Žižek: the left should ally with the alt-right

"Alt-right Trump supporters and left-wing Bernie Sanders fans should join together to defeat capitalism"


Is Žižek now Nazbol?

I think it does make some sense to exploit the class divisions in both Republicans and Democrats to further weaken them. The question is are we organized enough to fill the power vacuum, doubt it. Weak Democrats and Republicans does not necessarily mean real left will step in, more likely that alt-right will instead. I think Žižek is gambling on the chance that the left will get its shit together in this event, or at least putting forth the possibility that they will. When he argued for Trump over Hillary he quoted Mao, "Everything under heaven is in utter chaos; the situation is excellent.”

Should we form any strategic alliances with the alt-right (or alt-light) or no? Effectively many segments of the left have already chosen a strategic alliance with liberals against the right. Isn't this unbalanced, causing us to prioritize fighting the right over class struggle? Perhaps allying with elements of the alt-right base could expose them to real class analysis.

Other urls found in this thread:


Everyone should circulate this on Facebook, at the very least to piss people off.

Zizek is a fascist.



Zizek confirmed for NAZBOL.

Wow, stunning insights from "leftism"'s #1 meme philosopher.

The title is click-bait and misleading, Zizek's doesn't argue for a joint front between leftists and the alt-right: but that we should play up divisions in the right between neocons and the alt-right to weaken them.

The articles Zizek writes for the independent are always given the most absurdly provocative titles by the copy editor there. He isn't actually arguing for an alliance with the alt-rights.

What he's saying is:

1) That we should be trying to appeal toward populist forces on the right. (Which should be obvious and uncontroversial.)

2) That we should never forget that the ruling class is our main enemy and that fascism is just a natural by-product of the economic system they maintain. (which is just a basic left-com position, anti-fascism is class collaboration)

Uh, how?

I get what zizek is saying, the enemy of my enemy, etc, but it's not as simple as that

I genuinely hope somebody kills that retarded old cunt.

Did t dumf supporters hurt your fee-fees or something?

I don`t think you know what fascism actually is nor means.


These things should be obvious and uncontroversial but the fact is they are anything but, for a majority of the left which is more focused on anti-Trump and anti-fascism right now. Sometimes the obvious needs to be stated.

As I said in my original post, effectively many segments of the left have already chosen a strategic alliance with liberals against the right. So we are already using the logic of "enemy of my enemy is my friend," with the consequence that fighting the right is prioritized over class struggle. So yes there are problems with it but sometimes they are deemed worth it. Why not use the same logic with the alt-right to balance this out?

Even though Zizek doesn't say this in the article: It's just click bait, don't worry these anons actually read it

Any leftist who does have similar thoughts to this has completely mis-read the situation as to what the alt-right is. Considering the alt-right is deeply drenched in right wing idpol, I doubt a thing could be achieved without people clashing heads.
I don't expect people to start quoting Varg and state leftists as the enemy. We hate capitalism for very different reasons and want to achieve very different goals. We recognise capitalism is the system which permeates bigotry against all races and genders, minority or majority, but the Alt-right is still an identitarian movement first and foremost, and will only go as far as being a bunch of turd- positionists.

The Alt-light may be more of "le civic nationalist based black man" sort of people, but their economic views are still inherently capitalist. So unless you can find a way to despook them and just turn them into your typical ML which you find here on this board, then I'd say give up on them and do as Zizek says. The fascists aren't the enemy, but a by-product of capitalism, and we should stoke the flames between the right so they take the focus off of us and so we can better organise and plan.

I mean there is a great irony in him writing this for The Indy: considering Britain went through its "Alt-right" phase back in 2007-2010, and is now on its "THE RED LEFT IS BACK BABY" phase. Compared to Europe we are like a decade ahead.

Headlines are often written by editors, or someone from an editing team. So they probably skimmed the article and plopped that shit on without any thought.


