― alext, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― anthony, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mandee, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― the pinefox, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Mandee, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Josh, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Momus, Thursday, 30 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― The Hegemon, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Sterling Clover, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Momus, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Mandee, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
*sobs* a lot
I'd tried to erase that day from my memory, thanks a lot Barley!!!
― chris, Friday, 31 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
zizek is a leninist, a means-to-an-ends kind of guy, so his stance here is unexpected.
of 24: "It is here that we encounter the series' ideological lie: in spite of the CTU's ruthlessness, its agents, especially Bauer, are warm human beings - loving, caught in the emotional dilemmas of ordinary people."
which begs the question: well, can't ruthless people also be loving fathers? s/z's answer is:
"As Arendt says, the fact that they are able to retain any normality while committing such acts is the ultimate confirmation of moral depravity."
i can't help finding his paradoxes (and there are umpteen more in the article) a bit fortune cookie. isn't the ultimate confirmation of moral depravity the morally depraved act itself? likewise, do we need his thoughts on 'why is cheney telling us this' -- isn't the fact of torture enough?
― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 10 January 2006 09:58 (eighteen years ago) link
― Real Goths Don't Wear Black (Enrique), Monday, 3 April 2006 10:43 (eighteen years ago) link
But the main point is fairly straightforward. The means-to-an-end argument, when it comes to torture, boils down to "do what you need to do, then pay the price later." But by implying that torture has no price for those who practice it, legal or emotional, 24 to some extent moves the issue beyond mere means-to-an-end - there's no longer any moral balancing going on at all. It simply becomes "this is what we do." Torture becomes unfortunate but no longer morally troubling. The notion that this somehow goes to a person's guilt and depravity is popularly accepted in the entrenchment of the consideration of remorse as a mitigating factor in sentencing for crimes.
It's basically the same argument w/r/t Cheney openly justifying what was formerly tacitly permitted: this does violence to the notion that there is a price to be paid for these actions, that there is a price that should be paid. The point is not merely to bring formerly hidden acts out into the open, but to disrupt and overturn the systems of understandings that necessitated the acts be hidden. A government which has to hide its torture is one which submits to the notion that, strictly speaking, what is being done is wrong. And there is always the possibility that the torture will be publicly exposed, resulting in loss of face and power for the ruling government.
The hiding at least pays lipservice to the notion that what is happening is morally reprehensible (as Mac says on Commander In Chief, "I don't want to hear that he was tortured"). What is changed in publicly announcing the use of torture is not necessarily the seriousness of the acts of torture committed (which, perhaps in the short-term, does not increase), but the system of morality within which that act is situated, and the system of power relationships. The Government says "you can no longer hold your avowed distaste for torture over me"; if the public does nothing at this stage, it effectively acknowledges "I accept your use of the torture as morally defensible."
I think that the ramifications for "society" in this are pretty huge, and that it's therefore right for Zizek to argue that the consideration of the moral depravity of an act can go beyond the act itself and extend to how it is framed in discourse.
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Monday, 3 April 2006 13:56 (eighteen years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 3 April 2006 14:21 (eighteen years ago) link
― Real Goths Don't Wear Black (Enrique), Monday, 3 April 2006 14:23 (eighteen years ago) link
I wouldn't go that far because I haven't really gotten to the "make your own zizekian argument" stage. But yeah his stuff (esp. these sorts of arguments) feels very familiar now, you sort of know where it's going immediately.
Yeah he is very repetitive, and not just in terms of overall approach but in terms of specific detail - the analogy of the husband and the wife who have the tacit agreement w/r/t his infidelity is in half a dozen other books by him. For me it's really all about the world-building of the first two big books (The Sublime Object and For They Know Not What They Do).
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Monday, 3 April 2006 14:53 (eighteen years ago) link
(of course, he also coasts in other things too, but then that's more an element of not seeing himself as a "theoretician" so much as a sort of gadfly polemicist)
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 3 April 2006 15:02 (eighteen years ago) link
But cool that he'd thought enough about it to come up with that one perfect phrase.
