#rsrh Noam Chomsky is remarkably ignorant…

…about Native Americans, apparently:

It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk… It’s as if the Luftwaffe were to call its fighter planes “Jew” and “Gypsy.”

Not to mention the US Army, but we knew that already.  I can only assume that it’s due to his being steeped in the deeply parochial and insular culture that is Western academia: if he had more extensive life experience then he’d know that the Army honors Native American nations by naming its military helicopter classes after them, and makes it a point to have representatives of said nations participate in solemn rituals involving those helicopters.   The next example of same will take place in May of 2011, involving Lakota Light Utility Helicopters; as the link shows, representatives of the Oglala Sioux Nation…

– that’s a Native American nation associated with the Lakota, Chomsky; I only mention this elementary detail since you apparently don’t know anything about the original inhabitants of this continent –

…have been involved as respected participants in the acquisition of the helicopters from the beginning.  And why should they not be respected?  Their ancestors were brave men and women and renowned warriors, and their descendants have shown – REPEATEDLY – that they have not forgotten how to fight with valor and skill; it is no insult to honor their nations by naming our war machines after them.


That made absolutely no sense to you at all, Chomsky?  Well, it was your choice to so thoroughly isolate yourself from your country, not mine.

Moe Lane

PS: What?  Oh, yes, the rest of the article was equally ignorant.


  • Apparently the Kiowa Indians really like their helicopter. I once read a story about them “blessing” their “Fighting Kiowa” the OH-58D. They thought it was a pretty cool machine.

    Only a true western academic could assume that the American Indians could never be a part of the USA, and the Americans of non-native stock would hate and fear the Native Americans. The whole murdering each other thing ended a long time ago. Most of us have learned to get along just fine since.

  • Catseye says:

    History it tells you a lot, if you know how to read it and understand it. I believe it is required for a degree in Military Science.

  • Cameron says:

    Poor Noam. It must be hard dealing with the fact God is keeping him alive long enough to see what a failure his ideology is and how little his opinions mean outside college.

  • VANDERLEUN says:

    It is long past Noam’s dirt nap bed time.

  • helltoupee29 says:

    “It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk…”

    Isn’t naming one of our weapons after a Tomahawk kind of like naming our weapon after a weapon?

  • bandit says:

    Does he think Tomahawk is someone’s name?

  • SenatorMark4 says:

    AS I understand it, Chomsky is a Linguist professor at MIT or something. I have always felt that all of his rantings were just experiments to see how many people, and dollars, he could sway with absolute BS. I fully expect him to recant on his death bed in order to give a dying example of how propaganda can ALWAYS get the idiots behind you.

  • AzA says:

    Having lived near and worked on Indian reservations for many years, I can tell you that American Indians are very proud of their military service. They are disproportionately represented in our elite combat units, and Veterans Day is the biggest celebration of the year on any rez.

    Of course, a Marxist like Chomsky would say that their pride is just false consciousness. But I’d advise him not to say it to their faces.

  • craig says:

    So why, in the mindset of Chomsky et al., did we put Indians on our coinage for so many years? (Especially since we didn’t intentionally debase our currency until after the designs had changed to show dead white men?)

  • Slartibartfast says:

    Lakota is getting guns and sensors, soon. The Lakota will be pleased/highly offended.

  • Rudersdorf says:

    Traditionally, Native Americas have had the highest volunteer rate for the armed forces of any ethnic group. One of the flag raisers in the famous Iwo Jimo photo was a Pima. Those guys act like it’s their country.

  • peterike says:

    I see Chomsky blogs at a magazine called Guernica. Oh brother.

    Also, the comments for his blog are moderated “by the blog owner.” I guess we won’t be seeing any posts contradicting Chomsky’s blatherings. It’s really ironic how often that Leftist websites — endlessly screaming about censorship where there is none — either don’t allow comments at all, or moderate them heavily.

    • Moe_Lane says:

      For the record: I heavily and cheerfully moderate comments on this site, and at the same time hypocritically deplore it when the Left does it on their sites. I’m lampshading this because, well, why not?

  • Mark81150 says:

    I’m amazed anyone bothered to look this chump up for his opinion. A linquist,.. and they ask his views on world affairs, political/cultural/military why?

