Why do some leftists hate Zizek

in part because he takes anti-pc and anti-leftlib stances. But also because a lot of what he has to say, especially in his more publicized shit seems like it's more made to provoke than to convince. He says something crazy sounding and doesn't support it or uses some anecdotal evidence from some movie or something. Not everyone's cup of tea I'd imagine.

Idpolers seem to despise him. No idea why.

He's a meme, most of his insights are quite basic, and his solutions are often times nonexistent. A lot of how he says is just pomo Lacanian wordsalad based on no evidence.

He's right on everything except technology.

Sargon.

...

Because he calls them out on their bullshit. For instance, he says that the validity of an argument is independent from who says it: that is utter heresy to the idpol crowd for whom the muh privilege status of the speaker is more important than what they say, e.g. a whatevet a transwoman of color says is *automatically* more valid and right than what your typical cishet white dude thinks.

Also, he can be pretty gross in his discourse and jokes. He excuses it with Lacan, but I think he just really loves being a dirty old man and that triggers the idpolers just as well.

My personal experience is that liberal leftist hate him because well, he criticizes the liberal left. If you take some of his sayings out of context, he might seem pretty alt-right.

More "radical" people (like anarkiddies and whatnot) hate him because his takes on the refugee stuff (etc) aren't "open borders!" - I've seen some who didn't quite hate him pre-2010s but now that he has written books and articles on the European refugee stuff… European leftists sometimes attack him on that. He is, to them, Eurocentric, almost fascist, etc.

He is totally honest about that, though. I don't think it counts a sin when he dedicates time to actually saying that we don't fucking know what to do, maybe we should think.

zizek is pretty leftcom though

I don't particulary dislike him, but he think he doesn't have "politically incorrect" opinions or is "the most dangerous philosopher in the West". Almost all of his stances are quite basic (help the refugees, we need supranational organisations, climate change), he just likes to cloak them with offensive rethoric and constant sex references. The media, which doesn't care about the content but rather about the form in which something is delivered, then labels him as "politically incorrect".

How so? He says in every interview that the idea of a spontaneous workers uprising is idiotic.

yeah but he's critical of 20th century communism and 'marxism'-'leninism'

We are hitting Autism levels never deemed possible before…

Obviously, he's featured in the mainstream media and all that. Nobody on there will say anything positive about 20th century communism. Maybe on RT, but it feels they are just pandering to Russian nationalism.

I think Žižek accepts that what happened under Stalin was inevitable and there was no other way to do it differently, at least that's what I'm taking from his interview with Kotkin. He never moralizes though, which is nice.

Hate him 'cause they ain't him.

Read his books, or watch his talks where he's in socialist environments.

That being said, you are right that he hides his power level in the media and says 'errr I don't mean we need communism, we need good social democracy lmao'. There is more to communism than the Soviet Union.

And you are also right about the moralism part, what is definitely something we need to do away with. Why not apply marxist critique to the Soviet Union?

You misunderstood me. I don't believe he tones down his opinions on the mainstream media, all I was stating that a soviet apologist would never be granted a second on there. Didn't imply Žižek was the latter. In fact, I believe he artifically inflates the controversy of his opinions to appear edgy.

But I do? Just because I'm a tankie doesn't mean "everything the USSR is at every point in time was good". However I do believe socialism was pretty much achieved in the USSR from 1945 to 1956.

Well, he does consider Stalin(ism) horrible.

He just insists that it wasn't some big evil psychopath Stalin who ruined everything; it couldn't have ended better.

Hegelian ideas
They can boil down to very annoying platitudes at times and people cant deal with it

However, he does sometimes over-emphasize that thing x was actually bad or a failure. Like Stalin or 20th century socialism, or Trump after the "Clinton would be even worse" comments.

I dunno, in some statements, sure. But he really is often opting for a "third way" (heh heh), he is so critical of the mainstream left that they really do hate him, no matter how much he could tone down his edginess.

Generally speaking he is just very pessimistic in his political positions. He doesn't think we know where we stand today, he thinks that all the 20th century ideas ended up failures, a surprising revolution is impossible and reform more or less as well. His main concern are acts that might open up the range of possibilities a bit, anti-ideological acts: after that, something might be possible.

BUT WHAT IF, EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE?

In his Vice interveiw he mentions that alot of ex Yugo lefties don't like him because he's not that nostalgic about Tito and Yugoslavia.

Judging by the responses I got to my question on twitter, a lot of these kids don't like his stance on refugees, one girl called him "an abortive thinker"

As some user's have said before, a dislike for Zizek varies from person to person. Some are turned off by his eccentricism and bluntness. Some find themselves too distracted by his speech impediment and prefer to read his stuff instead of listening to him.

In terms of his ideas, I think some individuals don't like him because for one, he is a Marxist, and many modern centre-left movements are still trying to distance themselves from the more radical ideologies of the past (as they see it), others hate him due to his approaches to social policy, they oppose his argument that social change under capitalism hasn't undermined capitalism at all, it has simply created 'capitalism with a human face' as Zizek puts it, and that a better society, (beyond that of constantly trying to reform capitalism over and over again) is possible through a radical re-imagining of Communist/Marxist theory. Personally, I quite like Zizek, I don't agree with all his ideas, but a lot of what he says makes a lot of sense.

In short, most people either dislike the way he talks, the way he looks or his approach to idpol.

He endorsed Trump, nuff said

...

because baudrillard and sartre were much better cultural critics & philosophers

But Sartre sucks.

Forgot to take off shitposting flag.

smh

Phil Greaves hates the mastah Zizek.

