hah, see, how can you not like this guy?
― max, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:23 (fourteen years ago) link
it's mainly his asswad stans i dislike
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:26 (fourteen years ago) link
even the biggest fans of his I've met fully accept that he talks shit half the time, I guess I've done well steering clear of the baduns.
― stand under Eljero Elia, Elia, Elia (Merdeyeux), Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:31 (fourteen years ago) link
his, uh, posting style, has really taken off. i guess it's not entirely him -- it's a tradition of hegelian/dialectical thought, and i get a similar vibe from some other cultural/philosophical marxist thinkers. but he's the current model. so saying something that [something completely paradoxical] is 'precisely' the case is something he and his followers do a lot, but they aren't the first.
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:35 (fourteen years ago) link
ah yes, the preciselys and exactlys are always good for wtfs and lols.
― stand under Eljero Elia, Elia, Elia (Merdeyeux), Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:41 (fourteen years ago) link
ok @ zizek being interviewed about this bk on Newsnight...
― xyzzzz__, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 22:08 (fourteen years ago) link
wow that quote is great. i hope he titles that book "Hegel Hegel Hegel" and i will promise to read it.
― ryan, Thursday, 8 July 2010 00:30 (fourteen years ago) link
shane danielsen is a bit of a blowhard, but he's on-point here:
http://www.indiewire.com/article/shane_danielsen_among_the_grifters/
and yeah it does sort of relate to hegel and avatar
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Thursday, 8 July 2010 09:35 (fourteen years ago) link
tbf, Zizek didn't pretend to see Avatar, he admitted upfront that he didn't see it and his points on the film were about as meaningful as the arguments of a lot of people who had seen it. also, he wasn't rendering critical judgement about whether it was good or not, just discussing the incredibly obvious and well-worn plot.
― Mordy, Thursday, 8 July 2010 10:58 (fourteen years ago) link
he admitted upfront that he didn't see it
i don't think he did:
http://www.newstatesman.com/film/2010/03/avatar-reality-love-couple-sex
the point is, the plot may be transformed by the treatment (it wasn't)
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:04 (fourteen years ago) link
hmmm. somehow he let people know. when i saw the link to the piece, the link mentioned Zizek hadn't seen the film.
― Mordy, Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:10 (fourteen years ago) link
(nb i saw the link right when the piece came out)
he mentioned it in cahiers du cinema. dunno when that came out in relation to the new statesman piece. n e ways, it's a question of ethics. coz of course i wouldn't talk about hegel w/o having read every last word of the motherfucker.
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:12 (fourteen years ago) link
lol, really? cause i think everyone who has talked about hegel has done so without reading every word of his
― Mordy, Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:18 (fourteen years ago) link
no not really! jeez, srsly. have seen 'the abyss' tho.
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:21 (fourteen years ago) link
lol, i thought u were joking but imbedded in context of jerks who review movies without seeing them, it's hard to tell
fwiw, someone should review Zizek not yet published Hegel book
― Mordy, Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:24 (fourteen years ago) link
lol yes brilliant
― frap your hands say yeah yeah yeah (history mayne), Thursday, 8 July 2010 11:25 (fourteen years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g
― Mordy, Monday, 9 August 2010 01:08 (fourteen years ago) link
Argh, I fact-checked an article about Zizek the other day. I'm sure his stuff is fun to think about, but it's not easily summarized.
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2010 02:37 (fourteen years ago) link
watched that animation (and the David Harvey one, which was also p. good) with my friend the other day. but then we got really weirded out when we went to the website for 'Cognitive Media' (the company that produces these things) and saw a bunch of testimonials from BP and GE execs about how well their presentations went over... sorta funny.
― stuff that's what it is (bernard snowy), Monday, 9 August 2010 03:09 (fourteen years ago) link
Great profile pieces about Zizek: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,705164,00.html
― Mordy, Sunday, 12 September 2010 04:36 (fourteen years ago) link
What is increasingly emerging as the central human right in late-capitalist societies is the right not to be harassed, which is the right to be kept at a safe distance from others. A terrorist whose deadly plans should be prevented belongs in Guantánamo, the empty zone exempted from the rule of law; a fundamentalist ideologist should be silenced because he spreads hatred. Such people are toxic subjects who disturb my peace.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/03/immigration-policy-roma-rightwing-europe
nice leap from 'people don't want to be blown up' to 'people want terrorists locked up without charge.'
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 09:17 (thirteen years ago) link
n e ways, kinda fatuous all round really, but interesting (in this context) to see the full-blown christian bit at the end
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 09:20 (thirteen years ago) link
I don't think Zizek is condemning the impulse to lock terrorists up, but locating these individuals in this extrageographic space, outside the country, an "empty zone exempted from the rule of law," it's that we can't even imprison them in our nation-state midst. their very proximity is "toxic" and disturbs the peace (obv this is referring to imprisonment because a terrorist act wouldn't just be 'disturbing the peace').
― Mordy, Monday, 4 October 2010 12:50 (thirteen years ago) link
yeah there's nothing wrong with criticizing guantanamo. it's a p mainstream position! but conflating the desire not to be harassed (which i don't think *is* being advanced as a 'central human right but whatevs) with guantanamo is effed up. in the real world we do lock up irl terrorists after jury trials. he's yoking two things together, but while we're there, yeah, terrorists are kind of toxic. if fundamentalist ideologists are really so hated and marginalized, how the fuck does he explain glenn beck (or, you know, himself?).
