Noam Chomsky says Trump and associates are 'criminally insane'

The renowned linguist and controversial political critic said President Donald Trump is choosing to race toward the catastrophes of climate change.

  • Chomsky said climate change and nuclear war are the two main existential threats facing humanity.
  • The Republican Party and Trump are not only failing to address climate change, but also are choosing to make it worse, according to Chomsky.
  • Polling data show that American Republicans seem to be growing slightly more skeptical about climate change and climate science.

In 2016, renowned linguist and political critic famously said the modern Republican Party is "the most dangerous organization" in human history.

His argument, which he later outlined in a New York Times opinion piece, was that President Donald Trump and his Republican allies are not only failing to address climate change—the principal existential threat facing humanity, in addition to nuclear war, according to Chomsky—but are also choosing to race toward catastrophe as quickly as possible, in the interest of short-term profits.

Chomsky elaborated on these concerns in a recent interview with Scientific American. For example, the controversial critic told science writer John Horgan that a September 2018 report from Trump's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration qualifies as "a contender for the most evil document in history."

That report predicted the planet would warm by 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century—a catastrophic forecast by any standard—but also said the administration isn't planning to do anything about it.

"It presented a rational argument: extrapolating current trends, by the end of the century we'll be over the cliff and automotive emissions don't contribute very much to the catastrophe – the assumption being that everyone is as criminally insane as we are and won't try to avoid the crisis," Chomsky said. "In brief, let's rob while the planet burns, putting poor Nero in the shadows."

Chomsky said the administration's pursuit of money over stability makes it superlatively malicious.

"There have been many monsters in the past, but it would be hard to find one who was dedicated to undermining the prospects for organized human society, not in the distant future -- in order to put a few more dollars in overstuffed pockets."

Chomsky argued that other institutions share a responsibility to mitigate or address climate change.

"The same can be said about the major banks that are increasing investments in fossil fuels, knowing very well what they are doing. Or, for that matter, the regular articles in the major media and business press reporting US success in rapidly increasing oil and gas production, with commentary on energy independence, sometimes local environmental effects, but regularly without a phrase on the impact on global warming – a truly existential threat. Same in the election campaign. Not a word about the issue that is merely the most crucial one in human history."

Does society need reform or revolution?

Asked about the utility of incremental change versus more drastic measures, Chomsky said both are useful in particular contexts.

"Generalizations are misleading; too much depends on specific circumstances. But some have a fair degree of validity, I think," Chomsky said. "One is that there is both justification and pressing need for radical changes in the socioeconomic and political orders. We cannot know to what extent they can be achieved by incremental reforms, which are to be valued on their own. But unless the great mass of the population comes to believe that needed change cannot be implemented within the existing system, resort to "drastic measures" is likely to be a recipe for disaster."

Americans' views on climate change

A 2018 Gallup poll shows how Democrats and Republicans are sharply divided on climate change.

American conservatives are slightly more skeptical and less concerned about climate change issues compared to 2017, according to the poll. This boost in skepticism arguably stems from politicians' rhetoric.

For instance, Trump recently suggested to 60 Minutes that humans might not be contributing to climate change.

"I think something's happening," Trump said. "Something's changing and it'll change back again. I don't think it's a hoax, I think there's probably a difference. But I don't know that it's man-made."

He added: "You'd have to show me the scientists because they have a very big political agenda."

In October, a landmark report from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that the planet could warm by up to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit by 2040 at the current rate of emissions. Avoiding such a change would require radical and unprecedented changes to the global economy, the authors wrote.

Climate Science: Is There Any Room for Skepticism?

Should you defend the free speech rights of neo-Nazis?

Former president of the ACLU Nadine Strossen discusses whether our society should always defend free speech rights, even for groups who would oppose such rights.

Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
  • Former ACLU president Nadine Strossen understands that protecting free speech rights isn't always a straightforward proposition.
  • In this video, Strossen describes the reasoning behind why the ACLU defended the free speech rights of neo-Nazis in Skokie, Illinois, 1977.
  • The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Keep reading Show less

Become an intellectual explorer: Master the art of conversation

Want to be smarter than you were yesterday? Learn to have better conversations using these 3 design principles.

Sponsored by the Institute for Humane Studies
  • What is a great conversation? They are the ones that leave us feeling smarter or more curious, with a sense that we have discovered something, understood something about another person, or have been challenged.
  • There are 3 design principles that lead to great conversations: humility, critical thinking, and sympathetic listening.
  • Critical thinking is the celebrated cornerstone of liberalism, but next time you're in a challenging and rewarding conversation, try to engage sympathetic listening too. Understanding why another intelligent person holds ideas that are at odds with your own is often more enlightening than merely hunting for logic errors.
Keep reading Show less

New alternative to Trump's wall would create jobs, renewable energy, and increase border security

A consortium of scientists and engineers have proposed that the U.S. and Mexico build a series of guarded solar, wind, natural gas and desalination facilities along the entirety of the border.

Credit: Purdue University photo/Jorge Castillo Quiñones
Politics & Current Affairs
  • The proposal was recently presented to several U.S. members of Congress.
  • The plan still calls for border security, considering all of the facilities along the border would be guarded and connected by physical barriers.
  • It's undoubtedly an expensive and complicated proposal, but the team argues that border regions are ideal spots for wind and solar energy, and that they could use the jobs and fresh water the energy park would create.
Keep reading Show less

Belly fat: Gut bacteria checks could lead to personalized diets

The reason one diet does not suit all may be found in our guts.

Media for Medical / Getty Images
Surprising Science
  • New research shows that there's no one diet that works for everyone.
  • Instead, gut bacteria may hold the key to personalized diet plans.
  • A future doctor may check gut bacteria to offer diet advice.
Keep reading Show less