Derridean approach to praxis

List any.

What argument did Derrida make?

Yes, quite, I imagine it was quite the feat ambling into an audience still potentially impressed by the en vogue jargon of Anglo English departments ~30 years ago, and yet you persevered.

You're a moron. Just listen to Zizek: there's two kinds of difference. For example, sexual difference requires not the domination of one by another, and so we require a situation where the difference is respected. But in capitalism, there is an antagonistic difference where one group (capitalists) constantly seek to enslave the other group (proles). This is an occasion where difference is troublesome.

did you read the OP? Also
Lol do you enjoy magic?

Sorry that I didn't burn out my brain cells huffing paint in the "theory" dept so that I can giggle at all the drivel in Grammatology. Praxis and Derrida aren't difficult terms, but most of Derrida's writing is intentionally opaque and verbose. He's just as much a clown as Zizek. He's a bad writer and not even a philosopher. Derrida is far worse for the Left than Ayn Rand is for the right. Postmodernism = SJW…. Referring to me with the generic they outted you as an /idpol/er btw.

Hegel was basically an apologist for Prussia. Being a sophist and mystic, Hegel attacked objectivity in an effort to shield himself from criticism. Fichte was surely the father of pseudophilosophy, but Hegel remains the worst offender. You don't need to be a Hegelian in order to be a Marxist – why are you one? There's no reason to work backwards. You don't need alchemy to do chemistry.

In my experience, most continental philosophers suffer from something like Stockholm syndrome. They waste so much time and effort trying to make sense of their cult's bullshit that they end up bluepilling themselves. Pssst! The emperor wears no clothes.

...

Read 'Deconstruction in a nutshell'. You have literally no idea what you are talking about and bring a fucking terrible name to anarchism.

This is what I mean. You think postmodernism = "hurr durr everthin is relative things don't have foundation"
read a fucking book please. Deconstruction is not the levelling of values. Derrida himself admitted at the roundtable that he is a very Conservative person. It's the love of justice and democracy that forces us to deconstruct past and present democracies, and yes even take democracy beyond it's original Greek-European etymology and current understanding.

When you have a tradition you value, you MUST take responsibility for the passage of that tradition's knowledge and its multiplicity of forms.

Kill yourself bitch. Do it, please shoot yourself.

I read some 36 pages of Specters of Capital. It's actually very impressive in terms of how it mesmerizes your ilk. Which is, of course, why I study it closely.
You mean semiosis?

Well, here's your you anyway.

Get the fuck out.

wew

Kill yourself Popperite. You're probably the same autist who masturbating about muh anarchists being scientists.

Yes. Care to explain the time out of joint angle? Why did it go on for so long? Does he ever come back to it, like he promises? Of course he does, or maybe he doesn't, would you notice? Repitition, repitition, repitition.

You're quite clearly rambling about something you don't understand, making a very vague and short statement to signal that you understand (it didn't work) which ultimately is topped off with the American attitude of "please elaborate because I'm too stupid on these things to contribute".

I'm not taking someone who "read 36 pages of specters of marx" (hasn't even read a proper Derrida text, no wonder you didn't understand it) and uses the phrase "mesmerises your ilk" seriously.

>>2048649
please go back to /idpol/. you're pretty obviously tumblr

I want Peterson kiddies to leave

Leftypol discourse "in a nutshell"

x5
No, I understand Derrida quite well, and how it works, I'm asking you to prove you understand.
Oh no, I'm much worse.

You asked me about something that has no relevance to the OP, and all you did was go
it would prove nothing, I could just do what you do and start rambling on little soundbites. Why don't you ask a proper question about deconstruction, or the international Derrida requests we strive towards?

Haha no. Did you read this text or not? If so, I ask again, can you unpack for us the extended discourse on "time out of joint" in the opening remarks? This is called a pop quiz. It helps separate the wheat (me) from the chaff (you).

Why don't you give us your so great critiques of Lacan and Badiou, my Deleuzian friend? Or did you come to shit up the thread with snark?

- Derrida

Badiou is an unironic, unrepentant French Maoist who attempted to tunnel into the analytic divide by constructing an ontology of events from the set of all sets. If you really believe he warrants further critique you need your head examined. 2 minutes long enough for you? Do you not understand the purpose of tripping these bourgeois ivory tower snakes up on their lies, given all the disservice they have done to the Left in its name since the 1960's?

I'm done with you. Go jerk yourself off somewhere else.

I don't know if Derrida said this but it sounds a lot like something he would say :> and it definitely goes along with my understanding

like cockwork
oops, tongue slip. I meant clockwork

So you either
1. Haven't read the text, and are lying.
2. Have read it and don't understand.
OR
3. Are accusing Derrida, the master of language, of being wasteful with his words over a large portion of the very text you are here defending.

It's sad how little the disclosure actually makes these types engage in self-reflection. They must know they're frauds, they'll go to the grave with it I guess.

Jesus.

There is nothing outside the text, faggots.

This does not exist

yes, because it's about literary criticism and the indeterminacy of language.
Also, you have to understand something about the French language if you are going to be anything but confused by Derrida (unless there is a better translation than what i have seen)
those who try to expand his theories to the political realm are kind of missing the point

You're clearly a moron who doesn't know what he's talking about. The only way to construe Hegel as a Prussia Apologist is to entertain the idea that his Philosophy of Right in fact describes the prussian state. Which it blatantly doesn't.

...

According to Derrida, deconstruction is a kind of radicalisation in the same spirit as Marx. It doesn't seek to create a heading, but it does seek to allow us to 'keep our heads'

Even in French he is indecipherable if you don't have a strong philosophy background

you're just retarded for reading Derrida without a strong background in philosophy

this

Bump