Is this accurate?

[Elok]

I have never read Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky, but still find this somewhat amusing. Did they get it right?

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/columns/unused-audio-commentary-by-howard-zinn-and-noam-chomsky-recorded-for-the-return-of-the-king-platinum-series-extended-edition-dvd

Sample dialogue:

CHOMSKY: If that. It has all the characteristics of a classic fetish object. It’s ludicrous to believe that this ring, or any ring, is indeed a “ring of power”—whatever that could mean—or that it, as an inanimate object, is “evil,” or, indeed, that the fate of Middle Earth depends upon its destruction. We are supposed to accept this because Gandalf has recounted a couple of legends of dubious legitimacy. As we will discuss, the truthfulness of these legends is highly suspect, bound as they are in a conspiracy to keep the indigenous beings of Middle Earth under Elvish thrall. Hobbits, a race hopelessly addicted to pipe-weed, are, from Gandalf’s perspective, the ideal example of a malleable native people. How fitting that they are selected as the “bearers” of this worthless bit of jewelry.

[Felch]

My scholarly opinion is that this is genuine.

[BlackCat]

Well, if gods outsource their allmighty power, then a ring or like could have world destructing powers

[Barnabas]

Didn't you major in English, I thought all people who studied languages had to read Chomsky as a linguist (along with Saussure, Bajtin etc), not his political stuff which is bs.

I have a cousin who is an English teacher, when Chomsky came to Argentina decades ago, she and a group of English teachers went to his conference thinking it would be about linguistics and how kids learn languages, and it was all about politics. So they wasted a lot of money.

[Uncle Sparky]

Didn't you major in English, I thought all people who studied languages had to read Chomsky as a linguist (along with Saussure, Bajtin etc), not his political stuff which is bs.

I have a cousin who is an English teacher, when Chomsky came to Argentina decades ago, she and a group of English teachers went to his conference thinking it would be about linguistics and how kids learn languages, and it was all about politics. So they wasted a lot of money.

Funny.

When someone has a scholarly area of expertise, they should not venture into other areas, in your opinion. You'd be shocked at the number of religious scholars who comment on the sciences, and economists who think they understand politics. What a bunch of tw*ts.

[Elok]

I majored in English Literature. I also took one very introductory class in linguistics, as an elective.

[loinburger]

I learned about Chomsky in computer science, by way of the Chomsky hierarchy (regular grammars, context-free grammars, etc) and Chomsky normal form.

[Hauldren Collider]

Chomsky appears to be one of many extremely smart academics who is consequently entirely removed from political reality. His politics are pretty nutty.

However, that commentary was extremely funny.

[Kidlicious]

Anyone can certainly talk about politics. Atleast he isn't a psychopath.

[loinburger]

Yeah, it could be a lot worse - for example, he could be a fundamentalist Christian

[Kidlicious]

Yeah cause we should kill innocent people instead of learn about the Bible

[loinburger]

You've been killing innocent people instead of learning about the Bible? That's pretty ****ed up.

[C0ckney]

i've got a chomsky book on universal grammar. it's interesting, but hard to read. i had to read a shed load of other stuff to be able to understand that book.