Agreed, any kind of real alliance is bound to create insoluble problems. I think this is more what I had in mind ->

So, as someone who fully believes in the idea that there is a coordinated effort to destroy the white race, whether by jews or the bourgeoisie, i would like to explain exactly why YOU should not and can not believe in both the preservation of the white race (and the preservation of all races in their distinct, unique forms as well) and capitalism in ANY form - i wanted to articulate these points to make it as clear as possible to anyone willing to listen. here goes;
- takes advantage of cheap labour, this also leads to and is one of the biggest driving factors in causing the importation of foreign workers in place of locals and regional/indigenous people.
- worker alienation - worker is not allowed to interact with other workers, worker is only a tool and must not think of himself as anything else. worker works to merely live, working is life-or-death and therefore the worker does not enjoy life, meaning he is not
- degrades society, kills intelligence in people forced to do manual labour and in people forced to do menial tasks constantly - people with fully-functioning brains go braindead over time as they are forced to bend coathangers over and over again or flip patties over and over again. he is not allowed to think for himself or do much for himself.
- worker does not gain the majority of profit coming from his work alone. this goes to paying the company in command of him.
- capitalism is inherently globalist in nature; companies do not have borders, they do not comprehend the concept of a nation, and they do not believe in the preservation of races who do not produce enough to sustain the system
- government is inherently corrupt under capitalism. It can only restrict company policy as much as lobbyists allow it to, meaning that anything being done to improve working conditions can not and will not be good enough for the workers' satisfaction and government will regularly work in the interests not of the nation but of the globalist corporations
Capitalism fully allows liberalism/"idpol" to fester; it is an ally of the bourgeoisie. liberalism by my definition is defined as capitalism with a friendly face to migrant workers. American Democrats are a good example of this; they "defend" the rights of cheap exploited Mexican workers to enter the United States and to work for lower than minimum wage if he is illegal. (This next part is a theory i have made to articulate a good reason to explain why capitalists seem to love "multiculturalism" so much beyond simply wanting cheaper labor) Liberalism also has a hidden motive of wishing to mongrelize the proletariat in order to both impede their mental capacity and to increase their productivity through means of what appears to be selective breeding; bringing the dumbest immigrants possible in order to mix them with local populations and in turn to largely change the gene pool of poor and poverty-ridden areas and again mongrelize the population into a better, more productive worker who does not question his place in society.


See you in hell or

I really wouldn't mind that. Could you imagine the asthetics.

Because when you fight fascism you fight for liberal democracy.


It's almost like Zizek doesn't actually engage with these people and know they're staunch protectors of capitalism.

t. liberal
Read the article.

And now he's pushed farther left.


Watch as Twitter ☭TANKIE☭s go insane and never actually read the piece

Dear lord I wish I wasn't banned from Zizek's Dank Meme stash so I could troll the fuck out of it with this article

SJW anarchists are the ones who hate Zizek the most.

t. retard
Read Holla Forums

We're comrades now Holla Forums!

They're discussing it right now. Reactions seem mixed to positive actually.






lemmings, they'll post about punching the alt-right one day, then their God tells them no


Also, these are the same people defending the death of net-neutrality JUST because Trump is in office.

I think Žižek thinks that the American alt-right is the same as the European far-right, aka from mildly anticapitalist to full on nazbol.
He doesn't get that the Yank alt-right is mainly spergs astroturfed into supporting repealing NN and destroying their healthacre by the megacorps.

wrong Zizek is NAZBOL

I think he's aware that the american alt-right is classcucked. But he thinks they are motivated by class antagonisms even if they have false consciousness.

probably the more sensible altright are sneks and I don't mind working in the political south regardless of left/right.
I think there should be a cohesive effort, I will call it Project Ketchup and Mustard, to unite burgers. The cyber-syndicalists need to get Hawaii Left Review to finish his fucking calculator or whatever it takes to get that ball rolling and we need to start organizing Real Tangible Unions for people working in tech and also the precariat to join. These unions will provide the capital for workers to start their own co-ops, which the sneks can join and also help finance.
Basically a lot of Red Commies are going to suck up their poverty loving ideology, and moral superiority and get their hands dirty with using big dollars. Wield power. The capitalists have provided us the rope by which we can crush the elites. May 2017 spike in crypto. Use your head. Get that money. Make communism with it.

Is this the power of the immoral science of historical dialectical materialism?

This all has to do with the concept of common interest. Marxism is based on the idea of proletarian class consciousness but that class consciousness is supposed to erase all classes- i.e. establish that all people have a common interest.

Thus the whole question of politics is to find the common interest and articulate it so that people will recognize it. As far as the alt right, people are simply making a fetish of the nation since overt nationalism has been rendered taboo by capitalism cosmopolitanism.

