Take a photo of a barcode or cover
calarco 's review for:
The Responsibility of Intellectuals
by Noam Chomsky
After admiring Noam Chomsky's social critiques as he's communicated in interviews, I was excited to finally read one of his printed works. Overall, there were both good and bad elements in The Responsibility of Intellectuals, but I mostly found it to be disappointing.
Writing this review in 2018, current events has had me looking back to the Nixon years and Vietnam. Partly why I was interested in this book was that it included Chomsky's essay from that period, and in the second half touches upon the War in Iraq. I found the second half of the book to be much stronger than the first, especially when it came to (younger) Chomsky's criticisms of foreign powers in Asia. For someone who is so good at the self reflection of his own country, his one dimensional characterizations of Asian countries left much to be desired.
What the book does do well though, is emphasize the importance of truth-telling, even if it means critiquing what is popular. Chomsky clearly defines who he means by "intellectuals" as individuals who should utilize their privilege to tell the truth as a moral imperative. He expands, "It seems to be close to a historical universal that conformist intellectuals, the one who support official aims and ignore or rationalize official crimes, are honored and privileged in their own societies, and the value-oriented punished in one or another way" (122).
This is definitely true, though I do wish he would expand on HOW intellectuals could utilize privilege to critique the powerful. Not every country has a First Amendment. While I wholeheartedly agree with the central thesis of this volume, I would have liked to have seen the surrounding argument better developed. Otherwise, it just read like someone in a (secure) porcelain tower preaching to others in their own porcelain towers.
It also probably does not help that I read Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine this year, which touches upon many of the themes introduced in The Responsibility of Intellectuals, but is much better researched and argued. Overall, I didn't really like this one (sorry Chomsky), but read it for yourself and decide.
Writing this review in 2018, current events has had me looking back to the Nixon years and Vietnam. Partly why I was interested in this book was that it included Chomsky's essay from that period, and in the second half touches upon the War in Iraq. I found the second half of the book to be much stronger than the first, especially when it came to (younger) Chomsky's criticisms of foreign powers in Asia. For someone who is so good at the self reflection of his own country, his one dimensional characterizations of Asian countries left much to be desired.
What the book does do well though, is emphasize the importance of truth-telling, even if it means critiquing what is popular. Chomsky clearly defines who he means by "intellectuals" as individuals who should utilize their privilege to tell the truth as a moral imperative. He expands, "It seems to be close to a historical universal that conformist intellectuals, the one who support official aims and ignore or rationalize official crimes, are honored and privileged in their own societies, and the value-oriented punished in one or another way" (122).
This is definitely true, though I do wish he would expand on HOW intellectuals could utilize privilege to critique the powerful. Not every country has a First Amendment. While I wholeheartedly agree with the central thesis of this volume, I would have liked to have seen the surrounding argument better developed. Otherwise, it just read like someone in a (secure) porcelain tower preaching to others in their own porcelain towers.
It also probably does not help that I read Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine this year, which touches upon many of the themes introduced in The Responsibility of Intellectuals, but is much better researched and argued. Overall, I didn't really like this one (sorry Chomsky), but read it for yourself and decide.