My apologies. I seem to have repeated myself there.
Remember when I asked for your opinions about the definition of racism and I told you about letting a professional linguist talk to you about how you think? Well, Peter Schweizer of Canada’s National Post has the goods on Noam Chomsky.
One of the most persistent themes in Noam Chomsky’s work has been class warfare. The iconic MIT linguist and left-wing activist frequently has lashed out against the “massive use of tax havens to shift the burden to the general population and away from the rich,” and criticized the concentration of wealth in “trusts” by the wealthiest 1%. He says the U.S. tax code is rigged with “complicated devices for ensuring that the poor — like 80% of the population — pay off the rich.”
But trusts can’t be all bad. After all, Chomsky, with a net worth north of US$2-million, decided to create one for himself. A few years back he went to Boston’s venerable white-shoe law firm, Palmer and Dodge, and, with the help of a tax attorney specializing in “income-tax planning,” set up an irrevocable trust to protect his assets from Uncle Sam. He named his tax attorney (every socialist radical needs one!) and a daughter as trustees. To the Diane Chomsky Irrevocable Trust (named for another daughter) he has assigned the copyright of several of his books, including multiple international editions.
Chomsky favours massive income redistribution — just not the redistribution of his income. No reason to let radical politics get in the way of sound estate planning.
If you’ve ever heard Trotsky, oops, I mean Chomsky speak (sorry, I keep getting those two mixed up), you’ve probably heard his spiel on property rights and how it is a tool of the rich to keep the poor where they are, yada, yada, yada.
Well, Schweizer has some very tasty info on what Trot, damn, Chomsky thinks of his property,
But when it comes to Chomsky’s own published work, this advocate of open intellectual property suddenly becomes very selfish. It would not be advisable to download the audio from one of his speeches without paying the fee, warns his record company, Alternative Tentacles. (Did Andrei Sakharov have a licensing agreement with a record company?) And when it comes to his articles, you’d better keep your hands off. Go to the official Noam Chomsky Web site (www.chomsky.info) and the warning is clear: “Material on this site is copyrighted by Noam Chomsky and/or Noam Chomsky and his collaborators. No material on this site may be reprinted or posted on other web sites without written permission.” (However, the Web site does give you the opportunity to “sublicense” the material if you are interested.)
Radicals used to think of their ideas as weapons; Chomsky sees them as a licensing opportunity.
Chomsky has even gone the extra mile to protect the copyright to some of his material by transferring ownership to his children. Profits from those works will thus be taxed at his children’s lower rate. He also thereby extends the length of time that the family is able to hold onto the copyright and protect his intellectual assets.
I’m sure that Canada’s socialist contingent will be asking for Schweizer’s head on a plate and a retraction with apology from The National Post in short order.
Of course, with a name like Schweizer, it probably won’t take Chompers long to call him a Nazi.
And the lefties will eat it up.
Post story found at Alarming News