Alterman on Chomsky

[Brad DeLong]

>Brad De Long squirmed.
>
>>>  >How does one have one's work included in a book "without permission"?
>>Aren't there people in black robes whose job it is to make sure that
>>your copyrighted work shows up where and when you want it to?
>
>>>By being a consistent freedom of speech absolutist who refuses to
>>sue for libel, slander or copyright violation. Most of us our not
>>that absolute in our commitment to free speech. Noam is.
>
>
>>Ah. So it was included in the book "with permission," not "without
>permission"...
>
>You know you are really excercising bad faith. Suppose some Randite 
>wrote a book arguing the the poor and unemployed should be enslaved 
>in a  revival of bond slavery , as a solution to our social 
>problems. Suppose you had put some work of yours into the public 
>domain - because you thought it should be widely circulated; suppose 
>the Randite used this as introduction to her book.

Well, I certainly wouldn't write--in the last paragraph of that work:

"...is it true that X is an advocate of slavery? As noted earlier, I 
do not know his work very well. But from what I have read -- largely 
as a result of the nature of the attacks on him -- I find no evidence 
to support such a conclusion. Nor do I find credible evidence in the 
material that I have read concerning him, either in the public record 
or in private correspondence. As far as I can determine, he is a 
relatively apolitical liberal of some sort. In support of the charge 
of slavery advocacy, I have been informed that X is remembered by 
some schoolmates as having expressed pro-slavery sentiments in the 
1940s, and as having written a letter that some interpret as having 
pro-slavery implications at the time of the Algerian war. I am a 
little surprised that serious people should put such charges forth -- 
even in private -- as a sufficient basis. I am aware of nothing in 
the public record to support such charges..."

But Chomsky did.