You are on page 1of 3

We shouldn't be looking for heroes, we should be looking for good ideas.

(Kita tidak seharusnya mencari pahlawan, tetapi kita seharusnya mencari pikiran-pikiran yang baik. (!oam "homsky #$f we don't belie%e in freedom of e&pression for people we despise, we don't belie%e in it at all.# ('ika kita tidak percaya pada kebebasan berekspresi bagi orang-orang yang kita anggap rendah, maka kita tidak percaya akan kebebasan sama sekali. (!oam "homsky (ptimism is a strategy for making a better future. )ecause unless you belie%e that the future can be better, you are unlikely to step up and take responsibility for making it so. ((ptimisme adalah strategi untuk membuat masa depan yang lebih baik. Karena *ikalau kamu tidak percaya bahwa masa depan bisa lebih baik, maka anda tidak mungkin untuk ma*u dan mengambil tanggung *awab untuk membuatnya lebih baik. (!oam "homsky $t is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and e&pose lies. (!oam "homsky +ither you repeat the same con%entional doctrines e%erybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like it's from !eptune. (!oam "homsky +ducation is a system of imposed ignorance. (!oam "homsky, ,anufacturing "onsent- .he /olitical +conomy of the ,ass ,edia $t's not radical $slam that worries the 01. $t's independence (!oam "homsky .he more you can increase fear of drugs, crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people. (!oam "homsky .hat's the whole point of good propaganda. 2ou want to create a slogan that nobody's going to be against, and e%erybody's going to be for. !obody knows what it means, because it doesn't mean anything. (!oam "homsky $f you assume that there is no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. $f you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, that there are opportunities to change things, then there is a possibility that you can contribute to making a better world. (!oam "homsky !eoliberal democracy. $nstead of citi3ens, it produces consumers. $nstead of communities, it produces shopping malls. .he net result is an atomi3ed society of disengaged indi%iduals who feel demorali3ed and socially powerless. $n sum, neoliberalism is the immediate and foremost enemy of genuine participatory democracy, not *ust in the 0nited 1tates but across the planet, and will be for the foreseeable future. (!oam "homsky

$n this possibly terminal phase of human e&istence, democracy and freedom are more than *ust ideals to be %alued - they may be essential to sur%i%al. (!oam "homsky #/ropaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state. (!oam "homsky, ,edia "ontrol- .he 1pectacular 4chie%ements of /ropaganda

(ptimism is a strategy for making a better future. )ecause unless you belie%e that the future can be better, it5s unlikely you will step up and take responsibility for making it so. $f you assume that there5s no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. $f you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, there are opportunities to change things, there5s a chance you may contribute to making a better world. .he choice is yours. (!oam "homsky $f it's wrong when they do it, it's wrong when we do it. (!oam "homsky !o honest *ournalist should be willing to describe himself or herseif as 'embedded.' .o say, '$'m an embedded *ournalist' is to say, '$'m a go%ernment /ropagandist. (!oam "homsky, $mperial 4mbitions- "on%ersations on the /ost-6788 World

.he intellectual tradition is one of ser%ility to power, and if $ didn't betray it $'d be ashamed of myself. (!oam "homsky /eace is preferable to war. )ut it5s not an absolute %alue, and so we always ask, What kind of peace9 (!oam "homsky :oebbels was in fa%or of free speech for %iews he liked. 1o was 1talin. $f you5re really in fa%or of free speech, then you5re in fa%or of freedom of speech for precisely the %iews you despise. (therwise, you5re not in fa%or of free speech. (!oam "homsky $f anybody thinks they should listen to me because $'m a professor at ,$., that's nonsense. 2ou should decide whether something makes sense by its content, not by the letters after the name of the person who says it. (!oam "homsky ;isco%ery is the ability to be pu33led by simple things.# (!oam "homsky /eople who call themsel%es supporters of $srael are actually supporters of its moral degeneration and ultimate destruction. (!oam "homsky

$t's easy to think of things that need to be done, but they all ha%e a prere<uisite, namely, a mass popular base that is committed to implementing it. (!oam "homsky, (ccupy )ertrand =ussell dan 4lbert +instein sama-sama dikenal sebagai intelektual hebat. Keduanya sepakat bahanya tengah mengancam umat manusia. .api mereka memilih *alan yang berbeda untuk meresponnya. +instein hidup dengan enak di /rinceton dan mengabdikan dirinya semata-mata untuk riset seraya sesekali menyampaika orasi ilmiah, sementara =ussell memilih demonstrasi di *alan. $ngin tahu hasilnya9 =ussel dikutuk sementara +instein dipu*i selangit seperti laiknya malaikat. 4pakah itu semua menge*utkan kita9 .idak (!oam "homsky #)ertrand =ussell and 4lbert +instein, to take another leading intellectual, essentially agreed on things like nuclear weapons. .hey thought nuclear weapons might well destroy the species. .hey signed similar statements, $ think e%en *oint statements. )ut then they reacted differently. +instein went back to his office in the $nstitute for 4d%anced 1tudies at /rinceton and worked on unified field theories. =ussell, on the other hand, went out in the streets. >e was part of the demonstrations against nuclear weapons. >e became <uite acti%e in opposing the ?ietnam War early on, at a time when there was %irtually no public opposition. >e also tried to do something about that, including demonstrations and organi3ing a tribunal. 1o he was bitterly denounced. (n the other hand, +instein was a saintly figure. .hey essentially had the same positions, but +instein didn't rattle too many cages. .hat's pretty common. =ussell was %iciously attacked in the !ew 2ork .imes and by 1ecretary of 1tate ;ean =usk and others in the 86@(s. >e wasn't counted as a public intellectual, *ust a cra3y old man. .here's a good book on this called )ertrand =ussell's 4merica.# (!oam "homsky #"ompare )ertrand =ussell and 4lbert +instein, two leading figures, roughly the same generation. .hey agreed on the gra%e dangers facing humanity, but chose different ways to respond. +instein responded by li%ing a %ery comfortable life in /rinceton and dedicating himself to research that he lo%ed, taking a few moments for an occasional oracular statement. =ussell responded by leading demonstrations and getting himself dragged off by the cops, writing e&tensi%ely on the problems of the day, organi3ing war crimes trials, etc. .he result9 =ussell was and is re%iled and condemned, +instein is admired as a saint. 1hould that surprise us9 !ot at all.# (!oam "homsky /andangan monolitik media-media besar yang tampil secara konsisten harus dicurigai sebagai upaya untuk mempertahankan status <uo yang ada. (!oam "homsky