Accusations on Zizek

This guy is either really crazy or really right. What do you comrades think of his accusations? He's calling Zizek a crypto-fascist.

alphonsevanworden.tumblr.com/post/146430343445/the-protocols-of-the-learned-lacanian-of

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=wfKFNMaGKN0
youtube.com/watch?v=IrEJW3INm58
thebaffler.com/latest/flakes-alive
nytimes.com/1998/07/13/business/paul-l-klein-69-a-developer-of-pay-per-view-tv-channels.html
thecharnelhouse.org/2015/06/14/no-tears-for-tankies/
youtu.be/_tt8zpTwFSk
youtube.com/watch?v=wZy45QRuoF0

So this is… the power… of Holla Forums's idol… woah…

I ain't clicking that link nigga. And you should go back

Anglos really seem to have no idea what Slavoj is all about, or his whole intellectual background, it's hilarious to read these accusations. His project as a serious examination of the whole radical leftist thought is not a joke, but it requires reading his books and not just listen to the obvious provocations he makes to upset the liberals.
It's true that he ultimately has no communist program or something, but he never concealed that he is a lacanian philosopher who somehow achieved fame in the first place.
If you want a thinker who isn't bullshitting you about his motives and is very honest about his ignorance there's hardly anyone as honest as Slavoj tbh.

This guy gets it.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=wfKFNMaGKN0

This is my favorite lecture from the sniff man, if you wanna hear some coherent arguments from him give it a go

fuck me if I'm reading that whole thing.
especially if it's more likely than not written by a snowflake vegan anarkiddie who got triggered by Zizek's "ideology"

I'm a fan of any essay that starts with Proudhon. Even if it's Marx's criticism of him.

youtube.com/watch?v=IrEJW3INm58

The butthurt is phenomenal.

Tumblr idpol autism.

Zizek is not a communist. I don't know why people don't get this. He has made it clear over and over again that there is no connection with the Marxism of early last century and his work today. He does not want a stateless society, he doesn't want direct democracy, and he doesn't want a decentralized power structure and pretty much in every talk he gives makes it crystal clear.

that's bullshit. he just don't believe we can transition to communism right away, he often clearly says that he's marxist

So how do I become a Zizekist?

I went to one of his talks and can confirm he's not a crypto-fascist. He advocates for a new radical universalism to leave both liberals and the reactionary right in the dust.
Red liberals think he has sympathies with the new anti-immigrant right (Le Pen, Wilders etc.) but his point is simply that the left needs to realize how those "populists" get popular at all.

I like Zizek.

Old news, people have been calling him that before.

What most of you amerifats don't understand about east european countries is that they were pretty fucking close to national-socialism, if not even better.

anything's better than that, though

I am asking someone who has insight on Zizek's views and ideas to see if any of the man's criticisms of Zizek hold true. Or if he is right. By the way you dismiss ideas based on superficial aspects like a media platform than I assume you must be a former pol/yp/ or some sort of dogmatic moron.

He also says he's a Christian Atheist, a Maoist, a Stalinist, and back when he was running for office, a liberal. What he means by these things is totally dependent on the context. So in what sense is he a Stalinist, a Maoist, a Leninist, etc? It depends on what book of his you are reading or what talk he is giving.

Pic one retard

It's really fucking long though, why should I read all of it? I've read 4 books by Zizek and 2 about him and can confirm he's a diehard communist.


both twisted the meaning of socialism though :^)

Are you serious bro? Listen to this, or try to force yourself to listen.

Imagine these fucking slimy, skiny little liberal NY bourgeois shits, that have never known hardship in their lives accusing Zizek of being a racist during the Yugoslav wars, like they are the self-appointed commissars of liberal utopia picking off every single point of "racist" wrong think.

Gulag is not enough for these kind of fake-leftist parasites.

thebaffler.com/latest/flakes-alive

you have to go back, newfag.

Why does it trigger you so much people don't like Zizek?

I wouldn't be triggered if it wasn't by liberals/idpolers.

It's like asking "why are you mad at traitors?"

What books are you reading of his that you can make anything like that out of it?

Just go back to reddit already

?

You cheeky cunt. Yugoslavia fought against the Nazis, the fact that anyone would call the economic system(s) in Eastern Europe National "Socialism" shows they lack any clue on history .

