This is the only logical way of understanding the Chomsky-Epstein controversy and what it means for us on the left, and I will die on this hill.
The worst thing Chomsky did was go against his anarchist principles by being friends with a billionaire pervert. There is zero evidence he did anything criminal himself. No woman has come forward and said Chomsky did anything to her on Epstein Island. Chomsky gave Epstein advice on how to defend himself from the media because they were friends and Chomsky believed his friend (no matter how awful of a person he was) was innocent. That’s not a valid reason to cancel someone or Chuck out their lifetime of work.
Let’s be honest: a lot of the stuff said about Epstein is dubious at best. There’s no solid evidence he was a Mossad agent luring in high-ranking global elites in order to get blackmail material on them on behalf of Israel. Not only does this narrative completely ignore capitalism and class interest, but it’s not supported by much. For one thing, most of the girls Epstein was having sex with were over 18. Yes, sone were underage, but it’s most likely they lied about their ages the same way underage groupies in the 1970s lied about their ages in order to bang rock stars. I don’t deny Epstein was a disgusting sleazeball, but he wasn’t some three-headed Illuminati alien sacrificing babies to Satan. There’s also no evidence of Epstein ever being a pimp. None of the women he trafficked have said he was pumping them out to others. One woman, Virginia Giuffre, has made multiple claims that haven’t been substantiated yet the media takes as gospel truth. Some of the things said in the files are so outrageous it’s hard to believe them. Look at it with skeptical eyes.
But back to Chomsky: his work is now being thrown out by 99% of the left precisely because the left operates on a very rigid moralism. They will dogpile on anyone for every single little thing. Modern leftist spaces have no leaders and no real structure, so they’re unable to resolve any internal conflict in any other way than mob justice. This is a huge problem that needs to be addressed and solved.
Is there a way to hold Chomsky accountable for being friends with Epstein without demanding comrades burn his books? There should be.
150 posts and 9 image replies omitted.>>2695474how do you strip them of their power?
how do you make them work for the community?
>>2695425The abolition of class society can be interpreted by many people as a demand for justice. Your insistence on it being otherwise is to the detriment of your own cause. No one is going to go out to rallies for the abstract notion of "ending commodity production".
>>2695474This is going to surprise you but in one of the only large-scale anarkiddie experiments ever devised (Revolutionary Catalonia) the anarkiddies did indeed resort to death penalties/death squads and labor camps.
>>2692546>it works by name recognition and internal cred so elites are incentivized to go out there and just social climb with other random elites as much as possible. 70% of Epstein-related speculations come from proles who do not understand this thing about elite socializationCan you make the jump in reasoning to understand why this behavior makes one a perfect intelligence asset?
>>2695425Progress without justice is eugenics.
>>2695478
Why does it matter if someone is Jewish? Would Epstein have been any better if he was Catholic or Muslim?
>>2695391>Communists are not prison abolitionists. That's a radlib thing.Next you're gonna tell us Communists don't want to abolish the State
>Usa will need even more prisons acter thd revolutionAlphabetization camps will be of far greater importance it seems.
>>2695387Because anarchists are idealist idiots.
>>2696230Are you sure you're not an anarchist?
>>2696230Communists do not want to abolish the state. It will rather whither away.
>>2690995>le good and evil>guiltIdealism
The accusation of anarchism reveals your own conceptual poverty. You see "abolition" and imagine absence, see "no police" and imagine no coordination of reprisal. Your linearity is projected onto what you cannot parse. The framework does not abolish punishment systems…it transforms their form, their social relations, their material basis. You cannot imagine form without content, so you look to engage in a campist argument.
In the real world of history, the state has abolished punishment repeatedly; torture to imprisonment, public execution to carceral discipline, corporal correction to psychological normalization. Each transformation preserved domination through new modalities of interaction based on materially developments within their respective societies. The bourgeois social model cannot exist without reproducing bourgeois results—this is not moral critique but structural mechanics. Centralized state apparatus, professionalized violence, carceral logic: these emerge necessarily from the concentration of economic and political power that defines capitalist social relations. Police and prisons in their current form are not unfortunate additions but constitutive features, required to manage the contradictions that bourgeois society continuously produces. The Marxist framework recognizes that abolition without transformation of social form becomes mere reconstitution; the same bourgeoisie models applied to a post revolutionary society are bound to reproduce the crudest forms of bourgeoisie social relations. The critic who sees this as anarchism mistakes the target. We do not seek to remove institutions and hope for unattainable harmony; we seek to build institutions that produce different results because they embody different relations; this is abolition. The bourgeois model produces police and prisons necessarily; our model seeks to produce necessarily something else, knowing that failure is possible but that the attempt is compelled by the alternative's guaranteed catastrophic failure. The proper revolutionary learns this from history; abolition without structural transformation becomes reconstitution. We do not repeat anarchism's error of assuming institutional absence produces harmony.