The solution is to show to the alt right that even if you want to retain the nation, the way to do that is internationalism. We must establish that material conditions have changed, and that the era of discrete nations must be forever over. All people rely on each other now, which means that the whole world is in the position that say, Germany was in in the 19th century- we all share a common interest and must establish one world nation- though this in a way eradicates the notion of nationality, exclusionary as it is. Still, it is an objective fact that all nations rely on each other now, and so in effect constitute one nation.

You're deluded if you think we would ever allow degenerates such as yourselves into our coalition. Of course, the professor argues not for us joining, but for you to sabotage the Republican Party by encouraging the Bannonites.

What. There's no reason you can't be both antifascist and anti liberal democracy.

lol back to >>>Holla Forums faggot


These two statements contradict each other.

The Barbary wars were Americas fault, right?

Fucking dumbass


there NO way pol is that retarded
i refuse to believe

The Zizek is ignorant of what a leap this would have to be.
Most of them are pro-private property, pro business types.
The people who swung the election may be working class, but they're still not a majority.

Zizek often complains that the left wants to replay the 20th century, and yet he advocates this shit. Stop taking him seriously. He's a hack.

Stop taking anyone seriously.
Shitner was a racist, the ussr was equally bigoted as the west, and Che among others were also racist traditionalists, people need to stop worshiping idols, you can pick the good parts of their ideas out but worshiping the people themselves is bad.

Please explain how importing more foreign workers is anti-racial diversity

The difference is you can round up and shoot the entire fascist movement in America pretty easily. Muslim =! Jihadi but Fascists inherently deserve death. I'd take a suffi Muslim family over a group of autistic neckbeards with a frog fetish.

Is this the death of Žižekposting, now that Žižek has become ?

One can only hope so.

Umm… No.

If everyone is interbred into uniformity, there will be no diversity.


That's even more retarded than your initial contradiction.

Because ultimately opposing capitalism to many of these "leftists" is a game or a career opportunity, they don't actually care about socialism, the working class, and the oppressed people of the world.

I mean I don't fully agree with Zizek here but if your immediate reaction is to start calling him an evil racist for suggesting that anticapitalists could find common ground with anticapitalists then I gotta question your commitment to socialism.

Too late, Žižek is already dead to us, like a Mormon Church family member disowned by his family for making out with the atheist qt.

suck a dick

Keep in mind the idea is something from the "good fences, good neighbors" tendency of nonsupremacist racism, one I myself doubt the sincerity of pretty much everyone espousing it.

This mystery will be solved when you remember who Trump's opponent was.

If you believe "anticapitalists" make revolution, as opposed to the working-class, I have to seriously question your understanding of socialism.


Zizek has always been an internationalist fascist.
Yes, its retarded, and yes, he is.

"This shit" being?


Some reddit reactions:

First batch is from /r/ChapoTrapHouse

1. The opponent was the better option.
2. None of these people supported Bernie.

I like Zizek, but he's wrong here.

/r/politics (aka HillaryHQ)

I don't think he's aware Trump supporters will defend him to the end.


Some of these I can agree with. Alt-Right really doesn't hate capitalism, or even in as little as reforms to make healthcare work in burgerland. They should still be gulaged for calling Noam Chomsky a brocialist or saying there is no point in trying to bread-pill right wingers.

That's not what Zizek says in the article. Clearly these people (you included, most likely) haven't got further than the title.

But Chomsky IS a liberal, and there really is no point trying to "bread-pill" anyone because the Bread Book is bullshit.

Get behind me Satan
[C]lowns [I]n [A]merica

Holy shit, we read the article. Why do you people think Zizek is some Messiah, second coming of Karl Marx? He believes Trump supporters are truly anti-establishment which is the most naive thing to believe.

Since when have liberals wanted to go beyond capitalism?

Trump ran on anti-establishment, and people actually believed him.
I did…

I didn't ask if Chomsky is a liberal (which is a long stretch if you actually read Chomsky besides clickbait articles made about him in MSM), I emphasized them calling Chomsky a brocialist.

Then why does Zizek want to frame Alt-Right as some kind of "enemy of the enemy"? I bet the wobbly girl who died in Cville would beg to differ.

You could say the same about Obama.




Hey look, I’m Q. You can do this too!!

wonder what zizek would say if he say this

Completely agree. The current situation with net neutrality has been a real indicator of the alt-right true loyalties.

