Noam Chomsky: Income Tax Fan
From TechCentralStation.com:
Editor’s note: In light of news that a British poll identified Noam Chomsky as the world’s leading intellectual, we thought it would be a valuable exercise to run this excerpt from Peter Schweizer’s new book Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy (Doubleday $22.95).
Note from the Author: Whereas readers of The Prospect found the top public intellectual in Chomsky, I found a poster child for modern-day capitalism and, because of his anti-capitalist views, a complete hypocrite.
One of the most persistent themes in Chomsky’s work has been class warfare. He has frequently 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 one percent. The American tax code is rigged with “complicated devices for ensuring that the poor — like eighty percent of the population — pay off the rich.”
But trusts can’t be all bad. After all, Chomsky, with a net worth north of $2,000,000, 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 favors the estate tax and massive income redistribution — just not the redistribution of his income. No reason to let radical politics get in the way of sound estate planning.
I guess here’s one thing Chomsky has in common with the FairTax: the dislike for offshore tax havens.
Keep reading for more…
Noam Chomsky: A person who issues that charge that someone adheres to the principle “do as I say, not as I do” (the actual charge) has three options: (1) produce an example; (2) withdraw the charge; (3) take the coward’s way out and slink away silently. So far, no one has provided even a single example (if you can find one, I’d be glad to know about it and correct the practice). That leaves (2) or (3). The examples you mention obviously won’t work unless you can produce a statement of mine saying that others should not do exactly what I do. You’ll find no such statement, either in the literature to which you are referring, or elsewhere. I’m omitting the many pure fabrications that accompany these charges.
the essay makes numerous mistakes. for example it redefines what capitalism is just to call chomsky a capitalist. it also condemns him as a capitalist for living in a capitalist society. thats akin to saying all whites who live in a racist society are racist. just because he puts away money he made for his family doesnt make him a capitalist. nor is investing in stocks. his “cabin” comment underlines this well. it would be foolish to cut off our noses to spite our face. in other words, we live in a capitalist society. to purge ourself from anything connected to capitalism to make a statement would consign ourselves to being hermits. he takes advantage of what he can and uses it to bring attention to various issues, donates to charities and provides for his family.
also, another stupid comment in the hoover essay was the spin job on the “free press.” what makes a free press is not free access to private events. but the author ignores the different meanings and links them together all for his smear campaign.
rather than defend capitalism’s defects the writer chooses to turn windmills into giants and slay them like he is don quixote.