Abolition in revolutionary sense comes with transformation. To be a revolutionaries is to be innovators. For people not realizing this, its because the prison's abolition requires organizational imagination they do not possess. The linear thought measures novelty by conceptual distance; our materialist method measures it by practical capacity. If you imagine prison and police abolition as a removal of all future forms of defense and reprisal for harm, that is your own imaginative failure.
>>2696769 IS in response TO
>>2696457.
As for the OP topic;
The association between Noam Chomsky and Jeffrey Epstein while superficially jarring given Chomsky's longstanding critique of power structures becomes intelligible when viewed through the lens of class reproduction and ideological filtering inherent to bourgeois educational institutions.
Chomsky has repeatedly described the education system himself; from primary schooling through elite university credentialing as a sophisticated apparatus of social selection and control. It functions not primarily to cultivate intellectual merit or emancipatory consciousness, but to reproduce hierarchical obedience. As he articulates in discussions drawn from Understanding Power and related interviews the institutional structure rewards docility, punctuality, and conformity while systematically "weeding out" those exhibiting excessive independence, critical questioning, or resistance to authority. The non-compliant are labeled as "behavior problems," "unmotivated," or disruptive, and marginalized in society early on, ensuring that ascent to positions of prestige tenured professorships, Ivy League chairs, influential networks..selects disproportionately for those who have internalized the necessity of compliance. It's well beyond race and class alone, the logic of bourgeoisie control is veiled in every aspect of institutional society.
This filtering mechanism, rooted in the historical transformation of education into a tool for producing disciplined wage-laborers and managerial bodies (a process Chomsky traces back to the suppression of independent agrarian mentalities in favor of factory like regimentation), generates an elite stratum habituated to navigating power without fundamental challenge. Entry into the upper echelons of academia demands not merely technical skill, but a proven capacity for accommodation within dominant ideological parameters. This is precisely the disposition that enables sustained access to exclusive social and financial circuits.
Epstein's milieu, with its veneer of intellectual patronage and cross-class networking among the ruling bloc's academic auxiliaries is something tha represents one such circuit. The capacity to maintain "regular contact" and engage in prolonged exchanges (as documented in released correspondence) presupposes the very compliance and circumspection that the educational filter cultivates over decades. Far from contradicting Chomsky's anarchist-communist analysis of manufactured consent and structural domination this entanglement illustrates its material operation. in most cases the system does not elevate actual revolutionaries to the summits of institutional, intellectual or educational power; it elevates those sufficiently attuned to class hierarchy's veiled demands, even as they articulate critiques from within its sheltered precincts of education.
In Marxist terms, the Ivy League functions as an ideological state apparatus par excellence, reproducing the organic intellectuals of the ruling class while marginalizing counter-hegemonic voices, yet permitting a narrow space for domesticated dissent that never threatens the underlying relations of production. Chomsky's proximity to such networks underscores not hypocrisy perse, but the structural compulsion toward accommodation that the capitalist educational order imposes on even its most lucid critics. There is nothing that was shocking here to me.
Chimpsky and Epstein are both yanks.
All yanks are like that.
American anarchism is dead after this.
My biggest issue with the Epstein shit is that nothing is coming out of it.
Epstein was Mossad? Okay, assuming this is true, what does this change? We were doing direct action for Palestine for over two years and jack shit ended the genocide.
Epstein had politicians in total control? Okay, so what changes from here on out? We already know capitalism needs to be overthrown. In order to fight the rich and powerful we're going to be doing the exact same things we've been doing for decades.
Oh no, we've found out the rich are evil beyond comprehension? Ummm, yeah? Again, how do we remove the rich from power? How does the Epstein shit affect our praxis at all?
Do you think when chomsky was at the island he asked for a monkey instead of an underage girl
Coz, you know, monkeys can't talk
>>2696778you've just forgot about Iron Felix, dear Mauritian nationalist
>>2696841No. No woman has come out saying Chomsky did anything to her on Epstein island. All Chomsky did was assume his friend Epstein was innocent.
>>2697271has anyone asked koko?
Very cringe question, but does anyone remember how the OG anarchist YouTubers were all Chomsky-cult?
I’m talking about mr1001nights, chomskyan, and buddhagem. How are they taking the news? I know I’m showing my age (I’m 38) but still.
>>2696797>My biggest issue with the Epstein shit is that nothing is coming out of it.Wrong, it good propaganda material for class consciousness, and to delegitimize the current world order.
>>2697896And yet we don’t see a mass socialist movement forming around it.
>>2698429The problem is, the Epstein shit is only a critique of CAPITALISTS, not a critique of capitalism. Run-of-the-mill liberals will say they want to remove the ultra-rich from power, or at least greatly reduce their power. There's zero reason to believe the Epstein shit will make people anti-capitalist.
Some woman needs to #metoo Chomsky so he'll finally be accused of something real.
>>2698429Moral outrage against ruling class excess and debauchery alone is not promising ground for building a socialist movement. It's akin to public outrage over any other sort of "corruption": the outed perpetrators are treated as aberrations which must be purged and punished in order to restore justice and cleanse the social order.