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Monday, 3 April 2006 15:21 (eighteen years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 3 April 2006 15:30 (eighteen years ago) link
― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Saturday, 13 May 2006 14:08 (seventeen years ago) link
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v30/n08/letters.html
excellent combination of bad faith and projection, well done.
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 12:16 (sixteen years ago) link
it would be kind of interesting to see him deploy that argument w/r/t palestine though, also not an independent state pre-1948, etc etc etc
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 12:18 (sixteen years ago) link
I agree that he is too understanding of China's policies, but I thought this paragraph was spot-on:
One of the main reasons so many people in the West participate in the protests against China is ideological: Tibetan Buddhism, deftly propagated by the Dalai Lama, is one of the chief points of reference for the hedonist New Age spirituality that has become so popular in recent times. Tibet has become a mythic entity onto which we project our dreams. When people mourn the loss of an authentic Tibetan way of life, it isn’t because they care about real Tibetans: what they want from Tibetans is that they be authentically spiritual for us, so that we can continue playing our crazy consumerist game. ‘Si vous êtes pris dans le rêve de l’autre,’ Gilles Deleuze wrote, ‘vous êtes foutu.’ The protesters against China are right to counter the Beijing Olympic motto – ‘One World, One Dream’ – with ‘One World, Many Dreams’. But they should be aware that they are imprisoning Tibetans in their own dream.
There are other peoples the Chinese central government has oppressed as well, such as the Uyghurs, but since they don't have evoke similar imagery in Westerners as the Tibetans do, and don't have a charismatic leader like the Dalai Lama, they are mostly ignored. (Also, the Uyghurs happen to be mostly muslims, which of course makes them less likely to get much Western support.)
― Tuomas, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:15 (sixteen years ago) link
The difference is, though, that the Israeli government has done little if nothing to develop the Palestinian areas. I'm not trying to defend China here, but the two situations aren't that easily comparable.
― Tuomas, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:20 (sixteen years ago) link
oh that bit about new-age hippies was what i meant by 'projection'; i suppose it might be true of some people who are actively pro-tibet, but most people seem to be against the occupation on more liberal grounds. just as many people who broadly support the palestinian cause might not be so keen on hamas.
zizek doesn't actually advance any evidence of this syndrome, anyway:
When people mourn the loss of an authentic Tibetan way of life, it isn’t because they care about real Tibetans: what they want from Tibetans is that they be authentically spiritual for us, so that we can continue playing our crazy consumerist game.
is just a standard zizek-y paradox. i'm sure he's used it before, conjoining it with the line from 'to be or not to be'; "the poles do the camping, we do the concentrating."
i'm not saying palestine corresponds with tibet 1:1, but zizek's take on it is likely to be 180 degress from his take here -- namely that the occupier is right, and the vocal support for a religio-nationalist cause is wrong.
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:26 (sixteen years ago) link
Tibetan Buddhism, deftly propagated by the Dalai Lama, is one of the chief points of reference for the hedonist New Age spirituality that has become so popular in recent times.
This is bullshit as regards specifically Tibetan Buddhism, which strikes me as being way too particularist to offer much to New Age thinking. The Dalai Lama's charisma and media savvy has done far more to keep Tibet in the public consciousness of Western liberals. I'm also pretty sure that a lot of anti-Chinese government protests are grounded in issues other than Tibet. Amnesty's campaigns are one obvious example.
― Noodle Vague, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:29 (sixteen years ago) link
Plenty of Stalin apologists argued that he was only liquidating horrible reactionaries, too.
― Noodle Vague, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:30 (sixteen years ago) link
Yes to the Dalai Lama's media profile keeping it in public consciousness - linked to strong idea of Tibet as a separate occupied country, a profile that abkhazia, dagestan, kurdistan, don't have - kosovo being the anomaly here (but western govts wanted kosovar independence, rather than western people - so a bit of a red herring?)