    Isn’t like reading what the head engineer at Raytheon thinks about ancient Mayan culture?

    He’s famous for being a Soviet apologist, extreme contrarian, and hater of all things western.. that I recently saw a poster at Huff Po gush about his insights in our current financial situation, makes me think, I fear for the corruption he’ll put in youngsters minds who come at him cold, with no idea what an astounding fool and clown he is

  • Faith+1 says:

    It’s simple to understand his position. He is one of those nimrods who feel anything associated with the military is “low class” or “insulting” therefore naming weapons platforms after honored warriors is really an insult.

    We should name a weapon system after Chomsky. Maybe that old Cold War nuclear artillery gun that fired nuclear warheads only a hair farther than the blast radius of the shell.

  • Tim H. says:

    I’m glad somebody else noticed the problem with Chomsky’s Tomahawk reference. Yes, Chomsky is a linguist, and in fact his field is “semiotics,” which is (crudely oversimplified) the study of the relationship between words and the things they signify.

    So why would he make such an apparent mistake in mentioning “Tomahawk” (an Indian weapon) in a list of “victims”? Furthermore, since semiotics is more generally not just about words per se but about “signs” and the things they signify, why would he miss the fact that our use of this naming is a sign of respect and not a triumphalist gloat? That is, the *meaning* behind this is entirely different than he supposes.

    One might wonder if he’s *not* that great a semiotician, after all.

  • Lakelevel says:

    We should name a weapon system after Chomsky.
    The non-lethal microwave weapon that causes discomfort and confusion should be called the Chomsky.

  • Phos says:

    My brother actually trained on the nuclear artillery back in the 80’s. I think he did not change his MOS to Forward Observer till after they stopped using them.

  • ThomasD says:

    Like Aza says, the people on the reservations generally prefer to be called Indians. Native American is a PC term, that can be applied to anyone born here, they want nothing to do with.

    Indian Health Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, etc… If they wanted those names changed is there any doubt they would be changed?

  • karrde says:

    Does he think Tomahawk is someone’s name??

    While, there is the joke that Black Hawk named his son Tommy Hawk…

    But that does make me wonder. Will someone ask him about the history of the Tomahawk tribe?

  • John says:

    Well, the United States also names ships after conquered territories, like the USS Virgina or USS Texas, etc.

  • Tim H. says:

    Whoops–I was wrong. Chomsky’s not a “semiotician” (I must have been thinking of Umberto Eco). His work is in “context-free grammar,” among other things. Nuts. I can’t think of an obvious joke about context-free grammar.

  • JEM says:

    Chomsky is what so many of the left like to point to as a Great Thinker, which tells us pretty much everything we need to know about those who take Pacifica Radio seriously.

    He’s also the two-word answer to this crossword puzzle question, at least as far as the lower-middle North American shire of the Anglosphere is concerned:

  • JEM says:

    Tim H – ‘Context-free grammar’?

    Isn’t ‘context-free grammar’ customarily the province of guys sitting on the sidewalk in puddles of their own urine?

    That explains a lot…

  • Jim says:

    What do you expect from some butthead who can’t even spell “Norm”?

  • Tom A. Hawk says:

    I’ve always wondered why a mother would name her son Noam. Here is the south that always meant “no mam”. Anyway, I understand his cringing over naming people or things with words derived from the Indian cultures. They tend to emphasize bravery and such. No so the left.

  • unominous says:

    Context free grammar would be exemplified by the article itself wouldn’t it? There is literally nothing of meaning in the text, but one can’t deny that it is grammatical. Badly written but grammatical.

  • Bruce Lagasse says:

    I must take exception to the PC use of the term “Native American”. Strictly speaking, the original inhabitants of the North American continent should be designated as “Siberian Americans.” The only true natives anywhere are the original inhabitants of the Olduvai Gorge and the Great Rift Valley. Everyone else on the planet is an immigrant or a descendant of immigrants.

  • Slartibartfast says:

    The only true natives anywhere are the original inhabitants of the Olduvai Gorge and the Great Rift Valley.

    C’mon; everyone knows those were just shipped in from the Pak homeworld.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by