chomsky trumps zirin and hitchens

if you have read my blog before you may know that i participate in a yahoo group called the sporthinkery. it is moderated by my good friend, bill gould. sportswriter dave zirin has been involved with the sporthinkery for some time even if his participation consists primarily of posting his 'edge of sports,' articles, (or his articles that appear in the nation.) (Click on the header to read dave's most recent article on christoper hitchens' broad attack on the winter olympics and all things sport in newsweek.) often times what i read on the sporthinkery compels me to write in to the group in response and occasionally my response seems worthy of a blog post...

it seems zirin may have had a thing for hitchens at one time and feels betrayed nowadays. personally, i can't stand hitchens and i think zirin has it right when he accuses him of "amputating with rhetoric." in spite of the fact that i enjoyed 'god is not great,' i found it to be far short of scholarly in terms of debunking the mythology of belief. rather, it was a fun romp through the foibles of so many belief systems.

what is more interesting about zirin's piece, however, is how he defends sport. it is as if billie jean king and muhammed ali and jackie robinson would not have existed as activist heroes were it not for sport. (personally, i think they would have but probably with different names. after all, martin luther king jr. was a preacher and not a celebrity or sports star. nor for that matter were most of the other prominent players in the civil rights movement or any other righteous movements for justice or peace or fair treatment.) it is nice that some sports stars stand up to be counted from time to time. i rooted for drew brees and the saints recently just because he had a moment like this. i love jim brown and john ameche and mahmoud abdul raouf and all of the others who speak up from time to time. (perhaps more importantly i can't stand the vacuous sports stars like tiger woods who reap huge rewards in terms of upward mobility, something that is less likely for an individual in the united states than just about any other first world country, and seem to instantly forget their roots, their working fathers and mothers, their neighbors, the working class.)

still, i could not help but wonder if zirin has ever seen or read noam chomsky's 'manufacturing consent,' wherein the sage of m.i.t. speaks of sport as that which occupies our minds and renders us impotent by means of activity as numbing and distracting agent as opposed to allowing us to demand the equality we deserve, (justice,) as a proletariat waging a class war. (of course as dennis kucinich recently pointed out, in this country we have already lost class warfare.

i don't feel guilty about my affinity and preoccupation with sports but i do recognize that my time could be better spent. in fact i have seen as much beauty in sport as can possibly exist. i have been as thrilled as is possible by miraculous outcomes. the human drama has transfixed me and i can never again engage at a level i once did. while i love sports that are new to me as if i were still a child, while i love hockey and even have a new favorite player in la kings defenseman drew doughty as if i was 12 again, (about the same age as doughty,) while i can be amazed ad-nauseum by the maneuvers of the greats on the soccer pitch, these twists and tricks that are so foreign to me, and such, my interest in the nba and mlb wanes a bit every year as it seems it should with any aging man. if my team is good i get closer, more interested, more aware. when they suck, (see the dodgers from the early 90s through two to three years ago,) i am bored and hold only a passing interest. i have friends too, who would belittle me, as if it is not my interest in sport that is falling away but rather my manhood and i am sad for them their immaturity and inability to grow and change.

as i get older i am increasingly interested in legacy, in leaving something good behind me. many of my friends would consider that sensibility absurd. i consider it ennobling. who knows what i can possibly leave behind me but i want to try and so as i negotiate my days i feel a simple happiness when i recognize my waning interest in sport and an increase in time i am able to spend trying to find ways to fight the powers that be. zirin and hitchens should just defer to chomsky on this issue. in this clip he talks specifically about sports, (as well as supermarket tabloids and astrology as that which is meant to dull the brain.) the message is clear, sports dull the brain. "sports," chomsky asserts, "is a way of building up irrational attitudes of submission to authority."

chomsky

chomsky is perhaps the top intellectual, the greatest philosopher and the best human being in the last 30-40 years to walk the planet. seriously. the praise this man deserves is truly at that level.

unless a man has been utterly disciplined in his life, never indulging in the unimportant sideshows of life, the hobbies and curiosities and entertainments of so many among the masses, he is incapable of reasoning on the level of chomsky. it is nothing to be ashamed of. still, chomsky's voice, as leveller of the masses, is unmistakable and true. he is the linguist of our age, a linguist in a time when language exploded.

i am not ashamed of having heroes. this is typical, solemn human behavior. chomsky is the only voice in the michaelsphere to have never, ever lied or told a half-truth. i have never found flaw with his reasoning, (not a surprise but an impressive fact all the same.)

chomsky's voice is as close as i get to trusting implicitly. it is my value to trust little-i am into verifying. it is with this idea in mind that i direct you, (to click on the header above that says, "chomsky,") to chomsky's comments on the financial crisis.

chomsky is so dense in his meaning when he writes, it can be difficult to follow him. still, if you read this article you can see how wrong-headed the prevailing thought is on our current financial crisis as well as several other related issues. check it out.

stewart exposes cramer, cnbc

i don't want to spend a lot of time talking about the jon stewart versus jim cramer thing but i do just want to say a few things along with encouraging everyone to watch the video.

CNBC along with virtually every mainstream media show offering so-called financial advice is nothing more than a vehicle for the super wealthy and corporate entities to disseminate their agenda to the masses and/or middle class. if you want to be a responsible adult in our society you cannot rely on regular news sources for information. you must go to alternet or tmp. you must seek out the opinions of doctor marc faber or noam chomsky but never, ever consider the supposed insights of a guy like jim cramer to be anything more than the purchased message of corporate america.

the header includes a direct link to the comedy central website where you can see jon stewart do what journalists in this country seem unwilling to do which is to expose a shill. (also note when jim cramer talks about how investors willing to gamble on hedge funds and derivatives made 30% yearly from '99 to '07. then next time you hear someone try to blame the financial crisis on poor people qualifying for mortgages instead of pointing at the deregulation of '99 which led to credit default swaps just file them away as jim cramers and never give them a second thought. ever.)