> See below...
> > I quite agree. Responsible 'economics' writing is always free from
> 'loaded
> > words', relying instead on clarity, freedom from ambiguity, and an
> entirely
> > objective neutrality. People like Chomsky who refuse to swallow the sign
> as
> > the signified have no business messing in serious matters. His
> contributions
> > often do no more than confuse people who should otherwise be content to
> > embrace the dominant paradigm and get on with their roles.

DDeBar wrote:

> Is this a bad joke?

Sorry mon ami... I thought it was about all our fellow critical thinker's
initial (and sole) posting merited. Trust I am forgiven.

Solidarity

b

bruce sandford
Hamilton 2001
Aotearoa - New Zealand

ICQ: 20816964

> Regardless of the "loaded" language that Chomsky, or
> anyone else, may or may not use, I can't think of a damned person on this
> planet, so full of people starving, choking and dying from
> economic chaos,
> "who
> should otherwise be content to embrace the dominant paradigm and get on
> with their roles".
> I await, with not much enthusiasm, the names of the
> "responsible" economic heroes of this writer whose reliance upon
> "...clarity, freedom from ambiguity, and an entirely objective neutrality"
> so inspired said writer that (s)he would expect anyone to swallow this
> "paradigm".
>
> DDeBar
>