By Brian Carnell

Tuesday, January 8, 2002

Is Noam Chomsky so disconnected from reality that he cannot even refute David Horowitz without a) resorting to a ridiculous and inaccurate ad hominem, and b) lying about his own familiarity with Chomsky? Apparently not.

Horowitz wrote his usual bombastic attack against Chomsky, and Chomsky was asked in an interview what he thought of Horowitz. Chomsky replied,

I haven't read Horowitz. I didn't used to read him when he was a Stalinist and I don't read him today. Haven't seen it.

Claiming that Horowitz was a Stalinist is absurd, as Horowitz pointed out in an article responding to this attack. Horowitz's parents were Stalinists, but anyone who takes the time to read what Horowitz wrote prior his conversion to conservatism will see that he might have been a bit nutty, but Horowitz was definitely not a supporter of the Soviet state nor of Stalin. Calling Horowitz a Stalinist is just as absurd as some of the attacks on Chomsky from the right that have accused him of being a Stalinist.

The second problem, is that if Chomsky indeed has never read Horowitz, how is he to explain that fact that he cited Horowitz in his 1972 book, Problems of Knowledge and Freedom. As Horowitz notes, not only is Chomsky familiar with Horowitz's work, but he sent Horowitz a couple letters after Horowitz criticized Chomsky in a 1979 article in The Nation.

I do not have a lot of use for Horowitz, but Chomsky really seems to be losing it these days with his constant refrains that he either doesn't read people who disagree with him or else people who disagree with him do not really believe what they write.

Source:

The World's Most Shameless Liar Unloads Some More. David Horowitz, FrontPageMag.Com, October 22, 2001.

Do the sensible thing (Interview with Noam Chomsky). Peter Clarke, Monkey.Com, October 16, 2001.

Discuss (11 Replies) | Printer Friendly