What are leftypol's thoughts on Michel Houellebecq?

Specifically this quote:

Here is what Zizek says on his work, on the beginning, just follow the link:

lacan.com/nosex.htm

and later:
lareviewofbooks.org/article/utopia-discontents-slawomir-sierakowski-talks-slavoj-zizek/#!

This is why I love leftypol: you guys are the synthesis between the old left with its focus on economic liberation and the honest social concervatives opposing the rampant SJWism and libertinist decadence that surrounds the left. I used to be from Holla Forums but I see what a shitpile it is now and never want to go back; you guys are like Holla Forums when it was good back before 2007, and I love you guys for it. Thanks for providing a real place for discourse and theory. You remind me of Houellebecq, but less nihilistic; you guys give me hope that there are other smart people that know what it takes to plan a revolution that can outmaneuver Capital and the State, and at the same time will be able to solve the real problems of people on the ground that will be the individual building blocks of it. How do we make more of you?

I vomited in my mouth a little.

Where do I start with hollenbeq? I've seen people praising him a couple times on here and I want to see what his ideas are

The only thing worth reading by him is his book on Lovecraft.

When you are working on something, believing it will get better generally will induce you to persevere; it is a psychic investment. Your reaction is why nihilism is an anachronism; the fact that you are afraid to entertain in your mind a synthesis so transgressive against your own personal limits in order to discover new solutions to the eternal question (What is to Be Done?) is why you fail. I have the same situation with Christians and Catholics going all muh Communism, muh militant anti-Religious policies, and don't see the forest for the trees concerning early Christians and their radical experimentation with forms-of-life, slaves and free men seeing each other as brothers and that the death of even the least street-shitting day-laborer matters. That's whats radical.

Start with the Zizek material, then go with Elementary particles and Submission; read the reviews first to get a sense of his attitude. He seems to be a pessimist, but I think he is just the Zizekian well-meaning misanthrope who is critiquing the charming bullshit facade like what South Park did with gentrification.

Not gonna even waste my time reading your wall of text drivel tbh. Rude sage

Nihilists are just as bad as liberals. Yo may think I am an asshole but I will let your own life beat you until you wake to it.

Here is the south park video

Is Zizek autistic?

I tip my fedora to thee good sir. Truly, you're the enlightened, happy, and well-balanced person here, whereas I am surely a degenerate queerio drug-addled whore who doesn't have their life together and will never have a family or be happy or well-adjusted, right?!

smh, how could I have fucked my life up this hard? If only I had accepted the truth of social conservatism. I mean, it's just human nature after all that humans can only be healthy and well-adjusted in monogamous, heterosexual relationships. Gays and womens literally destroy society after all :^🍀🍀🍀

kys retard.

I didn't assume that about you. Why did I bring up Michel Houellebecq? Because I wanted to bring to light Zizek's critique of modernity and its false promises. Things like class conscious feminism being recuperated and turned into a "lean-in" Sandberg-fest. I realized that you thought I was putting you down, so I decided to explain it unironically.

The lack of class-consciousness translates to the fact that women decide to be their own providers and escape the logic of the relationship where men and women provided each other with sustenance and sex respectively, while men are left behind holding their dicks. As this continues, some men withdraw, others react violently, from some woman hater comments to full-on Elliot Rodger-tier breakdowns and consequences, the largest of which seems to be ISIS, a reimposition by force of the previous regime of sociosexual relations. My interpretation of the message of their terror was to frighten the West to leave the area and to push the Overton window to the point where moderately conservative sexual regimes would be palatable by the world media. This seems to have failed so far. The West seems content to paint them this way as backwards hicks who should be just left to their own devices and those who are similar should escape.

The point is, Zizek made the case a while back that Islamic Fundamentalism and right-wing extremism are two sides of the same coin, and need each other for their mutual perpetuation. I am trying to extend it to the fact that young men who feel left behind by sexual liberalism, depending on their ethnicity, go to Holla Forums or to ISIS for the same reason; to find women as sexual commodities, not merely objects (ISIS), or to live vicariously through a billionaire that may never deliver what they think he will, though they are invested vicariously in him, among which would be a society where they could find meaningful jobs and receptive females (Holla Forums). I know because I felt the same way during the Ron Paul campaigns 4 years ago. It's the same response.

You may think that a liberalized sexual society will lead to the fulfillment of everyone's desire and a greater amount of happiness. I am against this, for the very fact that relationships are scarce and are made even more scarce on a liberalized market-place. You will then ask, "Should anyone including toxic people be allowed to have relationships?" I say, yes and even more so; they should have relationships in the most relentlessly active way, done to them the same way they do it to others, even when they themselves will be tired of it, to observe themselves as if in a mirror. The result will be that they will change themselves and try to become better people out of self-disgust. If they aren't engaged by society, they will stew by themselves inside an echochamber and explode like the Unabomber or some other mall or school shooter. That is the only way to neutralize fundamentalism; to not only show how it fails logically, but how disgusting it is. The disgusting truth of ISIS is that it is an unsustainable relation that pretends it only depends on its own power, but it knows full well that it could e wiped out in a day if its opponents subscribed to the same ethic; it is trying to bait the West into doing this, banking on a retaliatory response by the rest of the world, but I see that the West is using the disgust of other people to do this, destroying both ISIS and escaping the trap that ISIS set for it. I left Holla Forums because of the massive retardation and due to the fact that I engaged in a society in such a way that put my previous libertarian beliefs to the test and broke them; they were found wanting. I found new ones that are better and give a better explanation of political economy and commodity fetishism that dovetails well with my religious beliefs.

The next question is, do you not see how nihilism is its own fundamentalism? You pretend you don't care about anything with that snarky-ass post but I did rustle your jimmies enough for you to respond to the bait, and it betrays you. Sexual liberalism is already becoming disgusting, with freak-shows like efukt and inhumanity on the internet, rampant superbug STDs and lack of stable relationships, not to mention the rise of nofap support groups to get people to help themselves out of their fetishes. Disgust will be the cure.