That third pic sums up what I'd like to get out of a Trump presidency (aside from paralyzing asshurt from Shillary and the SJWs that she fucked us over with), and from the alt-right who propelled him into office: Using populist sentiment to REDpill rightists would be nice, but what about the things we already agree on?

What if, by working with rightists, nazis included, we can stop wars, close down the surveillance state, rebuild tariff barriers against offshoring, slash immigrant visa numbers to the bone, and get (probably pork-a-riffic, but still) massive public works and jobs programs going again?

Trump obviously isn't FDR, but his embittered voters might be ready for something like a new New Deal. Why not help them get it?

Because the cry for a return to the New Deal is reactionary in the extreme?
To begin with, Roosevelt -lowered- tariff barriers, so your New Deal 2.0 has already diverged from the historical New Deal in this respect. Roosevelt's entire foreign policy pre-1939 was predicated on an effort to reduce the tariff walls that had been thrown up in response to the Depression, to get rid of the logjam in foreign trade.
All the rest is simple succdem reformism. You don't want revolution; you want a capitalism made in your own image.

The alt right cock sucks capitalism. You don’t know how many alt right groups I was kicked out of back in my Asser days.

No fuck the autright. He's just toying around ideas in his head, he'll come back to his senses.

I'm aware FDR wasn't a protectionist (although that is a highly relative statement, given how insanely laissez faire our current policy is relative to the 1930s-1970s), but let's leave that aside, and on top of that I'll assume you aren't an accelerationist.

Do you think socialism would be easier to push, or harder, if proles were more financially secure, better organized as a class, and lived in a less corrupt legal system?

I don't think socialism is something to 'push' at all. I think it arises as an emergent property of capitalism.

We were HIGHLY organized during the last quarter of the nineteenth century, first under the Knights Of Labor, then under the American Federation of Labor. They, too, pursued immigrant reductionist schemes [Chinese Exclusion in California, for example]; they, too, fought for all kind of 'progressive' policies with respect to stamping out corruption. They did not abolish the commodity form and class distinctions.

And yet they were the backbone of every single socialist movement worth mentioning. All throughout the history of capitalism, meaningful leftism started and ended with unions.

Meaningful reaction also started and ended with unions - AIFLD, Solidarity.
I mean, it's not uncommon for someone who fetishizes unions to begin at syndicalism and end at the Republican Party platform of 1896. Better to just admit it and drop the radical pretense.

That's true enough, I'll readily admit working class≠always a good thing. But that doesn't invalidate the fact that without unions we're dead in the water.

For reference, my own ambition for "revolution" is a parallel system of coops gradually swallowing up the capitalist econopolity through a mix of market competition, fábricas recuperadas-style direct action, and outright government restrictions against capitalists, as popularity mounts, eventually transitioning to a full syndicalist system after the last capitalist vanishes. Large-scale violence would be avoided unless absolutely compelled.

I think that's radical, but maybe you don't. And even if that's the case, I can't imagine such a situation making it harder for whatever you or other radicals want.

Oh, so you uphold Marxism-Reaganism, then.
[Reagan was a union guy, too.]
I, myself, have absolutely no vision in mind for what Communism will look like or what the conditions under which it will arise will be. I'm a convinced leftcom. I'm also a factor worker and part-time bartender, so I'm not some academic divorced from the manual trades.

Yes, we've all seen the memes. But even aside from the obvious misunderstanding and willful dishonesty, doesn't that speak to how attractive these ideas are to all kinds of people at their core, and how easy it is to sell it to them if you sugarcoat it right?

If something has to be 'sold', then it's just another commodity, this time in the "marketplace of ideas".


Cheap at half the price, don't look a gifthorse in the mouth. Seriously, people spazzing out over "marketplace of ideas" is right up there with the use of meaningless relativist buzzwords "reactionary", "progressive", and "reform".

Really, silicon valley tea-sippers are actually socialists?

Those guys?

Jesus fuck, and Holla Forums worships this man?


Bitter pomo detected

Read Bordiga, newfriend. If you fight fascist agitation in a liberal state, what are you protecting if not the liberal status quo? How does you preventing the destabilization of liberalism and becoming a guardian of the center which even saves the ruling elite from having to reveal their willingness to resort to violence have any positive impact on achieving socialist aims?

Literal Neo Nazi reporting in: The Left and the Right SHOULD team up I agree. At least until we bring down the current system.

is this false-flag?

He didn't. Read the fucking article.

