Which team are you on?

chomsky is an anarchist who hates the ML states. Zizek just hates on everything communist. am i right?

No.

WHAT
THE
FUCK

FTFY

Parenti gang

I hope you're reporting all these counterrevolutionary newfags.

But to be fair we haven't had a good Zizek thread in a while.

Zizek of course

Based Parenti

Zizek talking about the internet has killed Zizek for me I'm sorry

CHOMSKEK CHOMSKEK CHOMSKEK!!1

PRAISE BE TO THE MIGHTY CHOMSKEK, THE ETERNAL GUARDIAN OF LEFTYPOL, MAY THEIR LIGHT SHINE APON YE, YOUR SHITPOSTING THREADS BE SMALL AND YOUR MEMES LEAD TO FULL LUXURY ANARCHISM

Chomsky hierarchy is actually relevant in cognitive science, computer science, and analytical philosophy, although he's frequently wrong about politics, has become a succdem reformist, and needs to re-read Kropotkin and reapply his materialist analysis of society to the modern world. Zizek just picks up the broken pieces of what's left of continental philosophy after the bull-in-a-china-shop that was the birth of PoMo and reminisces about a time when life possibly had deeper meaning. I like the guy, but he's not what we need right now. Neither is Chomsky as a whole, but he has some intriguing ideas which could be more properly integrated into theory.

They are both my first communisms tbh

Both.
I want them to get along, honestly.
Their sectarian squabbles actually annoy me.

Chomskek is the only right answer

How is he wrong? A majority of Leftists are under the false assumption that Twitter and blog posts are the new front for political action, and it's mostly just a circlejerk of idpol witch hunting and moralizing, creating strange exclusionary hermetically sealed online bubbles of Liberal idpol with no chance of reaching a wider audience or creating broader solidarity. This is what Mark Fisher was talking about in Exiting the Vampire Castle. There was a time, just a few years ago, especially when Occupy and Arab Spring were happening, when people honestly thought social media would help democratize society, and a lot of people still take that as a form of conventional wisdom, even a lot of Leftists, so yeah, I fail to see why you're upset about Zizek pointing this out.

Zizek likes Chomsky. Chomsky is the one who has made a fuss about Zizek being too "theoretical" or some stupid shit.

They are coming from completely different epistemological positions so you can't really compare them without comparing the entire continental and analytic traditions.

Chomsky is the author who radicalized me, and is probably the most important thinker in keeping anarchism relevant in the face of global capitalism. He is a bit of a liberal when it comes to praxis though.

Zizek is hilarious and pretty great for converting normalfags.

He likes him now, after reading his ideas about manufacturing consent.
Zizek kind of started it.
They should just bury the hatchet, tbh.

Chomsky all day errday niggers

Zizek is more relevant today because he's more willing to engage with pop culture and talk about current events. Chomsky unfortunately hasn't updated his thinking since the Cold War era.
I still like Chomsky more overall because he's such a wellspring of facts but i wish he was more engaging. He was what originally pushed me to the far left but for a lot of people his style of dry facts isn't convincing. Zizek seems better for converting people now, especially polacks, because he can speak their language.

I wrote Chomsky an email once and he actually replied.
He's pretty bro.

Truly sad.

he replies to almost everybody.
We should write him sometime.

Both because I'm not someone that needs to pick a side and both talk about good stuff?

This guy's team

Both are good for redpilling liberals or reactionaires, but both have no feasible plans of action beyong voting in elections.

Chomsky holds the key to my heart. I, like a lot of other people, began my journey into radical leftist politics through reading Chomsky and listening to his talks. I like zizek tho, hes still entertaining and informative.

saved

Why not both tho

chomsky is absolute garbage, and for me he is largely indistinguishable from a liberal when it comes to praxis. not to mention that i hate his linguistics, which, when followed to their logical conclusions, lead to explicit racism.

zizek, memes aside, is a serious philosopher and an indispensable resource for the modern left. i'm definitely biased here because he was my introduction to lacan, but nonetheless he is to be taken seriously.

Care to elaborate?

My daddy was a miner, and I'm a miner's son…

This.
There are only two teams. The
class conscious and the class traitors

How is Zizek different? They both advocate for voting in elections and against punching natzees.

Chomsky is against unorganized violence because it can bring the violence of the state to bear on fledgling activist movements. It's a perfectly rational position.

Absolutely. I feel like just about every Leftist has something to offer in terms of theory.

mine. the other two are both my property.

mine, and the other two are both my property also, as is this broken-ass yotsuba clone

There is no "feud" going on between them, it's just some guy trying to milk ad money by uploading dozens of "chomsky vs zizek" videos. That being said, I like the Z more than chomsky.

Neither. I'm on MIchael Parenti's side.

