Podcast appearances and mentions of hugo chavez intellectuals

During the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, political dictators were not only popular in their own countries, but were also admired by numerous highly educated and idealistic Western intellectuals. The objects of this political hero-worship included Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro and more recently Hugo Chavez, among others. Hollander will discuss the sources of these misjudgments and misperceptions, the specific appeals of particular dictators, and the part played by their charisma, or pseudo-charisma. He will shed new light not only on the political disposition of numerous Western intellectuals — such as Martin Heidegger, Eric Hobsbawm, Norman Mailer, Ezra Pound, Susan Sontag and George Bernard Shaw — but also on the personality of those political leaders who encouraged, and in some instances helped to design, the cult surrounding their rise to dictatorship. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

It's true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won't spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it's enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez.

It’s true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won’t spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it’s enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won’t spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it’s enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won’t spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it’s enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won’t spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it’s enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won’t spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it’s enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s true that Western “intellectuals” have not always been wrong about dictators fighting for a supposedly “brighter future,” usually (though not always) of the non-capitalist variety. Nonetheless, as Paul Hollander well shows in his readable, relevant book From Benito Mussolini to Hugo Chavez: Intellectuals and a Century of Political Hero Worship (Cambridge University Press, 2016), they have been wrong often enough to make one wonder if there is some sort of elective affinity between “deep thinkers” and despots promising to make the world a much, much better place. According to Hollander, there is. I won’t spoil the story for you (you should read the book), but it’s enough to make you think twice (or thrice) about anything Noam Chomsky or any would-be Noam Chomsky has to say about Hugo Chavez or any would-be Hugo Chavez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices