Some [people] may be "servants of the power structure," but that has to be shown. I think it often can be shown, but the burden of proof is on the critic who puts forth that thesis in particular cases.

Academics are mostly professionals, involved in their work and other concerns of their own, with no particular interest in the workings of the ideological system.

My feeling is that if any Republican was elected it would be almost a death knell for the species literally, just because of their attitude on climate change.

Should people be mere "interested spectators of action," not "participants," restricted to lending their weight periodically to one or another sector of the "responsible men," as advocates of "manufacture of consent" have recommended? Or should their rights transcend these highly restricted bounds?

In much of the world the U.S. is regarded as a leading terrorist state.

If something is repeated over and over as obvious, the chances are that it is obviously false.

I've been interested in the reports on Rojava. It seems clear that there are positive developments.