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:54 (thirteen years ago) link
Well, I haven't gotten a chance to read the whole thing, but Zizek's general thing is that toxicity isn't a bad thing. He's praised terrorists before for mounting serious challenges to the hegemony + stuff like that, so I imagine this will to not be bothered isn't a net "good thing."
― Mordy, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:26 (thirteen years ago) link
He's praised terrorists before for mounting serious challenges to the hegemony
ah
mm
k
hope they challenge his hegemony tbrr
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:30 (thirteen years ago) link
there is nothing a priori wrong with praising acts of terrorism. sometimes it is absolutely necessary.
― banaka, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:47 (thirteen years ago) link
you can just replace your spare parts if you get blown up though :(
― former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:49 (thirteen years ago) link
we are not robots.
― banaka, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:50 (thirteen years ago) link
however, we do believe that in the in the machine there is much to emulate. and soon when the technology has advanced enough we shall merge with the machine.
― banaka, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:52 (thirteen years ago) link
hegemony mayne
― polytetrafluoroethylene don (am0n), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:53 (thirteen years ago) link
DANGER WILL ROBINSON
― former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:54 (thirteen years ago) link
until then, terrorist acts will be occasionally be called for. not necessarily with bombs, however. nor with computer viruses. it will be a terrorism of ideas.
― banaka, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:54 (thirteen years ago) link
memerrorism, we call it.
― banaka, Monday, 4 October 2010 16:55 (thirteen years ago) link
we, robots
― polytetrafluoroethylene don (am0n), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:56 (thirteen years ago) link
yeah i think dom tried that, look where it got him xp
― former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:56 (thirteen years ago) link
3/5 iirc
― polytetrafluoroethylene don (am0n), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:58 (thirteen years ago) link
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 10:17 (7 hours ago)
thart's a bit of a wilful misreading.
zizek at this point is like telemann writing hundreds of subtly different concertos w/ material endlessly recycled, but that's a pretty good article.
"The others are OK, I respect them," the liberals say, "but they must not intrude too much on my own space. The moment they do, they harass me – I fully support affirmative action, but I am in no way ready to listen to loud rap music."
lol
― journey to the end of nyt (nakhchivan), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:01 (thirteen years ago) link
no it isn't, read it again
idk, seems tarded to me, i don't think many european liberals are in favour of affirmative action
not sure where zizek stands on either that or rap music
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:25 (thirteen years ago) link
i think you 'know what he means'
― journey to the end of nyt (nakhchivan), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:25 (thirteen years ago) link
i imagine zizek is in no way ready to listen to loud rap music
― journey to the end of nyt (nakhchivan), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:26 (thirteen years ago) link
when he says wanting beer without alcohol is like wanting outsiders without the danger, what does he mean?
― laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:30 (thirteen years ago) link
i don't think slavoj even gets his facts right here. like, a lot.
― goole, Monday, 4 October 2010 17:38 (thirteen years ago) link
Incidents like these have to be seen against the background of a long-term rearrangement of the political space in western and eastern Europe. Until recently, most European countries were dominated by two main parties that addressed the majority of the electorate: a right-of-centre party (Christian Democrat, liberal-conservative, people's) and a left-of-centre party (socialist, social-democratic), with smaller parties (ecologists, communists) addressing a narrower electorate.
Recent electoral results in the west as well as in the east signal the gradual emergence of a different polarity. There is now one predominant centrist party that stands for global capitalism, usually with a liberal cultural agenda (for example, tolerance towards abortion, gay rights, religious and ethnic minorities). Opposing this party is an increasingly strong anti-immigrant populist party which, on its fringes, is accompanied by overtly racist neofascist groups.
i don't think this is true.
― goole, Monday, 4 October 2010 17:39 (thirteen years ago) link
After decades of hope held out by the welfare state, when financial cuts were sold as temporary, and sustained by a promise that things would soon return to normal,
hard to tell which events in which countries he means, but i'm p sure those anti- the welfare state were never saying things would return to normal.
we are entering a new epoch in which crisis – or, rather, a kind of economic state of emergency, with its attendant need for all sorts of austerity measures (cutting benefits, diminishing health and education services, making jobs more temporary) is permanent. Crisis is becoming a way of life.
"a kind of economic state of emergency" dude where the f have you been 08 - now. "crisis is becoming a way of life," you say? how could have possibly have happened.
― goole, Monday, 4 October 2010 17:42 (thirteen years ago) link
goole I think yr quibbling
― haven't you people ever heard of theodor a-goddamn-dorno (bernard snowy), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:43 (thirteen years ago) link
i ain't quibbling with shit! there's a whole pile of rong here
― goole, Monday, 4 October 2010 17:44 (thirteen years ago) link
also as far as how this ties into the larger body of his thought, I think maybe the more important point is that, as he writes somewhere, the 'liberal progressives' already sorta-won this fight, in the sense that it's no longer cool to be openly racist or xenophobic... but now they (we?) have trouble conceiving of effective political action on any level beyond the purely reactionary condemnation of 'populist racism'/fundamentalism/whatever, i.e. turning our attention to the messy 'structural inequalities' that somehow seem to persist without anyone (that we know of?) consciously saying "hey I wanna make sure fucktons of black kids end up in jail" or w/e
― haven't you people ever heard of theodor a-goddamn-dorno (bernard snowy), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:45 (thirteen years ago) link
I don't think zizek would, like, deny that the economic crisis was a real thing that was going on in 08, he's just saying that the character of the public response has changed as people stopped deluding themselves that it was gonna be 2001 pt.2
― haven't you people ever heard of theodor a-goddamn-dorno (bernard snowy), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:47 (thirteen years ago) link