925

George MonbiotFebruary 4, 2026 at 2:49 AM EST

1. Noam Chomsky's response to the first tranche of Epstein docs - arrogant, high-handed, obfuscatory and, we now know, dishonest - reminded me of something: his response to my questions about genocide denial, 15 years ago. 🧵 monbiot.com

2. It reminded me of something else as well: the way his supporters ignored the bleeding obvious – that he had picked the wrong side – and furiously closed ranks against people criticising or questioning him. monbiot.com

3. They’ve done the same thing in the Epstein case: there have been some frankly shocking attempts by some of Chomsky’s fans to insist there’s nothing to see here. The first version of this article was 100% apologetics: thenation.com

4. In 2012 I wrote “If people who claim to care about justice and humanity cannot resist what looks to me like blatant genocide denial, we find ourselves in a very dark place.” The same applies to advising a criminal abuser of girls and women. theguardian.com

5. What this is about is the locus of solidarity. Either you express solidarity with the victims of genocide and the victims of sexual abuse. Or you express solidarity with someone you treat as a hero, who might be assisting the airbrushing of those crimes. There’s a choice to be made. 6. Rising to the challenge of moral consistency does not mean supporting your man through thick and thin. It means standing with the victims, whoever they might be, against the oppressors, whoever they might be. And, if necessary, making yourself unpopular in doing so. 7. If people on the left cannot stand up for the victims of sexual abuse and genocide, what the hell are they for? The thread on one page: skywriter.blue