Probably Chomsky. Even if Zizek could get the upper hand, Chomsky could always just run away from Zizek's fatass. Too much CocaCola and such.

This is a good thing

The thing is Chomsky doesn't hate all ML and MLM states, for example he's prasied Cuba and China countless times. He just holds a huge grudge against USSR and this is the thing that gets blown up by porky media due to its system of manufactoring anti communist sentiment

I mean that's normal for an anarchist or left-libertarian. We usually are at odds with Tankies because of Catalonia or Makhno debates.

I'm not a fan of him because I read an interview once and he correlated Stirner to the right-wing libertarian movement in the US which kind of had me lose my respect for him because out of all of the individualist philosophers, he chose the one that that wouldn't work for.

It's just wildly annoying that people love to misquote and straw man Chomsky so much. It should be a legal requirement to provide a full quote and source when claiming Chomsky said something

It's because him and Zizek have a feud. It's like when liberals take sides with random celebrities and their beefs, they'll misconstrue anything to create an additional dialogue. Even if it isn't substantial. What I notice is people who like Chomsky will actually take the criticism if it's merited but Zizek people refuse to accept that his theory can be really lazy and that he's a turd.

They're both worse.

Our father was a Zizek man some day I'll be one too.
The Chomsky attacked Zizek what's our family gonna do?

Come all you good continentals good news to you
I'll tell of how the good old Zizek has come in here to dwell.

Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

My daddy was continental and I'm a continental's son
And I'll stick with the Zizek 'til every battles done.

Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

They say in Holla Forums County there are no neutrals posting
You'll either be a Zizek man or a thug for Chomsky's boasting

Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

Oh continentals can you stand it?
Oh tell me how you can
Will you be a lousy analytic or will you be a man?

Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

Don't scab for the analytics don't listen to their lies
Us continental folks haven't got a chance unless we organize

Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

Parenti talks shit about Stalin all the time, far more than Zizek search for it.

Parenti is the guy that entered me into leftism

I loathe them both, but Zizek is slightly more tolerable.

He has made defense for ML states because he believes the only realistic communist regimes are these because they need a strong state to withstand external and internal threats from the US. I'm not sure how I feel about the apologism, but he definitely makes critiques against Stalin as well.

Same, through Choking Victim when I was 15. I generally don't like contemporaries though because they're reflecting on material rather than really contributing anything new. He talks a lot about imperialism and military and police protection of property though which is something that the originals didn't really speak of and that facet of critique is always evolving. It stays interesting.

There's a difference between rejecting milquetoast liberal identity politics and being spooked by Trans people

Zizek all day erry day. He's Holla Forums.

Yes true, and the tankie part of me sometimes agree with that, he makes also fair critics of the socialist states.
Do you now if he still wonders around??
I can not find anything of him newer than 2008 I hope he is still alive

I like them both but prefer Zizek at this point.

Since when has Chomsky advocated for Social Democracy ?

he still writes books and articles occasionally but his website hasn't been updated in a while.
michaelparenti.org
I know he defended Bernie during the primaries on facebook but I don't know if he's still active

Zizek obviously, Chomski is just a contrarian who would have preferred the Taliban rule over the relatively decent American puppet regime.

Can you link me some shit where he talks about Stalin?

this

What serious contributions has sniffle man made besides some Lacanian drivel?

The American puppet regime is barely any better and is propped up by the CIA

he's one of the few popular leftists today who criticizes liberalism as an ideology instead of haranguing about the far-right all the time.

FTFY

Chomsky, obviously

youtube.com/watch?v=AVBOtxCfan0

team Zizek 100%

Neither, stop being sheep

Chumpsky told me to vote for Hillary.

Since he started supporting gun control by the state.

Chomsky has criticised capitalism and neoliberism plenty wtf aer you on about?

anybody rooting for team is brainwashed

Because I am a massive autist:
vocaroo.com/i/s0GWwlwykUwf

Nice song comrade

Now THAT's what I call good posts

neither

They both have a point and something to say that isn't just identitarian pomo drivel. Also a good contrast between continental and analytical philosophy.

Zizek is a clown. At least Noam Chomsky tries to be understood.

I think many people here don't really put effort into politics outside of larping on the internet. This makes it easy for you guys to support Zizek, who endorsed Trump for reasons that turn out to be totally bogus. The guy is impractical and irresponsible. Chomsky understands the real consequences of actually existing political systems.

Zizek because Chomsky is a chode

rationalism is trash

This is what we need in this board man

oh my dayz blud

Zizek has defended the Cartesian subject at length in "The Parallax View" and "The Ticklish Subject".

they're both pretty cool, but I'd have to take zizek for his views on accelerationism

zizek

Chomsky, though he is too much of an authoritarian for me.

Chomskey is good, Zizek is fun

Chomsky all the way breh