He has changed my view of the world too, Charles Williams. After seeing these things, I can never go back to not seeing it.

That tends to happen when ya stick to the facts and have a backbone.

Fewer invisible monsters please!

Yo bro I agree but you know Noam doesn't post these, right? Like this account is just a really cool guy who takes clips

@@firelifeblizzard8782 no kidding huh?

@@firelifeblizzard8782 I guess Tara here is 1) not a bro and 2) not aware of Chomsky not posting these. Still, you could've just agreed w the sentiment instead of yo broing her 😉

@@khumomatlakane2009 😘👌

Back when politicians could still be prosecuted/removed from political office if exposed for bribery and corruption, which is now legalized in the US.

“Corporations are people too, friend!” - Mitt Romney.

Ehhhh, I wouldn't say that's where the line is. Citizens United was certainly a major negative turning point, but realistically, it kinda just legalized something that was already taking place - corruption and bribery. Our system has long been rife with it. Not that we exactly had a true democracy to begin with either, certainly not by the time the SCOTUS ruled in it's favor. Please don't take my remark as downplaying it's impact... I viewed this the very same way a few years ago, lots of research and observation later... hate to be the bearer of bad news but the overall situation runs deeper and is far worse than I could have imagined at the time. When I began realizing it was when I began researching a man named Robert Mercer. His family and his business/financial interests are tied into so many things going on in various countries including ours, I'm still learning about things he's involved with. Literally was just reading about the Epoch Times receiving nearly a million USD from his hedge fund between 2012 and 2016 which you may have noticed lately has been pushing ads like crazy on KZfaq recently, apparently as a result of having AI created profiles and violating facebooks advertising stipulations and such. Of course he was one of the people in the Panama Papers as well... we have been near-constantly fed carefully curated spoonfuls of disinformation by so many different actors and seems most of them have ties to one another in some way. It's deeply troubling.

Incredibly unfortunate, but true.

I'm in the process of watching your last interview with NC. Good job. I might include clips from your interviews in the future, if that's what you want. But I have to be honest, I'm pretty tired of doing this stuff. I also think Chomsky's work is covered fairly well here. I don't want to post videos of him saying the same stuff over and over again. And of course, feel free to use the clips I've posted here on your channel. Cheers.

@@chomskysphilosophy Thanks for your response. Yes, if you could share any clips or full videos that would be amazing. I could also send/email you the files in case that's easier for you. Besides the episode w/ Chomsky, I also have a few other episodes that I think are interesting for people who are interested in Chomsky's work. I haven't seen a lot of videos on YT covering Chomsky's work (or Chomskyan framework sort of scholarly work) and explicitly relating it to for example the field of neuroscience (David Poeppel episode) or to morality/moral cognition (John Mikhail episode). Again, if you would like to post any clips or the full episode - please let me know if I should share with you these files. Anyways, appreciate the work you've been doing on your channel. I understand you're getting tired of it as you've been doing it for a while now, haha. I will continue to produce more episodes for my Chomsky series. Next week, I will interview Paul Pietroski who discusses Chomsky on semantics/internalist semantics.

​@@Daretoknow2020 Ok, we'll see:) No, I'll just download it myself, but thanks for asking.I would also highly recommend you to post excerpts from your interview with NC on your channel. That'll probably get you more subs. Best of luck with your channel. Looks very interesting! Cheers.

@@chomskysphilosophy Is there a way to get in touch with you? There's another guy who has a channel dedicated to Chomsky and he needs some help. You can DM me on twitter. I'll post my handle once I know you've seen my comment.

@@chomskysphilosophy hope you’re doing well. Today I released a new episode starring Chomsky. I believe it to be a valuable interview where he touches upon few things he doesn’t usually talk about a lot (at least on KZfaq). As I said before, if you think it could be valuable for your subscribers, feel free to post the entire episode on your channel. I can also send you the files if required. Thanks!

Epstein

no i think that's from one of his talks back in the '60s

@@kungfutzu3779 I don't believe it's so far back...Im assuming you were joking lol

@@andrewtoebbe3885 guilty yourr honour

This is an interview with Nomiki Konst. I think the full interview is up on KZfaq somewhere

@@slippinjimmy8760 what exotic names these people have. not like bradley, andrew, kung & jimmy

I wish you peace in this time.

@@bobjohnbowles Thank you...Of course, I'll continue fighting to expose things until my last breath. I've seen too much as it is. Just trying to show others what I see.

@@brianparent God Bless you Sir.

please see the transcript

Because the corporations, Hollywood and governments controlled by the Jesuit, Freemasons, knights Templar and skull and bones etc…worship the Baphomet.

@@nomad9338 I think it is a bit more complicated than that. For one, corporations, at least in developed countries, cannot force you to do anything. Yes, they have control, but I doubt this is anything like slavery. No one whips you into doing a job and unions are able to fight for workers. People get exploited, yes, but no one shoots them for organising.

