By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Newly released documents detailing Noam Chomsky’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein reveal a personal familiarity extending beyond mere financial dealings, including discussions of social gatherings and even Chomsky’s expressed desire to visit Epstein’s “Caribbean island.” The exchanges also show Chomsky advising Epstein on navigating negative press, suggesting the best approach is to “ignore it,” particularly given the current “hysteria that has developed about abuse of women.” Furthermore, Chomsky sought introductions to figures like Steve Bannon through Epstein, underscoring the breadth of their connection.
Read the original article here
Newly released files are offering a more granular, and for many, a deeply unsettling look into the past interactions between the esteemed linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky and the now notorious financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. These documents, emerging from the ongoing legal processes surrounding Epstein’s network, seem to be pulling back the curtain on a relationship that many find difficult to reconcile with Chomsky’s public persona and his lifelong critique of power structures.
The most striking revelations stem from correspondence where Chomsky appears to have advised Epstein on how to handle negative press, particularly concerning allegations of sexual abuse. In one instance, according to texts attributed to Chomsky and sent by Epstein to a lawyer and publicist, the academic suggested, “The best way to proceed is to ignore it.” He further elaborated, suggesting that in the current climate surrounding accusations of abuse against women, “hysteria… has reached the point that even questioning a charge is a crime worse than murder.” This advice, coming from a figure who has been a staunch critic of established power and a proponent of social justice, has understandably ignited a firestorm of controversy and disappointment.
The sentiment of disillusionment is palpable among many who have long admired Chomsky’s intellectual contributions. The idea that he would offer counsel on public relations to someone like Epstein, rather than distancing himself or advocating for accountability, raises profound questions about his judgment and the nature of their association. It’s a stark contrast to the image of a fearless intellectual challenging oppressive systems. For those who once found inspiration in his work, especially in fields like political philosophy and critiques of neoliberalism, this revelation feels like a particularly bitter pill to swallow.
Digging deeper into Epstein’s background, it becomes clear that his ascent to affluence was intertwined with assisting wealthy individuals in tax evasion schemes, and he also played a significant role in the lead-up to the 2008 financial collapse through his work at Bear Stearns. This context makes Chomsky’s alleged advice to “ignore” allegations of abuse even more jarring, especially when viewed alongside Epstein’s considerable financial and alleged criminal dealings. The lack of accountability for powerful figures, a recurring theme in criticisms of societal structures, seems to be exemplified here, casting a shadow over everyone involved.
The principle that “a man is known by the company he keeps” is being invoked frequently in discussions surrounding these newly released files. For many, Chomsky’s engagement with Epstein, regardless of its extent or perceived intent, raises fundamental questions. The notion that a prominent intellectual would be in such company, especially given Epstein’s eventual conviction, leads some to re-evaluate his entire legacy. The surprise for some isn’t necessarily that Chomsky might have had problematic associations, but the apparent disconnect between his public advocacy and his private counsel.
Furthermore, some observers are drawing parallels between Chomsky’s advice to Epstein and his past stances on controversial historical events, suggesting a pattern of downplaying or rationalizing certain transgressions. The argument that Chomsky’s political analysis often boils down to attributing blame to America or arguing that any wrongdoing by others is worse, is being resurfaced as context for his alleged actions. This perspective suggests that his approach might be rooted in a consistent, albeit in this case, deeply flawed, framework.
The newly revealed correspondence also highlights a broader concern about how accusations, particularly those involving powerful individuals, are handled by the media and society. There’s a perception that while allegations against figures like Chomsky or Bill Gates are scrutinized intensely, accusations against political figures like Donald Trump, even when substantial, are sometimes dismissed as unverified. This perceived disparity in how accusations are treated fuels a sense of frustration and distrust in the media’s role and the mechanisms of justice.
The sheer strangeness of some of the interactions, like the mention of a diner outing with Epstein, Woody Allen, and Steve Bannon in 2017, and the cryptic comments about “who is Pluto and his moons?”, only adds to the bizarre and disturbing nature of these revelations. For some, Epstein comes across as remarkably unlettered, even while being clearly manipulative. The interconnectedness of these figures, spanning across different spheres of influence and political ideologies, suggests a deeply entrenched network that operated with a degree of impunity.
The question of how justice is sought by ordinary people when the powerful are so interconnected is a recurring motif. The release of these files, and the subsequent public reaction, underscore a deep-seated desire for accountability and a recognition that no one, regardless of their intellectual prowess or political standing, should be above scrutiny. The hope is that these revelations will not only shed light on specific relationships but also contribute to a larger conversation about how society deals with allegations of abuse and the enduring influence of power.
Ultimately, the newly released files have undoubtedly complicated the legacy of Noam Chomsky for many. While his contributions to linguistics and his critiques of political power remain significant, the alleged advice he provided to Jeffrey Epstein on handling abuse allegations presents a profound and deeply troubling ethical dilemma. The conversation is far from over, and the full ramifications of these revelations are likely to unfold in the coming weeks and months, forcing a re-examination of both individuals and the societal structures that allowed such relationships to flourish.