For what it’s worth, some big former fans of Chomsky are disgusted.
Valeria Chomsky, the wife of Noam Chomsky, issued a statement about their longtime friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. Noam Chomsky, 97, suffered a massive stroke in 2023 and is unable to speak.
Noam and I have felt a profound weight regarding the unresolved questions surrounding our past interactions with Epstein. We do not wish to leave this chapter shrouded in ambiguity.
Throughout his life, Noam has insisted that intellectuals have a responsibility to speak the truth and expose lies — especially when those truths are uncomfortable to themselves.
As is widely known, one of Noam’s characteristics is to believe in the good faith of people. Noam’s overly trusted nature, in this specific case, led to severe poor judgment on both our parts.
Ah. Another brilliant and successful expert in human behavior who hung around Epstein at length and just never noticed anything unusual or suspicious about him. It’s amazing how often those keen, long-honed skills at reading people just disappeared once Epstein entered a room. Valeria Chomsky continues:
Noam and I were introduced to Epstein at the same time, during one of Noam’s professional events in 2015, when Epstein’s 2008 conviction in the State of Florida was known by very few people, while most of the public – including Noam and I – was unaware of it. That only changed after the November 2018 report by Miami Herald.
A reminder: That conviction was for “felony solicitation of prostitution and, pursuant to the NPA, to a criminal information charging him with procurement of minors to engage in prostitution.” It was public record and covered in the Palm Beach newspapers.
We had lunch, at Epstein’s ranch, once, in connection with a professional event; we attended dinners at his townhouse in Manhattan and stayed a few times in an apartment he offered when we visited New York City. We also visited Epstein’s Paris apartment one afternoon for the occasion of a work trip. In all cases, these visits were related to Noam’s professional commitments. We never went to his island or knew about anything that happened there.
We attended social meetings, lunches, and dinners where Epstein was present and academic matters were discussed. We never witnessed any inappropriate, criminal, or reproachable behavior from Epstein or others. At no time did we see children or underage individuals present.
Here’s the biggest and most prominent problem with Valeria Chomsky’s “we just had no idea” excuse. Several months after the Miami Herald published the series, on February 23, 2019, Epstein emailed Chomsky looking for advice on how to handle his bad press.
In a response purportedly from Chomsky, the famed linguistics professor advised Epstein “the best way to proceed is to ignore it” and “not to react unless directly questioned.”
Chomsky drew parallels to his own experience with “hysterical accusations of all sorts,” writing, “I pay no attention, unless I’m approached for a comment on a specific matter.”
“What the vultures dearly want is a public response, which then provides a public opening for an onslaught of venomous attacks, many from just publicity seekers or cranks of all sorts,” the email said. “That’s particularly true now with the hysteria that has developed about abuse of women, which has reached the point that even questioning a charge is a crime worse than murder.”
Does that sound like a man who’s deeply concerned about what Epstein may have done?
But Valeria Chomsky insists that message is being taken out of context.
Noam’s email to Epstein, in which Epstein sought advice about the press, should be read in context. Epstein had claimed to Noam that he [Epstein] was being unfairly persecuted, and Noam spoke from his own experience in political controversies with the media. Epstein created a manipulative narrative about his case, which Noam, in good faith, believed in. It is now clear that it was all orchestrated, having as, at least, one of Epstein’s intentions to try to have someone like Noam repairing Epstein’s reputation by association.
Noam’s criticism was never directed at the women’s movement; on the contrary, he has always supported gender equity and women’s rights.
Oh, shut up. You don’t get to send a message to Epstein reassuring him that “hysteria that has developed about abuse of women, which has reached the point that even questioning a charge is a crime worse than murder” and then turn around and tout yourself as a feminist.
But there’s more. Back in 2023, Noam Chomsky confirmed to the Wall Street Journal that he received a March 2018 transfer of roughly $270,000 from an Epstein-linked account. That too was just an innocent favor, Valeria Chomsky insists.
Regarding the reported transfer of approximately $270,000, I must clarify that these were entirely Noam’s own funds. At the time, Noam had identified inconsistencies in his retirement resources that threatened his economic independence and caused him great distress. Epstein offered technical assistance to resolve this specific situation. On this matter, Epstein acted accordingly, recovering the funds for Noam, in a display of help and very likely as part of a machination to gain greater access to Noam. Epstein acted solely as a financial advisor for this specific matter. To the best of my knowledge, Epstein never had access to our bank or investment accounts.
Now, keep in mind, for just about all his intellectual career, Noam Chomsky has been a furious critic of American capitalism (“a grotesque catastrophe”), the wealthy elites of the U.S., and corporate influence over politics. He has written, “in this world there happen to be huge concentrations of private power that are as close to tyranny and as close to totalitarian as anything humans have devised… The corporations are just as totalitarian as Bolshevism and fascism.”
Recall that Epstein ran a financial management firm that catered to billionaire clients.
So just the longtime friendship with a person who had the public persona of Epstein, never mind his horrific private acts, seems like an abrogation of his stated values. The not-all-that-well hidden revelation that Epstein was a notorious sex trafficker suggests that at best Chomsky was astonishingly oblivious to a man he spent considerable time with… or he didn’t look and didn’t want to know. He was all too happy to believe that his friend was being accused by “publicity seekers or cranks.”
For what it’s worth, some big former fans of Chomsky are disgusted.
Vijay Prashad, Chomsky’s most recent co-author, wrote, “There is nothing to say on his behalf. When the photos and emails appeared, I was immediately disgusted by Epstein’s pedophilia, and so by Noam’s friendship with him. There is no defense for this, in my view, no context that can explain this outrage.”
Ralph Leonard, writing in the New Statesman: “Chomsky’s status as a dissident intellectual is in contradiction with his friendship with Epstein, someone who embodies the elite in its most degenerate form. It doesn’t make any sense. How could he not see Epstein for what he was: a patrician pimp?”
The headline on Leonard’s column is, “Noam Chomsky’s reputation will never recover from the Epstein files.”