>"zee capitalist is ze enemy *sniff* fashist can zoin zee fite and probably wants to crush zee *sniff* eeem eeem zyzstem too *sniff* we can exploit ziz
Except that he literally did just that.

No. Bringing down the current system is the #1 priority of both sides. I've been trying to tell Holla Forums this but there are too many untermensch mongoloids there to see the bigger picture. All they want to do is hate niggers & jews but never do anything about it.


Is there a ideology that teaches "kill anyone who attempts to have power over society"? Because I don't think there is such thing as a good leader at this point. I think anyone who attempts to have power of others is automatically evil and a power hungry control freak, and should just be killed.

What makes you think that convincing Holla Forums is even remotely a good idea?

Which movie is this from?

Anarchism i suppose. Careful not to cut yourself on all that edge though.

Aut right is close to the left economically but they are also the best of useful idiots with their hatred for communism. They are the ones you will have to fight in a civil war.

No he didn't
you fucking retard.




He said "fight for Bannon followers" aka some Asserist/nazbol creeps or even worse, literal Evola-reading fash. Is that really a viable praxis?

Technically speaking, that is progressivism. There are many people too spooked to even go that far.

what sexism? what racism?

Yeas, because these people aren't inherently reactionary, but not attempting to sway them will only ensure that they stay that way. Like in Europe, a lot of Trump's and similar "alt right" figures' support comes from people who are getting the economic shit kicked out of them and turn to the people that are talking about doing something about it. They may not think that spics and hajjis and sjws are the source of their problems, but without a leftist alternative they'll take what they can get.

Read Lenin, plz.

Why do people spend so much time advocating for propagandizing to fash but god forbid someone dare to suggest maybe, just maybe radicalizing liberals and there is already autistic screeching all over the place with a list of thousand different reasons why that's absolutely not done.

Now here let me give you something to think about
Cletus who lost his job to NAFTA in midwest is not gonna suddenly turn communist, despooking people takes more than few people losing jobs

It's not either/or, brainlet.
You should take your own advice.

Just explained why Žižek's argument doesn't quite work this way.

All you did was demonstrate how fucking retarded you are.

You still avoided the part about Bannon admiting to being a leninist and how Žižek might have mistakenly taken it into account.

No, Slavoj is not a shitposter. He doesn't even browse 4ch. He has better things to do.

Also, this is nothing new: communists have always advocated for the unconditional overthrow of Capitalism.


Is there a more retarded ideology in leftism?

considering that the alt-right is already in disagreement with neocons about pretty much everything, this makes about as much sense as the alt-right saying we should play up divisions between neocons and communists, as if they might otherwise find common ground and start working together. i wouldn't worry about it.

This has nothing to do with Bannon's stated Leninism. Zizek is proposing that we drive wedges in the alt-right's base by addressing their concerns from a leftist perspective allowing us to capitalize on the obvious discontent that drives people to find answers outside of status quo politics. By "fighting for Bannon's followers" he means to bring them to our side not align with their program. Your reading comprehension is abysmal.

picture my perturbation

you: if we dismantle capitalism, all races will abandon tribalism, and idpol will be a thing of the past.

me, an intellectual: fat chance, dumbshit.

embrace Not Socialism, and make your nation strong and healthy, whatever your race might be.

in the words of oswald mosley, "we can live in peace and friendship, side by side, in separate nations and separate developments, but we cannot have the mix up of peoples and races who are widely different and divergent. it will lead to nothing but trouble."


s/'Not Socialism'/'national socialism'

We're all mutts dude, we've been forming new ethnicities and mixing and matching old ones for all of human history, why would that stop now? Furthermore, how would would you build this fortress and maintain it?

nazbol is the future comrades

This guy is becoming a bigger meme with each passing day

The problem is that the alt-right guys aren't even really against neoliberalism. Hell, most of them aren't even against making their own countrymen suffer just to "get at" their opponents. A lot of them are just unhappy that they feel uncomfortable about the different people in their societies and that they have to put up with them.

