When you live in the ivory tower of academia, you can muse all kinds of things. People like Noam Chomsky, who spend their time philosophizing in leftist political circles, seem to have no trouble just imagining away segments of society and the culture with which they disagree.
PJ Media has the stream of consciousness from the great leftist.
So, is the truest threat to the world North Korea? Is it Iran or ISIS? How about Russia or China? Nope. According to Chomsky, nuclear war and climate change are pretty scary, but the big threats to our planet are the Republican Party and Christianity.
… “It’s not just the current administration” that he disdains, however; Chomsky maintained that Republicans in general are “dramatically leading a race to destruction” as they support the use of fossil fuels.
During the 2016 primaries, for instance, Chomsky declared that “the entire leadership of the party was saying let’s quickly destroy ourselves,” citing candidates like Ohio Gov. John Kasich who supported coal energy, though he contended that “it’s gotten far more extreme since Trump took office.”
“By now, half of Republican voters deny that global warming is taking place at all, and only 30 percent think humans may be contributing,” he lamented. “I don’t think you can find anything like that among any significant part of the population anywhere in the world, and it should tell us something. One thing it should tell us is there’s a lot to do for those who hope that maybe organized human life will survive.”
… During the question and answer session after his talk, Chomsky aimed his misguided philosophizing at Christianity, saying that the faith that isn’t Islam has set out to threaten the globe. Campus Reform noted:
“People in high places now claim to be devout Christians, and on the basis of Christian ideals they’re saying let’s proceed to destroy the world,” Chomsky asserted, adding, “I don’t know anybody in the Islamic world that’s doing that.”
“Christian ideals proceed to destroy the world?” Seriously? How, … how can a so-called linguistic genius be so clueless?