Aren't Uyghar's in a minority in Xianjiang?
― laxalt, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:39 (sixteen years ago) link
laxalt, by that i'm guessing you think none of these countries deserve independence? pretty blatantly in the case of kosovo.
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:41 (sixteen years ago) link
bringing the opinion of 'western people' is a huge red herring, really, but i'd have thought those western people who have heard of kosovo will generally recall why its independence from serbia could be seen as a good thing for the people of kosovo.
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:43 (sixteen years ago) link
No that isn't what I mean. (also wether Western Govt's wanted Kosovar independence or not shouldn't make that independence any more or less desirable per se)
I'm not suggesting any of these countries either deserve or don't deserve independence (just that western policy towards Kosovo was unusual as the usual state of affairs is to preseve integrity of the nation state).
Its more that I was trying to suggest that Tibet has a higher profile as an actual occupied state in western minds, whereas the others are probably thought of as regions - and that itself must be at least partially responsible for pro-Tibetan feeling in the west.
― laxalt, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:46 (sixteen years ago) link
Surely one of the Kosovans' core claims to independence is that Kosova corresponds to what a nation-state is supposed to be?
― Noodle Vague, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:50 (sixteen years ago) link
yeah, undeniably. though again: palestine is fairly prominent in the west. those other places barely even register as names, kurdistan excepted. i think there's some kind of insinuation threaded through this line -- i don't know what it is exactly, but my main reaction is 'so what?'
western policy towards Kosovo was unusual as the usual state of affairs is to preseve integrity of the nation state
greater serbia wasn't a nation state. plus the west had been operating in the former yugoslavia pre-1999. plus it was the west (germany) that encouraged its break-up.
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:51 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm curious as to why Zizek is someone you guys read/talk about? Is he someone you read in school, and if so in what course of study? Or is he a big public intellectual in the UK or Australia or somewhere, and in those places public intellectuals are taken seriously? I'm just ignorant but curious, not trying to be snarky.
― Euler, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:52 (sixteen years ago) link
-- Euler, Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:52 PM (7 seconds ago) Bookmark Link
he's definitely a prominent public intellectual -- ie he doesn't just address a specialist philosophy audience. (there is a q-mark over what his specialism is, perhaps.)
there've been about four films made about him, he gets new yorker profiles done on him, he gets into the LRB, guardian, etc, and he publishes a lot.
he's achieved this mostly post-9/11 and i was at uni before then and anyway he doesn't have much to say on my subject (history).
as for public intellectuals being taken seriously -- britain has often perceived itself as not giving intellectuals their due, in comparison with france where they alledgedly have a bigger public profile.
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:57 (sixteen years ago) link
What do you mean by greater serbia?
― laxalt, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:57 (sixteen years ago) link
yugoslavia
- croatia
xxxpost
Yeah, the French version of Play Your Cards Right was hosted by Louis Althusser.
― Noodle Vague, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:59 (sixteen years ago) link
in that case, i agree Yugoslavia, like USSR not a nation state
but kosovo was part of Serbia, not part of Yugoslavia. Same reason Estonias independence a different matter to, say, Dagestans, no?
― laxalt, Saturday, 19 April 2008 13:59 (sixteen years ago) link
He also was on the DVD of _Children of Men_, and made me realize that I did not in fact like _Children of Men_.
― Eppy, Saturday, 19 April 2008 14:03 (sixteen years ago) link
-- Noodle Vague, Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:59 PM (13 seconds ago) Bookmark Link
well this is the thing. but the received opinion is that french intellectuals had a nicer time of it.
-- laxalt, Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:59 PM (9 seconds ago) Bookmark Link
i don't think this is a very fruitful way to look at this issue -- comparatively, from the outside, but also using unchanging categories like 'serbia' and 'kosovo', and indeed 'nation-state'. "kosovo was part of Serbia, not part of Yugoslavia", but serbia was "part of" yugoslavia, so...