People not reading is a fucking problem. Funny how it has been mostly tanks freaking out over this. Almost like there's a certain group of people here who don't read 🤔🤔🤔

(heil hitler)

for most of human history this hasn't been an issue at all, because traveling long distances was extremely arduous, and there was no large-scale mixing of peoples and cultures. now they're shipping them in. on the one hand, they're discouraging us from having children, for a variety of reasons. on the other hand, they tell us we need "replacement migration", due to our disastrously low birthrates. there is nothing natural about any of this.

widely different and divergent peoples trying to share a society hasn't happened much until recently, and it has been a disaster, by any objective measure.

why don't you try going to africa, and saying "hey, we're all mutts my dudes, so i have as much right to this land as you indigenous people, amirite?" or are only european lands supposed to be for everyone?

pls stop being cringe

the absolute state of r/socialism

Do you have any scientific evidence that people from different races don't get along due to genetic factors? Evidence of racial preferences exists, but that isn't strong enough to support the claim you're advancing.

This isn't a liberal comfort box.

i have evidence that racial diversity inversely correlates to social capital.

Wow, it's almost like social capital is historically contingent! Gee whiz, that sure was a difficult question you posed there user. Races emerge from a combination of regional isolation, morphology, and historical factors. The varied social capital between races is just evidence that this is the case.

i'm not talking about differences in social capital between races, i'm saying that increasing the racial diversity of a society is correlated with a decline in social capital within that society. why don't you tell me (1) what you think causes this, (2) how it can be overcome, and (3) why going through the trouble of overcoming it should even be a goal, rather than living in ethnically homogenous societies.

before going into all that, can we see your """""proof"""""

and be secretly delighted lmao

I wanna fuck Megumin and cum all over her delicious flat chest

happened all the fucking time when I wrote for a local paper

Read Robert Putnam on diversity, fags

Basically what I think Zizek is arguing for here is:
- Steal good policy planks from the aut-right (anti-free trade, anti-interventionism, public works)
- Work to play them off of establishment republicans to fuck with the broader right coalition
- Discard and continue to run against their reactionary policies

This is just smart short-term politics.


It's true though, some of the supporters were, the man himself obviously isn't but some people still can be duped and were.

It was also true for Obama, yes. Although the anti-establishment Rhetoric for Trump is far more severe and I'd expect the Trump supporters that are anti-establishment are far more anti-establishment.

What the fuck? Even if we 100% convinced them and educated them of what we believe they would still be 'buying' our beliefs.
I think you tried to make the point that selling people watered down or un-nuanced versions of our beliefs won't help but you fucked up everywhere.


I'm sympathetic to market socialism in some sections of the economy, I was just spelling out the logic.

I thought the alt-right was obsessed with ancapitalism. They really like Stefan Molyneux, Jordan Peterson, etc.

Even the ayncraps are starting to give ground on issues like free trade and mass immigration that they held fast against as recently as the late-2000s Paulbot plague.

Joy, the one thing they were good for, the one worthwhile position they held, is being ceded.

trump supporters are actually anti establishment, as an example, look at any video where trump had nigel farage speaking. the crowd would cheer loudest when nigel blamed the big banks for their situation. honestly it was sort of OWS-y.

Trump is actually far more anti establishment than Obama ever could be for the simple reason that the man was opposed by both political parties as well as their media outlets, and he was never even a politician at all. Obama was always firmly establishment and even people at the time saw through it, but voted for him anyway because they thought him being black would somehow make him not an establishment tool

Is Kermit ayncrap? I've never heard him talk about real politics; he only talks about idpol despite supposedly hating it.

I think you took the opposite meaning from what was intended by my post. I meant that back in the late 2000s, Ron Paul shills were uniformly and relentlessly laissez-faire, but now that is no longer the case.

…You understand what Zizek is seeing right?

He is an outside observer looking at what's going on in the states and he thinks the """left""" has gone full retard with throwing the "DUMB HILLBILLIES LOOK AT THE TRAILERS THEY LIVE IN" under the bus for Petit-Borgies sucking down starbucks shots who are scared shitless of walking up to an actual gruff proletariat worker that builds skyscrapers and the Alt-Right is funneling them in like hot cakes.

This is a small transcript of what the Alt-Right and their podcasts are talking about right now:

Underneath all that jewish and racist bullshit rhetoric they spew, that's what they're talking about underneath; is it any wonder Zizek is fucking confused?

You seem to have missed an enormous amount of the recruiting rhetoric from far-right groups focuses on access to resources (class). The far-right simply blames other working class groups. Now go back to whichever intersectional shithole spawned you.

No, both of you are correct, just by different scales and dynamics.


Oh shit!

Rolling so the capitalists get blown up


>>>Holla Forums

I agree it should go back to Holla Forums

Winner! Planet destroyer goes to Holla Forums now!

