation with Chomsky about the ethics of war, terrorism, state surveillance, and related topics. As readers of the following email exchange will discover, I failed. I’ve decided to publish this private correspondence, with Chomsky’s permission, as a cautionary tale. Clearly, he and I have drawn different lessons from what was, unfortunately, an unpleasant and fruitless encounter. I will let readers draw lessons of their own.

The entire exchange is lengthy so I didn't post it in full. But this was exchange pure, unadulterated ether. I started to feel second-hand embarrassment for Harris midway through the exchange. Don't even know why he would want this published.

I've seen discussion of this exchange in a few other places and a lot of it invariably ends up focusing on Chomsky's tone rather than his arguments (which were made very clearly and calmly in my opinion) -- a phenomenon that is well highlighted by Glenn Greenwald in his piece on how Chomsky is discussed. Not to mention, I thought Harris was quite condescending himself, urging Noam, a well-respected 86 year old scholar, to edit his responses and remove phrases that Harris thought "unfriendly".

 

[JahFocus CS]

Harris is really just an Islamophobe. In what world can we really, honestly say Islamic extremism is the biggest threat the world faces, or that Islamic vs. non-Islamic is the central contradiction in society?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Sam Harris is an utter and complete moron.

LOL @ the complete hypocrisy of asking him to edit his responses because they were 'unfriendly'............​

 

[CHL]

Your own moral stance is revealed even further by your complete lack of concern about the apparently huge casualties and the refusal even to investigate them.

As for Clinton and associates being “genuine humanitarians,” perhaps that explains why they were imposing sanctions on Iraq so murderous that both of the highly respected international diplomats who administered the “Oil for food” program resigned in protest because they regarded them as “genocidal,” condemning Clinton for blocking testimony at the UN Security Council. Or why he poured arms into Turkey as it was carrying out a horrendous attack on its Kurdish population, one of the worst crimes of the ‘90s. Or why he shifted Turkey from leading recipient of arms worldwide (Israel-Egypt excepted) to Colombia, as soon as the Turkish atrocities achieved their goal and while Colombia was leading the hemisphere by far in atrocious human rights violations. Or why he authorized the Texaco Oil Company to provide oil to the murderous Haitian junta in violation of sanctions. And on, and on, as you could learn if you bothered to read before launching accusations and professing to talk about “ethics” and “morality.”

I’ve seen apologetics for atrocities before, but rarely at this level – not to speak of the refusal to withdraw false charges, a minor fault in comparison.

Since you profess to be concerned about “God-intoxicated sociopaths,” perhaps you can refer me to your condemnation of the perpetrator of by far the worst crime of this millennium because God had instructed him that he must smite the enemy.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

In Chomsky's world, theres only hypocrisy and nothing is a threat.

He lives in a world of privilege with no recognition of the efforts to obtain and maintain those advantages.

Anyone not understanding doesn't understand what it takes to live in the US or the West.

 

[88m3]

In Chomsky's world, theres only hypocrisy and nothing is a threat.

He lives in a world of privilege with no recognition of the efforts to obtain and maintain those advantages.

Anyone not understanding doesn't understand what it takes to live in the US or the West.

commie scumbag

 

[badhat]

I started picking out Chomsky quotes, but they're all the perfect intersection of a really smart guy completely obliterating a really dumb guy, with the added bonus of the really dumb guy not really grasping how out of his league he is.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Chomsky gave him that work.

@The Real @Broke Wave @GetInTheTruck @TrueEpic08

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I started picking out Chomsky quotes, but they're all the perfect intersection of a really smart guy completely obliterating a really dumb guy, with the added bonus of the really dumb guy not really grasping how out of his league he is.

He just kept on calling him a liar over and over and over...............​

 

[Broke Wave]

Chomsky gave him that work.

@The Real @Broke Wave @GetInTheTruck @TrueEpic08

This looks like me debating @Napoleon

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

We are left as we were. You made a series of accusations that were quite false, and are unwilling to withdraw them. You refuse to consider, let alone answer, the very simple and straightforward question posed in the passage you cited. And you still refuse to reciprocate as I have properly requested several times.

That means, clearly, that there is no basis for a rational public interchange.

I’ll skip the rest.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

This looks like me debating @Napoleon

Harris lost, but that's an insult to him. Harris at least makes a logical inquiry into morality, irregardless of how flawed it is. Napoleon just pretty much says "might makes right" over and over again.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I started picking out Chomsky quotes, but they're all the perfect intersection of a really smart guy completely obliterating a really dumb guy, with the added bonus of the really dumb guy not really grasping how out of his league he is.

In all seriousness, what is so great about what Chomsky has said?

I'm a big fan of both individuals, but Chomsky's liberalism predicates too much on criticism and never solutions....like...EVER.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Harris lost, but that's an insult to him. Harris at least makes a logical inquiry into morality, irregardless of how flawed it is. Napoleon just pretty much says "might makes right" over and over again.

Which proves my point. You know you can't really challenge it because when decisions have to be made, you'd rather pretend that there are anything other than bad decisions and worse ones.

Chomsky appealed to me when I was still learning the ways of the world. He's popular with those looking to understand the system...but Chomsky offers nothing outside of critique and inquiry. He's a nihilist (which I can relate to) without an appreciation for he has, what he wants, or what he thinks would be better.

He NEVER has any skin in the game.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Which proves my point. You know you can't really challenge it because when decisions have to be made, you'd rather pretend that there are anything other than bad decisions and worse ones.

Chomsky appealed to me when I was still learning the ways of the world. He's popular with those looking to understand the system...but Chomsky offers nothing outside of critique and inquiry. He's a nihilist (which I can relate to) without an appreciation for he has, what he wants, or what he thinks would be better.

Lol like you've actually ever read Chomsky outside of youtube vids and anecdotes. If you did, you wouldn't say something as ignorant as he never offers solutions.