Chomsky’s line on Iran—“first internal participation, then we talk colonialism”—isn’t just naive, it’s weaponizable

 https://x.com/KevorkAlmassian/status/2020205608075477464

Kevork Almassian

@KevorkAlmassian

This segment with Historian and Associate Professor Dr. Tarik Cyril Amar is one of the most uncomfortable—and necessary—conversations I’ve had in a long time. Tarik’s point is simple but devastating: the Epstein context isn’t a “minor glitch” in Chomsky’s life. It goes to the core of Chomsky’s brand: power, propaganda, networks, consent. And when someone who built a career exposing elite manipulation ends up giving image advice to Epstein, you’re forced to ask what else gets re-read differently. Then Tarik goes further: he says Chomsky’s line on Iran—“first internal participation, then we talk colonialism”—isn’t just naive, it’s weaponizable, because it hands talking points to the very people who justify coups, subversion, sanctions, and intervention. And the historical punchline Tarik drops is brutal: Iran had participation in 1953, then the US/UK coup destroyed it. So separating “democracy” from “colonialism” isn’t wisdom. It’s amnesia. Watch this clip. If you still think the “dissident intellectual” industry can’t be captured, this will change your mind. .

@TarikCyrilAmar

5:38 AM · Feb 8, 2026

·

2,984

Views

https://x.com/KevorkAlmassian/status/2020205608075477464