@@toseeornot2see Enslavement doesn't require direct physical force. When choice is but an illusion propped up by the rich and powerful such as large corporations, to their benefit and not the powerless', than the worker is little better than a slave. And the fact that "no one shoots" union organizers is a red herring, as this falsely suggests that other tactics aren't being used to suppress pro-worker movements. Even in the EU, where it appears a better haven for unions and better regulator of corporations than the US, smoke and mirrors are behind much of its anti-corporate, worker-friendly image. For example, Germany's strong pro-worker system is subsidized by the impoverishment of workers in Greece, Italy, and Spain in a scheme that most benefits banks and corporations, in much the same way that the IMF notoriously operates.

@@bronzenrule oh, I don't fully disagree. The fossil fuel lobby is a great example in convincing people global warming isn't real. But the fact that corporations came out in support of Black Lives Matter shows these people care. Yeah, ok, just don't ask them to pay a fair amount of tax. But I doubt though that choices are an illusion. At least they are not to the extent they used to be. Yes, I have read manufacturing consent, too, and believe a portion of the population accepts corporate and government propaganda. But now, more than ever, people are able to organise and influence corporate CEOs. Now you can access alternative viewpoints via Independent media. In fact, some of these CEOs probably know who Chomsky is. And the corporate platform is used by those on the left to reach out to the masses. Here, in my country, a Green party candidate is publically supported by a popular businesswoman.

@@toseeornot2see Corporations came out in support of BLM because it was a safe bet and in their economic interest to do so -- part of managing what Chomsky here refers to as their reputational risk. It's a net gain for them reputationally, in terms of gaining them brownie points with the public and distracting from/covering up their own outstanding misdeeds, and thereby ultimately becoming a net gain to their bottom-line, unlike previously -- before George Floyd -- when BLM was more than just controversial or a little toxic and, in fact, polled extremely negatively among the public/their customers. To think otherwise -- that for-profit corporations, which can only survive by meeting quarterly earnings expectations, have, or can afford to have, a conscience or operate outside of making a profit -- is a grave mistake. Yes, corporations are looking to embrace more social causes these days -- but again, it's part of rebranding themselves and their products to appear more socially conscientious in the wake of anti-corporate backlash/movements. Where a corporate industry is relabeling their products such as to "organic" or endorsing a movement like BLM, it's strongly advisable to check the ingredients and their sources, the cost/benefit to the corporation/industry, as well as all the circumstances surrounding such move more closely, before buying it. Because chances are extremely high that it's a move to stave off a hit on their bottom-line, or financially exploit a movement or trend or change in society. Also, the sincerity, or lack thereof, behind corporate acts of "good citizenship" is knowable by their consistency. Notice how corporations who've come out pro-BLM are con-currently silent on China vis-a-vis Hong Kong and the Uigurs, and on Israel-Palestine. If corporations had their way, South Africa would still be an apartheid state today. As for good people working in corporations, this is not evidence of the goodness of corporations. The reason being that good people in corporations are constrained every bit as much as the bad people by the necessity to answer, every three months if not literally every second, to their boss -- the shareholders -- who could care less about the personal mores of those in corporate HQ. Therefore, I'd hardly give these "good execs" credit whenever what is right by their conscience and what is right by the corporation happen to perfectly align, as what's right by the corporation always takes priority.

@@bronzenrule there are many corporations who didn't come out in support of BLM either. What about them? They are somehow not affected by this need to protect their reputation. Yes, there are quarterly expectations to meet profits, but then look around you, just about any organisation, including the left, have certain expectations from their members. I mean, if you have worked for student organisations, unions ,etc. There is a LOT of politics and backstabbing going on. But that's just human nature. And as far as questionable practices go, Chomsky has even criticsed those on the left who beleive in cancel culture.

I remember when you did that too.

King David that was awesome

@@zareh805 It was a thing for sure.

@@kingdavid3366 I remember when I saw your comment

Though admirable and, on rare occasions effective, this sort of action does little to change things. So much activism nowadays is single issue, or single project. Until progressives come together and present a coherent platform for SYSTEMIC change, things will pretty much continue as they are. Though the window-dressing may change every now and again. Just realised that it sounded as if I were criticising you personally. I'm not. Far from it. At least you're trying to do something positive. In contrast, I've become old and cynical... :)

@markplain2555 What do you make of the anti vaxers today? I also don't think we operate in a capitalist system but that corporatism system is in full affect...

so true

Deep, thoughtful reaction there. You really have your finger on the pulse...

@Chris Carlone Well they do provide goods and services which are not all bad. Could it be done in some other way? Probably, but that was not the question. Anyway, world is not black and white.

@Chris Carlone they have not created but distributed a lot of the technology, in an unethical way, you might say but it got done. We cannot feed ourselves from the enlightened word´s of professors.

Huh?

What do you mean by "many agendas"? Corporations have only one agenda - profit. It's like asking if we've noticed how many businesses the rich and powerful own.

BaraZulu You can easily find out by yourselves if you are not completely brainwashed

@@Mr131313ck Okay, brainlet.