I stopped reading there but that also made me crack a smile

You're not reading based off of tumblr rather than some of the other anons here who think it is a crock of shit. Which is more understandable than yourself as a pathetic excuse of a communist.

stfu, and read

...

...

The fags behind the Zizek hit peices

Molly Klein, a disgustingly rich "heiress" of this guy

nytimes.com/1998/07/13/business/paul-l-klein-69-a-developer-of-pay-per-view-tv-channels.html

thecharnelhouse.org/2015/06/14/no-tears-for-tankies/

A bunch of paranoid neurotic jews.

Most of this book is explaining Zizek's opposition to both traditional and post-marxist politics. But I guess if you call it communism, then it suddenly becomes communism.

Uhm, no? The whole books is about a way to "undermine" Badiou's rather pessimistic notion of "we can't be political subjects until the Event comes" and thus argues for a pre-evental group (party). Did you even read the book, you complete illiterate moron?

Do you realize that your links make fun of those who try to portray Zizek as a CIA op?

confirmed for a completely useless fag who doesn't read the material he comments on

yes that why I posted them, genious.

google "Titoism" you retard

troll hardah

...

...

Oops wrong post. I meant to reply to Jodi Dean's book.

Nazis were capitalists, I never implied otherwise.
Also I know what Titoism is, it's what brought me here

Identitarians are buttmad that Zizek says we shouldn't ignore reactionary behavior from Muslims that move to the west. That's the entirety of the argument, I don't even need to click the link.

He's definitely been trolling a lot recently.

I'd recommend "Violence", it's accessible for normies, go read it. I've also read Event and How to read Lacan but they're not political. In his rewriting of Antigone he couldn't even resist to end the story with a revolution where the Theban monarchy is purged.


MLs fought nazis aswell and I appreciate that a lot but they didn't surpass generalized commodity production :^)

Imagining an excited Zizek rapidly writing that ending late at night, quietly giggling to himself, puts a smile on my face and warms my heart

What. I just read that myth for the first time some two hours ago. How is this book called?

Also, is there a Zizek guide/flowchart? Is Living in The End Times any good?

I mean Catalonia only lasted a couple months while Yugoslavia lasted for years. He laid the foundations for its abolition just as well as any other early 20th century socialist leader but after he died it went to shit.

I didn't expect it, it was pretty funny.


It's simply called Antigone. Read Anouilh's version while you're at it (in French if you can)


Not as far as I know. There used to be a dedicated Zizek thread, maybe someone has an archive link.
Haven't read it.


wew lad
Catalonia lasted 3 years (so not "a couple months") and I am just as critical of the free territory and catalonia as I am of the USSR and Yugoslavia. Anarchism has existed before and continued to exist after Catalonia, while marxism-leninism and market socialism were brought into existence to justify USSR and Yugoslavia's economic policy. They're completely artificial ideologies, just like libertarianism is the product of think tanks.
So not at all?
Socialism shouldn't depend on "great men" in the first place.

thats not just any tumblr

thats RedKahina lol

RedKahina owns

t. Phil Greaves/Club des Cordeliers

RedKahina is the worst kind of opportunist, and on top of that she's insufferably puritanical with a heavy paranoid streak. She's also a shitty person in addition to being a shitty leftist. Her ex-buddy Fivek subscribes to exactly the same kind of puritanical paranoid leftism as she does and she still did her dirty for disagreeing with her minorly.

I've heard this bullshit come from so-called socialists in Europe. It amounts to shilling for capitalism and nothing else. Žižek is still /ourguy/

Now fuck off

You have to go back!

...

You forgot your flag.