Liberals pretending to be leftists hate him for calling them out on idpol.

Actual leftists may find him annoying or disagree with him on some things like his ironic support for Trump.

i can 100% guarantee that every zizek hater except idpol twats haven't even read one of his articles, let alone a book.

GMIL is fucking trash. Leftcoms are just people with no struggle and edgy contrarians.

Most self-described "anarchists"/"leftists" are just liberals. Of course they hate actual communist theory.

this is tankie tier self-critique

zizek is a liberal opportunist. he supported the liberal overthrow of socialist yugoslavia, he ran in bourgeoisie elections, he mixes lacanian gibberish with diamat to make it sound more than what it actually is all while claiming to be a marxist.

Why keep dragging the rotting corpse of 20th century socialism? Zizek did the right thing tbh.

ye lets dismiss all the achievements of the worker's movement in the past century so we can facilitate the neoliberal revisionist telling of history. cant think of a reason this is bad

What's wrong with Garry's Mod?
Some of the games are fun, prop hunt, messing with kids in RP servers, that one where you build boats.
Just to make it clear, I have autism and I also like Zizek.

still on, and Sartre is good.

I've actually seen a discussion about this on /r/socialism it went like this:

That's because he uses Freudian analysis extensively

Liberals hate him, leftists have no problem with him.

Yugoslavia dug its own grave like the rest of the state socialist systems.

You are either:
A) a Serb pseudo-commie who is fueled only by the "glorious past" that never was, or
B) an american turd who uses failed radical projects to satisfy his own fantasies.

Once, and nearly won, with a platform that opposed privatization that followed the fall of the soviet bloc.

Calling your opponent a poopoohead is a very effective method in polemics. You totally convinced everyone. Good job.

Tankies hate him - call him fascist - why is this? Red Kahina in particular, though she may be a unique case.

does anyone know why Red Kahina and Phil Greaves say anything?

for that matter, has anyone run into Amado Guzman, or even Ellen Robinson on normiebook? I avoid leftbook shit, but I've been catching some screenshots of what these people say and it's fucking ridiculous. it's like the mix of moonbat idpol and turbotankie that are Red Kahina and Phil Greaves but turned up to 11.

the achievements of the worker's movements can be found in western europe, not eastern europe

molly klein goes a bit further - she thinks zizek is a CIA psyop because his public appearances/arguments can be slotted into a general idea of what CIA psyop is

but really it's the standard tankie critiques - he's too ideologically deviant, he ran in elections, he opposed post-USSR yugoslavia, etc.

also, he has made some questionable statements re: minorities in the past like the roma, but some mild xenophobia in an elderly slovenian is nothing surprising.

Unfortunately this. In my opinion any serious anarchist should be familiar with Marx's analysis and critique of capitalism.

It was reported in Slovenia that some village has been terrorized by a nearby camp of Roma (stealing, vandalism, bullying) for years. Liberals tried to portray the report as racism, and went into the usual tolerance rhetoric. Zizek just said he'd love to see these academics removed from the ordinary men living in such a village for a few years.

His point wasn't that the Roma are shit or not, but that the libs trivialize legit problems of villagers because "muh racism," and THUS CREATING RACISM.

You can't be xenophobic against your own citizens.

AFAIK most people hate (or at least disagree with him) because of his use of psychoanalysis and/or Hegelian dialectics.

If you ask me, it sounds like more of an excuse to ignore all of his arguments, because most of the time, these people are also the most aggressive proponents of intersectional idpol.

When did he talk about Zizek?

Start arguing anytime.

Zizek need to check his Yugoslav muh muh privilege.

Kek, I forgot that was already filtered.

Because they don't understand or have never read his work.

It wasn't even 'I can call them niggers' but a black fan calling zizek 'mah nigga' after zizek made a mild r racial joke (iirc the fan was with another black fan of his and zizek said something like 'which one do I give this too, you know how hard it is for white people to tell you guys apart.').

Left communism is not synonymous with spontaneity, however an emphasis is put on the need for the working class itself to be the main driver of change, not a substituted organ separate of it.

he's essentially just an edgy socdem
he needs to get the bullet too

So they don't actually know much about him? Hell, he doesn't seem that harsh on them to me

lmao revisionism. it was some poor roma who were rowdy. neo nazis who had no familiarity with this family incited a riot against them and people directed anti gypsy slurs and incitations to murder. zizek defended that to be a contrarian of course. he claims to be anti idpol but is as idpol as they come. but this is pretty similar to leftypol. talking down to minority college students who havent even read about socialism about their idpol, yet while valorizing the "white" working class and muh european culture and enlightenment thought

Can't take critique/Get lost in dialectics/Too low or too high Autism Level/Idpol/Ideology

t. edgy socdem

The only person I know who hates Zizek is the kind of person who refuses to engage in any sort of debate or even discussion regarding socialism, sniggers even at the mention of 'anarchism' and gets severely triggered when egoism is ever brought up. He's also a trot. No idea why he hates Zizek - since he can't vocalise opinions without falling back on semi-passive aggressive memes.

He's done something to piss off pretty much every leftist tendency, the people who hate him are the people that can't take critique

there's your problem

Good job, cretin. Make sure to collect your Soros-bux.

Newfag this board is not for you. Fuck off back to reddit.

"spontaneity" is idiotic shit and a mistake that should have died with the second international

the whole "line" of it, which originally regarded Russia circa 1905, was completely ignorant of or ignored the actual material circumstances for the origins of russian (or german) workers to mobilize and organize.