― banriquit, Saturday, 19 April 2008 14:05 (sixteen years ago) link
Yeah I wasn't skitting you I was just playing the comedy disinformation game.
― Noodle Vague, Saturday, 19 April 2008 14:06 (sixteen years ago) link
I was reading an older book ("contingency, hegemony, solidarity") and his contributions are very notable for their repetitiveness -- not only within the book but within his whole body of work. he's a very formulaic writer and I think there's rapidly diminishing returns with his stuff.
― ryan, Thursday, 7 August 2014 11:42 (nine years ago) link
or what merdeyeux said
he has a lot of books that have come out and will come out this year
― markers, Thursday, 7 August 2014 15:49 (nine years ago) link
he's definitely the philosopher i've read the most of at this point
― markers, Thursday, 7 August 2014 15:50 (nine years ago) link
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/rolling-underground-tunnels.html
"Signed by Slavoj Žižek and a friend" - whatever that means. it doesn't read like his voice at all.
― Mordy, Monday, 25 August 2014 21:57 (nine years ago) link
ht treesh: http://www.theguardian.com/books/live/2014/oct/06/slavoj-zizek-webchat-absolute-recoil
But this is not all the truth. There are multiple signs that something new is possible. Let me conclude with one example. Free downloading. Aren't we almost entering communism there? Even DVDs are disappearing. I think capitalism will not be able to integrate so-called intellectual property. Intellectual achievements are in their very nature communists, able to circulate freely. And this free availability of products is already opening up a non-capitalist space, even if it is the product of the most advanced capitalism. Again, just look for the signs. There are signs of an alternative. We just have to be patient and wait. We should act, but not in the old Marxist way that we are instruments of higher historical necessity. We should fight all our struggles, against sexism here, racism there, and so on. But we should nonetheless keep open a sense of risk. There is always a mystery in political activity. You think you are engaged in a big project and nothing comes out of it. But often you make just a small demand, and if you insist on it, everything changes. We cannot master in advance the consequences of our acts. We should act and keep our mind open.So let me finish with a militaristic phrase from Napoleon: on attack, then we shall see. That should be our motto.
So let me finish with a militaristic phrase from Napoleon: on attack, then we shall see. That should be our motto.
― Mordy, Saturday, 25 October 2014 22:05 (nine years ago) link
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/12390885_1667285013527796_4322619636805548179_n.jpg?oh=8db71a04a918e42fe1e2ce16b6724362&oe=56D6A09D
― big WHOIS aka the nameserver (s.clover), Friday, 25 December 2015 00:28 (eight years ago) link
https://hutnyk.wordpress.com/2016/02/17/the-syndication-of-plagiarism-sz-for-nicole-pepperell/
― flopson, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 14:15 (eight years ago) link
I lol'd
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14022188_10157232549005304_7999281079063552365_n.jpg?oh=944cd564e44e01afa10a3bc95d87fa5f&oe=58141E77
― socka flocka-jones (man alive), Monday, 22 August 2016 16:17 (seven years ago) link
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/dec/10/slavoj-zizek-we-are-all-basically-evil-egotistical-disgustingI hate politically correct arrogance. With black friends, in contrast to politically correct white guys, I establish real contact. How? Through dirty stories, dirty jokes. When you visit a foreign country, you play PC games about your interesting food or music, but how do you become really friendly? You exchange a small obscenity.
Yes humour is important for bonding, no it doesn't have to be dick jokes. I wonder if over-generalising from personal experience is humanity's worst trait (after selfishness, xenophobia, and a bottomless capacity for violence).