Lmao, this article fills almost all of the many classic RedKahina checkboxes. It has:
✔️ An out of context Marx quote that doesn't support her argument
✔️ Paranoid CIA psyop accusations
✔️ About a trillion non-sequiturs
✔️ Cherry picked quotes used without any context
✔️ Claims that someone is a pseudo-liberal, but somehow also a crypto-fascist
✔️ Accusations of obscuritanism
✔️ The word "fascoid" repeated a million times
✔️ An inability to detect irony and/or sarcasm
✔️ Unprincipled identitarianism
✔️ Calling things she doesn't like "bourgeois" or "white" or "male"
✔️ The implication that left ideas becoming popular is bad
✔️ The implication that criticizing failed revolutions is somehow bad
✔️ Shitty sexual politics
✔️ An inability to understand psychoanalytic theory
✔️ An inability to use even the most basic psychoanalytic concepts
✔️ Guilt by association
✔️ Baseless accusations of anti-semitism
✔️ Schmitt shoutout
✔️ Assertions that being provocative/transgressive is reactionary
✔️ So much projection
✔️ Bad Leninist takes
✔️ Unprincipled anti-imperialism
✔️ Preempting arguments she thinks will be made against her by acknowledging the arguments and handwaving
✔️ An edgy outro that attempts to hide the fact that she said nothing substantial

Also, here's a video of Kahina making a fool of herself at a Zizek lecture:
youtu.be/_tt8zpTwFSk


Hey Kahina, you fucking suck. Reading your stuff and trying hard to avoid being like you has been extremely helpful in the development of my own politics, so thanks for that.

Jesus Christ that video. That cunt is insufferable

I love how he pisses of liberals

So who is this RedKahina and why is she so infamous?

By that logic, every ideology can be considered artificial. Marxism came about due to conditions of the time just like 20th century ideologies did.

She's a rich, paranoid, opportunistic, elitist tankie who is extremely online. She spends her time being rude on twitter, leading witch-hunts, and acting persecuted when people call her out for being shitty. She has beef with Zizek, Chapo, Doug Lain, and almost everyone else of note who doesn't share her views, which obviously means that they're a CIA backed psyop meant to destroy the left. She's the epitomization of the abusive undercurrents that have plagued the left for decades.

So can you counter any of her points or just list them off as absurd and think that is good enough? Typical irony bro.

How long has she been around? I ask because I've been pretty active for almost ten years and yet this is one of the first times I'm hearing about her.

Zizek BTFO

Plenty of the things I listed are fairly decent refutations of her arguments, but w/e. A long form refutation of this article would be an ordeal to write and it wouldn't say anything new or useful imo. I'm not an ironybro btw, whatever that means, I'm just someone who really dislikes Kahina.

t. ironybro

Kahina, you're going in a fucking gulag.

How can you not love him

Doug Lain? I think you mean Henwood.

this. liberals are the weeds and he is the weedkiller

You did amazing sweetie, I still love her tweets. Can you do a list for Phil too?

This serbian guy told me that Zizek kind've has subcouncious Serbophobia and that he's said pro-Ustasha statements before.

I didnt read that tl;dr but there's other people who claimed that

Fagplasm, Zizek used to be an anti communist activist, of course he'd have said stuff like that in the past.

Lmao, sure
✔️ Scarequotes
✔️ Bad Leninist takes
✔️ Sectarianism
✔️ Shitty sexual politics
✔️ Bad takes about the DPRK
✔️ Mostly terrible takes about Syria
✔️ Insanely terrible takes about Rojava
✔️ Unprincipled anti-imperialism
✔️ Really doesn't like PPG
✔️ Calling people Nazis
✔️ Accusing people of idealism
✔️ Retweeting himself
✔️ Accusing people of being ex-military mercs
✔️ Using "fascist" to refer to reactionaries in general
✔️ Unprincipled anti-Corbynism
✔️ Seriously, so many damn scarequotes

FWIW I think that Phil is way more principled and way less bad than Kahina is. Phil at least knows what he's talking about.

He's a false idol just like Stirner and the whole lot of them.

You've clearly never read Stirner or Zizek if you think there's nothing to their ideas.

Half of those things are good actually. Tackling MAO MAKES ME CUM was Phil's greatest moment, he was really on to something there. Plus he keeps all his posts in easy to read threads going back years which is also good.

I never said they didn't have good ideas, just that they ought to be abandoned because of their bad ones.

Idk, his unwavering stance against selfies might have that beat. Also his pro pizzagate take made me laugh, that one was pretty bad tbh

It's so pathetic how these guys can't even handle some Balkan banter, they'd be scared stiff in an actual debate. I totally sympathize with Slavoj's tics and bluster, this is how people passionate about their subject act

What kind of boring political argument would it be if we didn't make some tasteless jew jokes tbh

>>>Holla Forums

It's so obvious you've never engaged in a heated political debate with people around you fam

I swear to god if you're not a /int*/ shitposter you're just an idiot.