This myopic narrative in itself serves only to defend the foundations of the bourgeois democratic order as an authentic human community frustrated by the entryism of bad actors. Like so is obscured the fact that sexual violence and coercion are intrinsic, foundational and functional aspects of all patriarchal societies, and that the epistemic logic of Capital is distilled from the structural dynamics of Patriarchy.
Communists can only highlight this and afirm that the only way to put an end to the systematic abuse at every level is to take practical steps towards abolishing both the nuclear family and private property through violent rupture with the capitalist mode of production and the gendered division of tasks in all facets of life.
>>2690946I'm not gonna chuck out his work.
>There’s no solid evidence he was a Mossad agent … behalf of IsraelSeriously? The entirety of the files and all of his recordings with Ehud Barak and you think he didn't work for Israel?
>>2699195>not promising ground for building a socialist movement.I'm not talking about something that will be a structure for movement building, I'm talking about agitprop / propaganda by the deed / recruitment grounds. Of course you have to use your imagination, and stop thinking I mean the left should simply hold their version of "no kings".
This concern is not with moral outrage as foundation but with missed organizational opportunity. The Epstein revelations of ruling class impunity, institutional protection of systematic abuse, the visible operation of power outside legal constraint have generated mass attention, emotional intensity, and critical consciousness of elite criminality that the left can very well fail to channel. This is not failure to build socialism on moralism; it is failure to connect visible ruling class dysfunction to socialist analysis and current organizational capacity.
Distinction between moral outrage and socialist movement is valid but incomplete and a misdirection of what I mean. Public moral outrage is not foundation but gateway to truth, a moment of visibility where ruling class ideology loses hold, where "meritocracy" and "rule of law" appear as fictions, where masses are temporarily open to alternative explanation and acts. The left's task is not to build on outrage as such but to capture these moments of social rupture, to connect specific scandal and concern to structural analysis, and to channel attention into organizational relationship / capacity.
The Epstein case specifically offered opportunities; demonstration of how capitalist wealth purchases impunity across decades, how legal and political institutions protect rather than constrain elite criminality, and how media concentration enables suppression of anything that may target the elite. These are not moral lessons but materialist ones waiting to be learned. Visible confirmation of theoretical claims about state and capital that typically remain abstract. The failure to capture this energy will not be organizational prioritization of morality but a representation of organizational absence when visible widespread rupture of the bourgeoisie hegemony on legitimacy created possibility.
"The masses are never fully conscious of the tasks of the revolution, nor can they be, until the revolution has begun and has developed into a definite struggle. But it is the task of the party of the revolutionary class to prepare for the revolution, to indicate its inevitability, to explain to the masses their tasks in the revolution, and to draw them into revolutionary struggle." - Lenin
>>2699032Gotta go to work on Monday.
>>2690946Chomsky shat on the Soviet Union.
Ultimately, that's the real litmus test on whether someone is a real leftist or a LARPer/liberal/pseudoleftist/revisionist.
I seriously don't understand why you guys are surprised by this development. I value his contributions on linguistics, but is obvious he has been ideologically compromised for decades.
Anarchists stopped supporting Chomsky when he came out against Antifa around 2017 or so.
The flagship "victims" such as Lisa Phillips, Maria Farmer, Virginia Giufrre, Sarah Ransome are #metoo frauds.
Epstein was not a pedophile. There are no credible reports of "victims" younger than 14.
Nor was he based. He had a small penis, low T, and he died without children.
Stop falling for feminist propaganda.
>>2700359>Epstein was not a pedophileBait
>Stop falling for feminist propaganda.So are you saying the Trump administration is feminist?
>>2690946He was already a liberal who supported the continuation of American hegemony through his voooting and anti soviet stance so why does it suprise you he was friends with pedophile billionaires
>>2699855most people in the former warsaw pact also shit on the soviet union lol. chomsky was a libtard but not for this reason
>>2700424>most people in the former warsaw pact also shit on the soviet union lolbut not most of those that lived under it, and those country have become hopeless pit of pro imperialism reactionnaries
>>2700433older people are more split on the issue, but the majority still don't want it back. we have to somehow overcome the 20th century instead of repeating it
>>2700439Not happening, the only revolutions that happen are CIA backed color revolutions, the proletariat is over
>>2700441there are more proletarians than ever before in history but i agree we probably won't live to see socialism
>>2700442There’s not a single proletarian alive, we have two billion labor aristocrats
Face it: people are only chimping out at the Epstein shit because the victims were overwhelmingly white women. If this has been Black or Native women no one would care
>>2700359I don't know how retards like you found this website but fuck off back to wherever you came from
>>2701046Vast majority of victims are from either the ex USSR or ex Yugoslavia, he wasn’t primarily targeting WASP kids
>>2701046the unnecessary palestine flag attached to this post adds a bit of extra spice to the bait but it also gives the bait away, you can tell it's meant to be bit
Am I the only one who’s sick and tired of the Epstein shit turning into the left embracing the Great Man of History nonsense?
>>2700359This. How is Epstein any different from #metoo?
Unique IPs: 26