> With respect to the responsibility of intellectuals, there are still other, equally disturbing questions. Intellectuals are in a position to expose the lies of governments, to analyze actions according to their causes and motives and often hidden intentions.
"The facts are known to all who care to know. The press, foreign and domestic, has presented documentation to refute each falsehood as it appears. But the power of the government’s propaganda apparatus is such that the citizen who does not undertake a research project on the subject can hardly hope to confront government pronouncements with fact."
This speaks to the great failing of today's media. Who has time to stay current on all the world's events? I can hardly keep up with my Hacker News RSS feed! We rely on the media to do this research that Chomsky speaks of (or at least to use sources that have done said research). Given limitations on our time and focus, we have no choice but to accept what the media reports at face value. The more information proliferates, the more important becomes the filter.
That is why populist Libertarianism (Randian muck) and the ghastly half'n'half-baked ideology of the Tea Party are so awfully (and often ironically) misdirected these days.
all these things are toys and distractions. it's up to you to choose what to follow: the false prophets or the real ones. the issues that actually matter or the ones that actually don't.
the main thing i have found is that it all feels impossible/insurmountable in the beginning. but as with anything else, it gets much easier over time as long as the work and effort is there. e.g. "programming is too hard". but in reality EVERYTHING is "too hard". nothing is easy. nothing is black and white. etc.
Just as an example of someone of prestige and integrity, standing up for Wikileaks and kicking ass while doing so (on national television), is Ray McGovern, "former high-ranking CIA official":
http://www.juancole.com/2010/12/former-cia-official-ray-clos...
This guy comes out and contributes to what the press should have been doing the last 10 years, and what happens? The cable news networks spend all their time talking about his "motivations" and how "anti-american" he is or isn't. Or who on the washington circuit is saying he's anti-american and how that fits into the political gossip column. What about the damned cables!?