It's just banter from a man who comes from a culture that has different prohibitions around racial humor. And the way he justifies it is pretty sound, especially in the larger context of his provocative public persona.

...

...

...

of course everyone sceptical about serbian politics has that, amirite

>Jokes have no place in srs discussions XD o(*>ωωω

Epicly memed my friend! Nice dubs (xD) too. Please take my Upvote!!!

Haha, thanks Holla Forumsro! xD

xD No problem fellow Anonymous member!

*blushes*
t-t-thanks user-kun
*hides face in hands*

You're welcome
You're a pretty big gui ;^)

A-ano….sumimasen…
gomennasai
eto…

Honestly, if there's anything where I completely agree with Slavoj, it's his point that respect for the Other doesn't come with a tolerant false sympathy but precisely through a sort of ironic ribbing and implicit recognition of the
He's totally right, I've always discovered this IRL, I have zero trouble with usual conservative triggers like LGBT, racial and national hatred etc. but I'm also the one making all the tasteless jokes. Because it's always obvious that people who are actual racists are uncomfortable with this, you can't bring the tension to the surface if it actually presents a problem.

Everyone who isn't a liberal is a fascist to them. Doesn't matter if you're a Marxist, an anarchist, a centrist, a conservative or an actual fascist. If you're not a liberal larping at socialism, you're an evil fascist.

...

Is Zizek Nazbol?????

molly klein was the woman in the ridiculous cosplay, not the main provocateur in the video (that was taryn fivek/emma quangel). fivek does good work with the WPP, but that was such a poorly planned disruption, using cherry-picked quotes that were easily deflected with context.

for what it's worth, i think zizek has a tendency for slight reactionary thought in his opposition to mainstream liberalism, but one should also distinguish media zizek, where he dumbs down his thoughts for normies, from book zizek. in some instances of the former, like his piece about the refugee crisis, have some reactionary undertones,

I can see that in myself too but I have to wonder if we aren't simply flattering ourselves by saying this. Because if I like making tasteless jokes then isn't it convenient for me that making tasteless jokes just happens to be the best way to have respect for the other. It's a funny outlook to have but sorta alienates people without this affinity for ironic humor which is why I think Zizek rubs many people the wrong way.

...

Well I think you can say that from any position. For example I am gay but if a liberal friend has a problem with making gay jokes I'll find it a bit ridiculous. If i was straight would this invalidate the position or not? Personally this goes far too much into the territory of certain identities having a special insight that others cannot access. Ultimately if we actually support these identities/freedoms I think we should fearlessly stop tiptoeing around it as sources of humour and teasing, while fully supporting them as something that is dogmatically self-evident for a decent person. I think that's Slavoj's point pretty much.

Now do one for Sam Kriss.

dude made us delete all of his posts on our tankie forum because he wanted to write for the graun

which forum?

I assumed Kriss was a giant hipster, Lacanian weirdo.

t H E r H i z z o n E


if he understood Lacan he'd be less annoying

What is he generally like though?

whiny, cryptozionist, SMOOTHBRAIN INCEL CHUD memer, defends the idea of "corncob" being a racial slur, basically everything awful about "left" twitter

Ross Wolfe is also a crypto-Zionist to my knowledge.

lmao

very good at concealing power level. knows a lot of theory but mainly uses it to write humorous articles. falls into a pragmatist camp where he organizes with succdem but is more radical.

This. Not sure how anyone could listen to Zizek after he went full retard during the election.

You're willfully choosing to focus on an offhand political statement he made so that you don't have to engage him theoretically. You're both brainlets.

When are you going to source this claim?

He was in Platypus who are a bit too cute about it

Reminder that Weird Twatter are goons. Reminder that beneath their layers of irony, they are same single cult of assblasted SJWs responsible for everything from killing Occupy, to killing Reddit with SRS, to causing GG.

Reminder that every single one of them needs to be exposed for the vermin they are and utterly exterminated before leftism can get anything done again.