Fuck you. If it comes back here again it will have to be a board other than Holla Forums
>>>Holla Forums13875567

and since this is turning into a game of pass the Planet Killer
>>>Holla Forums13875588
Nominate a board other than Holla Forums

Why not embrace eternity?

SEND TO Holla Forums

Rolling for trips


Pussy, send it back
>>>Holla Forums



back to Holla Forums

Send it to /fur/






Fuck, I hate Zizek now.

somebody post the board owner of /leftycuck/ already

handwaving happytalk not substantiated by his own data. cant blame him tho, no one wants to be the guy saying Santa dont real

This is now a NazBol meme thread

No! This is now a giraffe gang thread.

¿Por qué no ambos?

Yeah, that's the point. If Trump isn't anti-establish then why would Trumpets be?

t. Holla Forums

well obviously not. he lurks /marx/, dumbass

Why would Bannon say something so unprecedented and controversial if there wasn't some truth behind it?

What happens when Trump inevitably fails to deliver on his promises? Cletus will be desperately looking for new, more radical solutions to his economic suffering. It's true due to propaganda, he has an innate aversion to leftism. But this isn't the case as much with younger people as with boomers.

his data is focused on the short term and doesn't substantiate the claims made by others that want to hijack his work. He himself cites the data as evidence of the need for greater attention to integration and cites success stories such as the U.S. armed forces. You handwave this and say that "he's just pretending" without any hard evidence suggesting that

Most of his base will stick by Trump because of the spectacle.

American leftists need to look for the small number of people (mainly rust belt voters) who voted trump as a reaction against the failures of the clintonite dems while working to regain the trust of the millions of committed liberals and leftists that didn't show up to vote at all.

This also includes trench warfare at the state and local level to roll back voter disenfranchisement laws, install auto voter registration, expand advance polling days and put mobile polling stations on university campuses. This ALSO means fighting shithead centrist dems that do fuck all, and so you can install a younger generation of socialist cadres in school boards, city councils, city clerks, anything you americans vote for.

This is really solid advice man

i'd love to stay and discuss this, but they already banned me for wrongthink (or maybe just a joke). putnam is one example, but there are several others. google it. or, i guess, just enjoy your echochamber. l8r faggots.

What the fuck is even your point mate. Real life socialist societies haven't imported millions of immigrants like capitalist societies.

Not agreeing with him, but I doubt that was his point. ML countries were never much better than the 3rd-world countries economic migrants pour out of.

Literally might as well be Nazbol, because the only value he sees in socialism is the "in-one-nation" part.

based Zizek.
It has yet to occur to any of you that this man's tastes in music and literature are PURE, God-tier reactionary. Zizek believes in morality, Christian morality, even.

Communism is dead. Fascism can no longer compete or even become a reality, partly because the testosterone-Serotonergic fueled romanticism, individualism and repression of fun, which high Autism Level people usually have to go trough in their youth, are nowadays being dismantled trough powerful and corrosive perversions of the mind, and so they(we)'re left listening to Nasheeds and techno-remixes of old fascist anthems to fulfill their(our) innate Männerbund longings as they(we) browse /fit/ and /nofap/, imagining themselves(ourselves) deadlifting 400 lbs. as they(we) sift trough a King James Bible PDF, rereading the first chapter of Genesis, hoping it will cure their(our) debilitating hatred and fear of 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧women🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧.

If you listen to Zizek at all you're a fucking idiot

Capitalism is a hell of a system.

yeah, this The Independent editor should obviously


Good God, you people are fucking idiots. Typically I consider calls for putting someone "up against a wall" to be LARPy garbage, but holy fuck do you badly need a bullet through your brain.

keep dreaming, the dream will come true one day.

dont poopu your pantsu, big boy

Haha, that headline is pure clickbait. Every single leftist acting outraged by this on Twitter/Discord hasn't read past the title.

He is into the first-wave of modernist art, people like Arnold Schoenberg, Samuel Beckett, Mark Rothko, basically the original degenerate art. I wouldn't call his tastes reactionary, "pure, god-tier reactionaries" prefer Bach, Buxtehude, Mozart, Rembrandt, Goethe, and so on.
theguardian.com/books/live/2014/oct/06/slavoj-zizek-webchat-absolute-recoil (

allah willing, to Holla Forums

Is the bomb not fashionable anymore?

