Noam Chomsky is one of those people that some people will defend reflexively without even thinking.

[enby_of_the_apocalypse@social.treehouse.systems]

@artemis honestly i’m not surprised at all, considering how i already knew he did genocide denial, another sign that he lacks any kind of moral compass that i can accept. I think that this culture of treating theorists as figures to be basically worshipped inevitably leads to this kind of shit and is irreconcilable with anarchism.

[wilbr@glitch.social]

@tryst @artemis @quinn kinda, but much like if Bernie was accused of similar it seems to get overshadowed by all the correct things. This is all I could find pre-2016, yet I heard mixed/creep opinions as early as 2013:

09.18.2008 - Revisiting the human-rights horror in Cambodia

(newsarchive.berkeley.edu)

The paradox of Noam Chomsky on language and power

In his recent speech accepting the Sydney Peace Prize, Chomsky returned to a recurrent theme from his work in political science: that the violence perpetrated by the West is not represented in our media…

The Conversation (theconversation.com)

Open Letter from Ed Vulliamy to Amnesty International - Congress of Bosniaks of North America

Noam Chomsky has been invited to give the annual Amnesty International Lecture in Belfast. This is second time in four years that Chomsky has been invited to

Congress of Bosniaks of North America (bosniak.org)

[ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai]

@artemis

Another random slot along these lines is it it’s perhaps natural to valorize people of unusual achievement, but Isaac Newton had a secret hobby of alchemy, and Albert Einstein abused his wife when their marriage began to sour.

Achievement in one area is no guarantee of I guess achievement in others