Noah Chomsky - intellectual fraud.

Several days ago Noah Chomsky the leading "intellectual" of American progressive thought gave a speech in San Francisco (video below) comparing the conservative talk show hosts of catering to people's fears a la Nazi Germany.  Why is Chomsky an intellectual fraud?

First of all this particular clip while taken out of context is laced with subtle hints despite his assurance of an imperfect analogy, attempts to draw an analogy between what Rush and Savage say and the Nazis during the Weimar republic of the 1920s Germany.  If Chomsky believes even just a tiny bit that modern conservatism espouses Nazism then he needs to think and long hard about his status as an intellectual.  What is it about restricting federal government expansion, fighting against ObamaCare, reducing handouts, minimizing taxation, fighting against smoking/bad food regulation that reminds him of Nazism?  One merely needs to graduate high school with a C average to understand that Fascism/Nazism represents the direct opposite.  If we truly wanted to drive the stake through the heart then we can certainly channel Jonah Goldberg and illustrate that Chomsky's defense of liberals aligns him much closer to the very Nazis he accuses conservatives of being.  Of course it is possible he already came to this realization and is now using the public forum and a page out of Alinsky's Rules of Radicals to freeze and erradicate his enemy.

He is right about one thing, Germany in the 1920s were the pinnacle of civilization and culture - and even they could not predict the outcome of Nazism.  Why?  Because as the Weimar Republic spun out of control and hyperinflation turned life into living hell, these very same civilized and cultured Germanic people consciously voted in the demon spawn himself.  Consider this;  Nazi party could barely get 10% of the vote in the late 1920s, but the early 1930s they claimed almost a third.  As the Weimar republic declined, a party promising full totalitarian control gained popularity.  Fast forward to America in 2008.  As the economy worsened and our financial crisis spiraled out of control, America turned to elect the most liberal candidate in the history of this young nation.  Hitler blamed the Jews and the civilized Germans nodded in approval, Obama blamed Bush and the civlized American nodded in approval.

Second of all, Chomsky calls himself a "libertarian socialist", a label so oxymoronic it should immediately disqualify anything he says as drivel.  His ultimate distaste for capitalism and private property is so profound and so transparent it's almost comical to be real.  He is using the term libertarian to tap into anarchist sympathies, but he is nothing more than a Marxist goon.  Chomsky's ideal vision is of no property rights, but a collective ownership through Utopian labor unions a desire straight out of the Communist manifesto an anathema to the American way of life.  Our founding fathers understood private property and it's immediate correlation to freedom, the more property and wealth you can acquire the more freedom you will enjoy.   Chomsky instead sees this accumulation of work as a means for exploitation and abuse of the proletariat.  How Leninist of him.   What gives Chomsky the right to criticize conservatism when he lacks basic historical understanding and sympathizes for Communists revolution? Let it go, collective property ownership does not work and while Engels/Marx could be excused for trying, Chomsky's attempt at wrapping up the same ideology in a different box simply smacks of intellectual dishonesty.