Is this b8 or just a retard ?

so what your saying leftypol is that hillary clinton wouldn't have sold you to the slaughter faster then trump?

4th comment in first pic is right tho

Nazbol is redpilled


Not once does Zizek suggest that we should make an "alliance" with the alt-right, but that Trump supporters represent working class dissatisfaction with the Republican Party establishment, and are the right-wing iteration of a greater proletarian vs bourgeois politics that is overtaking the old Republican vs Democrat paradigm, so the left should be working to reaching out to these people and bringing them into class politics rather than antagonizing them. After all, the enemy is the neoliberal bourgeois establishment, not conservative proletarians.

Honestly, how many people actually read beyond the clickbait title?

Have you read it? Last paragraph says it:

That's not suggesting an alliance. Just before that it says
IE - We should court Trump supporters and try to bring them to our side, not ally with them.

That seems pretty clearly to be an alliance to me.

That doesn't sound like much of an alliance.

Zizek isn't wrong here in principle, but severely underestimates how impenetrable American politics can be. Capitalism is too deeply ingrained in American culture. Criticizing it is virtually nonexistent, it's taken as a completely normal fact of life, not just the status quo.

There is also the fact that left and right politics have different concepts of what the establishment is.


look i'm reading a headline !
why people don't read and fall for clickbait.

What does that even mean?

Tell this to 99.99% of anti-fascists.

Hating feminists and black people

Zizek is talking about stealing all the people that voted for Trump because he appealed to the economic problems that have ruined their fucking lives.

But that's too fucking complicated for brainlets that don't understand Zizek.

The midwest flipped primarily for this reason. Outside of certain areas on the east and west coasts, a lot of the country is economically a shithole and tired of the neolibs and politicians in general

Inaccurate, tbh
They’re reorienting towards socialism (or, Not Socialism, but they’re becoming more “left wing” than most of the contemporary left on economic issues, and are explicitly anti-capitalist, although not in the purist sense of ending private and state property)

It's not clear if that is what Zizek is saying. He doesn't mention "Trump supporters", but the Bannon audience- that is: the Breitbart crowd, Alt-right, civic nationalists, etc. That's a tall order and Zizek has written about how these crowds are harder to reach than standard liberals because of their warped understanding of "the true enemy" - for Nazis, it was Jews, for these guys, it's "globalists" and even (imaginary) communists.

Also I wish he had went in more detail here. Why is a pact between Sanders and Bannon excluded, but he expects us to reach out to Bannon supporters? He gives no reason why to do the one, but the other is simply impossible.


Also Zizek, but this time he's right:

Imagine if Zizek was alive in the 20s and 30s.


If this is your first Zizek article, then I get where you're coming from, but as I've tried to demonstrate above

it contradicts other things he has said. And really it's basic common sense. It's an insane idea that we could ally with reactionaries to do anything productive. Holla Forums in general has a hard time admitting Zizek is wrong about anything ever, so the reactions here defending him aren't surprising.

it's not, I'm well acquainted with his work and that of the other continental philosophers

If this is what he says, then yeah.

Trying to appeal to the alt-right itself is retarded, but the populist "right" is basically the product of Dems backing away from any kind of economic platform that could appeal to these people. The GOP has consistently tried to turn them into hardcore classcucks (with some success due mainly to Democrat spinelessness), but at heart most of these people are only conservative on social issues and know they're being screwed economically.

Who do you think Bannon supporters are?

Except in reality the alt-right attracts a thoroughly middle class type of person.

Just no, there has been meaningful reaction in union form, mostly in reaction to the left but in no way did it start and end that way, like it literally has with leftism

Of course not, and I'm not against trying to radicalize liberals, but this kind of person could be more open to it then some liberals, if it's the middle/upper class type of liberal then most likely Cletus is readier for radicalization

alt/far right types, i know of a few just personally and most are more lumpen, the others vary either "middle class" (proletariat personally who's parents are some kind of bougie or just workers with more money) or posh

He never said that he would vote for trump, he said maybe trump over hillary but he explicitly said that he would abstain given the chance.
In France he suggested foremost abstain, otherwise vote melenchon or whoever the lefty was

You do realize that during the 20s/30s there were status-quo SPD-backed paramilitaries which cracked down on both the far left and far right.

where zikek sucks porkie dry.
I mean I've read some theory from him and that's interresting and all but someone should stop him when he reaches for the keyboard with this kind of shit