Considering our boy Slavoj has received lots of attention due to his recent short articles on Jordan Peterson I figured it's time for a thread dedicated to the man's philsophy and politics. Let's share some of our favourite lectures, talks, debates, and books relating to Zizek. Of course memes are welcome as well.
To start off, here's a recent lecture on the topic of subjectivity - it's theory focused:
youtube.com
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
hooktube.com
youtube.com
mega.nz
users.wfu.edu
thenextrecession.files.wordpress.com
paulcockshott.wordpress.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
youtube.com
twitter.com
How can one man be so based
My Gott, haven't watched molymeme for a long time but you really know you're an intellectual powerhouse when you screech 'nod an argumend' after every half sentence of an opinion piece
You fucked up the link. Here is the correct one: hooktube.com
How can anyone still take this dude seriously? He's a living meme. The moment I see him speak I instinctively start laughing.
Sorry, I don't want to derail the thread already. Question. Is it true that Zizek is basically always right, or have I brainwashed myself by listening to too many of his lectures?
is his cult still going strong or what?
He's Video sadly has over a 100k views and it's fairly new. How do people listen to this guy seriously for 40 minutes.
no I meant the actual cult where he has a bunch of kids steal their parents' credit cards, send him money, then run away from home and live in a compound he's set up.
Holy shit lads, who the fuck are are these cunts?
...
intellectual honesty*
Mollymeme is such a fucking fraud. None of Zizek's engagements with Peterson's rise on the internet was supposed to be an argument or refutation against him. The entire point was to account for the interest people have in him in the first place.
Why is it always the logic pedants that lack critical self awareness?
this describes Holla Forumstards perfectly
He seems like a genuine psychopath to me
Zizek didn't really even attack Kermit. Why are they so butthurt?
Because it's the alt-right's most academically prestigious talking head thinking that he can intellectually dick wave with some lefty guy. Turns out that lefty guy is a Professor at NYU, the director of UoL, and one of the most prolific radical thinkers alive. In essence it's a D-lister going against an A-lister and Kermit's fans thinking he could actually go head to head with the guy, but of course Zizek is too busy being an asshole to actually get caught up with someone so far down the ladder.
I really don't know. He seems to be less and less interested in Free Domain Radio and more interested in making money peddling his cheap half-baked crap to gullible alt-right tards.
Yes. He's almost ready to release his millions of anti-antifa super soldiers.
...
I'm trying to into Lacan without misreading him but it's almost completely impenetrable without already knowing "lacanian". Is Zizek a good entry or will I have to read everything by Lacan from his earliest work?
Molyneux is like a nigerian scammer, the idiocy is a filter. He's evil, there are some videos around it where he does "therapy sessions" which come down to him playing into teens insecurities until they break down in tears and will repeat everything he tells them to.
That's a trick to create a guru aura and have people spend so much time and effort that said time and effort become reason itself for believing lacanianism. Otherwise zizek is a good entry, lacan is only worth it for the philosophical concepts, the clinical side is narcissistic wankery.
1. Read 1997 -> 2007 -> 1995.
mega.nz
2. Congrats, you understand Lacanese now.
I'm still a brainlet but the Critical Thinkers series by Routledge is well-written from what I have read so far.
while you're looking for Zizek on Youtube, please give Parenti a shot. It's a shame he isn't more popular
Zizek has his flaws here and there too, don't take him as saint. Also add your own thoughts to his theory and talking points.
This, the Althusser one especially clarifies a lot.
Parenti is quite popular on Holla Forums, I reckon. Unless you were talking about popolurity in the general population.
I've heard talks of him - he's really accessible. Plus "Blackshirts and Reds" is one of the next books I'll read.
...
lel.
is that supposed to be an insult, user?
Oops didnt mean to sage.
lol keep repeating it while covering your ears bro, maybe it'll eventually become true.
Evidence for the scientific validity of the labor theory of value: users.wfu.edu
Evidence for the falling rate of profit: thenextrecession.files.wordpress.com
basically all major political-economic theses of Marxism are derived from these two laws so I need say no more
If either of them backs out at this point I'll have the necessary emotional push to finally commit suicide.
>Evidence for the scientific validity of the labor theory of value: users.wfu.edu
i can't believe i've never read this before. thank you, user
One of the authors, Paul Cockshott is actually very concerned with the scientific basis of Marxism. Read all of his presentations to start: paulcockshott.wordpress.com
PPPFFFTTTHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!
Did that really happen or is it just a meme?
Are you twelve years old?
What kind of professor doesn't take liberties with his young (but legal) pupils? Your only competition lives in a shitty dorms and doesn’t have enough money to pay for booze. It's a fucking breeze.
But seriously though it's true and is probably why he hates female empowerment so much.
Is there any actual proof though? You may as well accuse Zizek of it too if the only reasoning is "he's a professor".
Life advice:
Peterson: Offers practical, real life solutions to adapt to our current system and make the best of it.