I don't disagree with you comrade but, get real, goons made this website and the one it came from. ANd you are also a goon because no one cares about goons except goons.

Those weren't the same goons, this is some Darth Vader/Luke Skywalker father/son bullshit.

I'll admit I'm a bit of a newfag, having hidden away in USENET clear to its spam-induced death in the mid-2000s, and avoided major websites (aside from lurking) in lieu of posting in smaller fora afterward, only having started posting on imageboards when GG incinerated all my old haunts.

But from everything I saw at the time, and have read about since then, it's obvious a variety of very bad things happened to SA circa 2007 and created the cancer eating the internet alive today.

How can you take him seriously, when he obviously is not being serious? After he endorsed Trump -even if its to be contrarian and provocative, how can I look at his books and think: "there are some worthwhile ideas in here". If he's saying things that are obviously wrong to get a rise out of people and doesn't really mean them, why should I take seriously the parts of his work that are even harder to understand and even entertain the idea that he may be right? He's already so hard to understand and time and time again he says stuff that he doesn't really believe or bluff about some theory. It's not much fun to go through difficult material with the thought that most of it may be bullshit.

lelo

While that's quite ironic.

...

I knew we had some idiotic mods, but god damn. Just. God. Damn.

...

lol, "endorsed"

By reading the book, you absolute moron.

youtube.com/watch?v=wZy45QRuoF0


What did he mean by this?

I have read a few of his books. I'm saying I still don't know which parts are contrarian bullshit and which parts he seriously believe. And he did endorse Trump - call it what you will - he said the guy was the lesser of two evils and he would've voted for him over Clinton. Im just telling you what he said. If you're interested, look into an interview he did with the guardian over his book "living in the end times" - he admits that a lot of his theories in that book are bullshit and he analyizes films he didn't even watch. Separating the real from fiction is not as easy as "lol just read the books" - he openly admits to making stuff up.

But Holla Forums is a media platform.

What have you read?

Berniecrat Trump voter here. There is no question in my mind the entire populist phenomenon (left, right, and center) of 2016 would've been smothered to death under a Shillary presidency. 1000% unironic, unchallenged neolib/neocon hegemony.

The bleating "muh drumpf, muh pootin" idpol nonsense being puked all over leftism by the media now is exasperating, but it's nothing compared to the absolute purge of genuine leftism by shitlibs that Shillary (and her counterparts inside the Republican party) would've overseen.

he is right because titoism is Italian fascism without any Italians.

I'll put it all on "idiot that doesn't understand Zizek."

In an interview he says it would be better to vote for Trump rather than Hillary because Trump promised the potential for a break with the current status quo rather than the promise of maintaining current rates of decay under Hillary.

Is it true about her dad owning Playboy TV?

Right. And I realize you're not the same guy, but some people try to have it both ways. 1.He endorsed Trump ironically - he didn't really mean it. 2.He actually did mean it because he thought Trump provided some potential for revolutionary (re)action. I think Zizek gave a real endorsement of Trump when he really should have done the old Stalinist move: "they are both worse".

I read the easy introductory ones: How To Read Lacan, On Violence, and Against the Double Blackmail. I am making my way through The Sublime Object at the moment. The thing is that people say his pop-political stuff isn't the real him, but when he says that most of a book like "living in the end times" is "blah, blah, bullshit" it makes me wary of taking anything he says too seriously. Which is a problem if you call yourself a philosopher.

can someone give a quick rundows on the political thinking of this guy?
I can't figure it out by myself, nothing he says makes sense to me

My god this is stupid. Ethnocentricism and tribal loyalties have always been huge in Asia and Africa with or without colonialism.

Zizek is a left wing grifter who became very popular with armchairs because nothing he talks about is of any worth whatsoever to anyone who doesn't practice leftism from their armchair

I hate how Fivek is popular now even though she's the same as RedKahina except more coherent.

So do you?

fivek supports rojava but redkahina/phil greaves don't, and is slightly more willing to compromise purity for practical action.

Antigona by Smole is better tbh.

...

no. zizek can only be reactionary if you take his comments out of context. also lmao if you think he's against idpol. He rightfully supports it to the end. His problem with the refugees is that there wasn't enough "anuddah shoah"..