This is really ridiculous.

All my associations of Judt are to do with the Israel-Palestine question, and that will be his legacy as much as anything else he wrote, maybe more. He outstripped Chomsky as a world intellectual because he was more reflective than Chomsky, likely more self-absorbed, and so was capable of interrogating his Jewish identity;

His independence and self-awareness were thrilling. Only a majestic independent thinker could have written the most staggering, or second-most-staggering, piece on Israel/Palestine in the last ten years, Judt’s great essay on the Jewish state as an anachronism in the New York Review of Books in 2003. …

I say the second-most because three years later Walt and Mearsheimer published their great piece in the London Review of Books, and Judt rose to the occasion.

I would be interested at this point to know if Phil Weiss has even read what Chomsky’s been writing since the 70s. Comparing Judt to Chomsky is a joke. Chomsky is undoubtedly one of the great intellectual activists of the 20th century. The only person I can think of one might compare him to is Bertrand Russell. Otherwise, there have been a handful (like Desmond Tutu) who command the same international respect and attention, and take consistently impressive moral stands. And neither Tutu nor Russell could compare to Chomsky’s political scholarship.

One Response to “Mondoweiss”
Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] via Mondoweiss « Michael Brull. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: