I don't agree with my friend Slavoj Žižek about everything but he's an insightful thinker. I have nothing but contempt for attempts to denounce him as a philosophical lightweight or neoliberal stooge.
Thanks for this analysis and critique about Žižek's miserable detractors, if there's something great about Žižek is precisely that you don't have to agree with him on everything, but instead, he makes you think about the political issues of our times, and that's what all this miserable left that shows itself more and more aligned to the right wing couldn't accept, and that is their own misery, instead of starting to think about a new, viable project to make communism work again, they just make all this comical criticisms full of fallacies, misinterpretations and out of context cites, mixed with silly right wing conspiracy theories or some politically correct approach is just shows how miserable can be the left today.
Your first paragraph made me think you were setting up a call back linking in Zizek’s endorsement of Kripke’s theory of proper names in The Sublime Object of Ideology as illustrating Althusser’s theory of interpellation and Lagan’s concept of the Big Other. Richard Nixon would still have been Nixon if he’d lost in 1968 and Zizek’s still Zizek whether or not he was indirectly funded by the CIA back in his post punk period.
This essay also makes me want to read something on Zizek’s approach to the most mundane issues in Slovenian politics. Something about Zizek and transportation policy for Ljubljana
Thanks for the analysis of Rockhill, Ben. There was a moment where I was fascinated by his works in the Philosophical Salon, but I quickly realized he does the same thing for all his critiques of Western Leftism: trying to tie their popularity/rise to CIA and psy-op conspiracies. Even when he's offered some alright critiques of left-liberal intellectual currents, he does this same CIA gaffe for both Michel Foucault and the French Left and Adorn/Horkheimer and the Frankfurt School. Didn't know he was on the same beat with Zizek.
Suppose the CIA funded all these twentieth century left-wing (or not) thinkers? So what? It wouldn’t tell you anything about the merits of their thought.
It is a particularly bizarre point from anyone in the Bolshevik tradition, since Malinovsky turned out to be an Okhrana agent and Lenin of course for Luhdendorff’s help to get back to Russia. The Okhrana thought it was brilliant keeping the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks split.
Thanks for this analysis and critique about Žižek's miserable detractors, if there's something great about Žižek is precisely that you don't have to agree with him on everything, but instead, he makes you think about the political issues of our times, and that's what all this miserable left that shows itself more and more aligned to the right wing couldn't accept, and that is their own misery, instead of starting to think about a new, viable project to make communism work again, they just make all this comical criticisms full of fallacies, misinterpretations and out of context cites, mixed with silly right wing conspiracy theories or some politically correct approach is just shows how miserable can be the left today.
Your first paragraph made me think you were setting up a call back linking in Zizek’s endorsement of Kripke’s theory of proper names in The Sublime Object of Ideology as illustrating Althusser’s theory of interpellation and Lagan’s concept of the Big Other. Richard Nixon would still have been Nixon if he’d lost in 1968 and Zizek’s still Zizek whether or not he was indirectly funded by the CIA back in his post punk period.
This essay also makes me want to read something on Zizek’s approach to the most mundane issues in Slovenian politics. Something about Zizek and transportation policy for Ljubljana
Thanks for the analysis of Rockhill, Ben. There was a moment where I was fascinated by his works in the Philosophical Salon, but I quickly realized he does the same thing for all his critiques of Western Leftism: trying to tie their popularity/rise to CIA and psy-op conspiracies. Even when he's offered some alright critiques of left-liberal intellectual currents, he does this same CIA gaffe for both Michel Foucault and the French Left and Adorn/Horkheimer and the Frankfurt School. Didn't know he was on the same beat with Zizek.
Suppose the CIA funded all these twentieth century left-wing (or not) thinkers? So what? It wouldn’t tell you anything about the merits of their thought.
It is a particularly bizarre point from anyone in the Bolshevik tradition, since Malinovsky turned out to be an Okhrana agent and Lenin of course for Luhdendorff’s help to get back to Russia. The Okhrana thought it was brilliant keeping the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks split.