Zizek: Tells his students to kill themselves.
Indeed, telling me to clean my room and relax about climate change is revolutionary.
Is it wrong that sometimes reminds me of this hugh laurie and stephen fry skit?
I'll take Z's advice, thanks
>youtube.com
← 8 minutes 19 seconds into the video he admits to having been accused of sexual impropriety three times.
...
How exactly does it not describe Marxists as well? All your political and economic views center around a guy who died in 1883 being right on pretty much everything. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think presuppositions are bad, because literally everyone has them.
...
We need to develop foreskin restoration so adult circumcision becomes an option for these weird circumcision-as-identity people.
My leftist friends hate me for this but– transgenderism, I am against it totally. Okay, but in what precise sense? You see, Hegel wrote that there’s this… night of the world *tugs shirt* in all of us, that constantly threatens to consume us with dark thoughts *tugs shirt and sniffs loudly*. I cannot go into too much detail here, but I claim that in order to traverse the left-liberal fantasy, we have to return to Schelling and Kant. *tugs shirt for an uncomfortably long time* Is it not true that the Gulag Archipelago preceded Auschwitz? In Stalinism the tragedy is that its origin is some kind of radical emancipatory project. In the origins you had a kind of workers’ uprising; the true enigma is how this project of emancipation went so wrong. Here I am a radical pessimist. I believe that to do this revolutionary terror requires compassion. I am reminded of an old Jewish joke, maybe you’ve heard it…
He was vague about most things, he was certain about use value, the alienation of the worker from their products, and need for a democratic revolution where the proletariat rises up and rules democratically. The bible is overarching and has every little thing codified ranging from diet to holidays to sexual acts (albeit with many contradictions).
If you have ever taken econ 101 you will know that the opposing theories are much older with 17th and 18th century being 'new' for the field.
Thanks. These are interesting
lyl
You forgot the man boobs
this nigga is 100% a rapist
Indeed I did, but I like "I would prefer not to" shirt. Nice work though.
Zizek has literal diabetus, it is dishonest to present him as chad or an ideal model.
...
If a meme is dishonest, it loses power.
As long as it gets spread around, I'm happy.
It's about staying power my boy, survival of the best memes.
Your will not be remembered.
no bully
rekto
HOW IS ŽIŽEK A POST MODERNIST???
DO THESE FAGGOTS EVEN KNOW WHAT POST MODERNISM IS?
No, of course not. To learn, they'd have to read a book, the arch-tool of the Post Modernist Tranny Liberal SJW Faggot Menace.
I see the abolition of work but what are the other three in there?
Honestly doubt any of the lobsters actually read Marxist or Postmodernist literature tbh, they think that marxism is back as postmodernism.
Zizek BTFO
Is there a stereotype of syndicalists liking Jimmy Johns?
Against Leviathan Against History and Ted K's book. IDK what the blue one is.
His lacanbabble could be called post-modernist. The term is even more ambiguous than neo-liberal, meaning as much as vague, (superficially) complicated philosophy of recent origin and that which is associated with such. Try talking to people outside of obscure ultra-left internet circles to get over your difficulty with the ambiguity of language.
pathetic, the hallmark of the pseudo-intellectual
Honestly it would be fucking wild if Foucault was still alive to debate Peterson.
Foucault was in many ways more SJW than today's most rabid SJW's, but he could debate, he could engage. That just doesn't happen anymore, now leftism is pure super-ego; it can only interact through judgement.
Oyy Veeeyyy
Debate is pointless. The old order (Peterson) is dying. No amount of muh logic can hide the fact that it's all just a bunch of value assertions. Whether or not you find his arguments to be correct depends entirely upon your previously held beliefs. Zizek knows this, which is why he spent most of his article about Peterson talking about the Left rather than bothering with any sort of "takedown." Peterson's tribe is finished. The west is dead and that is a good thing.
That doesn't explain why Zizek is seemingly incapable of engaging with another person, in person or text, without having a neurotic sperg-out. When Zizek said that even if all anti-semetic statements about jews were true, it would still be pathological to mention them, he explained the kernel of current leftism: what is true is irrelevant, all that matters is how a given belief or statement reflects on the person. vid related.
I'd like an actual example of your first sentence.
Not the mentioning, but that precisely even if the statements were true - the essential character of the Jew would still be a fabrication to cover up antagonisms irreducible to being. He is dealing with the aperture through which certain notions attain sublimity and coagulate into a symbolic register, which dictates the whole of the body politic. All of this sits within his discussion of ideology - has nothing to do with reflection or judgement of subjectivity.
God meant every manchild not man child
That exchange he had about the refugee crisis with a former employee of the disney company.
Yes, precisely. Even if Hy Brasil is sinking, it would still be a fabrication to cover up the unsinkable nature of Hy Brasil. For it means that there is an ideological need for a sinking Hy Brasil, which doesn't fit into marxist ideology, and is therefor a something something lacan-babble.
The Coming Insurrection by the invisible committee.