― the year of diving languorously (ledge), Sunday, 11 December 2016 14:16 (seven years ago) link
Also fun: the accelerationist gets accelerated every time he touches his face
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AIWUMkKZhus
― THE SKURJ OF FAKE NEWS. (kingfish), Tuesday, 20 December 2016 17:26 (seven years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIWUMkKZhus
― THE SKURJ OF FAKE NEWS. (kingfish), Tuesday, 20 December 2016 17:39 (seven years ago) link
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSfCzWmVQAEJSc8.jpg
― mark s, Monday, 1 January 2018 23:37 (six years ago) link
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSfDp4CWsAAtxNv.jpg
― global tetrahedron, Tuesday, 2 January 2018 00:00 (six years ago) link
slavojpingbag
― mark s, Tuesday, 2 January 2018 00:03 (six years ago) link
Oh no: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrSUGgfM4Q4
― Glower, Disruption & Pies (kingfish), Sunday, 11 March 2018 09:08 (six years ago) link
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QwasyxTf3q0/VgU-uPebGeI/AAAAAAAAFVM/NmFobBNrk6A/s1600/Zizek-wedding-0002.jpg
― calzino, Sunday, 24 March 2019 10:06 (five years ago) link
Everyone evil n egotistical: that's why I love Zizek (and Haneke). Both have a deep rooted belief that we're not that good.
― nathom, Sunday, 24 March 2019 10:37 (five years ago) link
the fabled backstory here -- true or not who can say! -- is that he looks as if he's beaten up bcz he had been, by the brothers of the bride when sz tried to weasel out of the wedding :D
enjoy yr symptom!
― mark s, Sunday, 24 March 2019 10:42 (five years ago) link
he is fumbling in his pocket with a concealed taser.
― calzino, Sunday, 24 March 2019 10:49 (five years ago) link
Not sure how an in-law-to-be beatdown is gonna convince you to *go thru* with a wedding
― Helel Cool J (Noodle Vague), Sunday, 24 March 2019 10:55 (five years ago) link
i think it also involved being frogmarched to the altar
― mark s, Sunday, 24 March 2019 11:07 (five years ago) link
no shotgun no credibility
― Helel Cool J (Noodle Vague), Sunday, 24 March 2019 11:08 (five years ago) link
we are in agreement tbh
― mark s, Sunday, 24 March 2019 11:27 (five years ago) link
Feels like they watched Game of Thrones. Lol
― nathom, Sunday, 24 March 2019 15:12 (five years ago) link
in an alternate universe zizek plays detective crockett in miami vice
― affects breves telnet (Gummy Gummy), Sunday, 24 March 2019 15:28 (five years ago) link
A local linguist is found dead in a puddle of black ooze. Suspicion falls on Midsomer Stanton’s ice cream van driver, angry that all-encompassing whiteness might threaten the world ending with a whimper rather than a bang.— Midsomer Murders Bot (@midsomerplots) March 18, 2019
― mark s, Sunday, 24 March 2019 16:57 (five years ago) link
Important update
mesmerized by this video of slavoj žižek absolutely demolishing two hot dogs pic.twitter.com/grNOIPfEQn— Nick Usen (@nickusen) April 16, 2019
― mfktz (Camaraderie at Arms Length), Thursday, 18 April 2019 12:31 (five years ago) link
So good..
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 18 April 2019 12:40 (five years ago) link
So stoked to watch this
― flappy bird, Saturday, 20 April 2019 05:14 (five years ago) link
Not going to watch this (my masochism has limits). Sounds like they were having two monologues side by side rather than a debate.
― Leaghaidh am brón an t-anam bochd (dowd), Saturday, 20 April 2019 07:29 (five years ago) link
Live debate is bullshit
― findom haddie (jim in vancouver), Saturday, 20 April 2019 07:31 (five years ago) link
lest we forget
remember in 2011 when the white radical left lined up to denounce the black riot as feral, incoherent, mindless? here’s Zizek and David Harvey back then pic.twitter.com/ZJVxWq5r5e— hannah (@nanpansky) June 4, 2020
― hip posts without flaggadocio (Noodle Vague), Thursday, 4 June 2020 11:35 (three years ago) link
I had a feeling Owen Jones was often bad back then but couldn't quite remember why, but knew it was more than just his early hostility to Corbynism and his terrible books!
― calzino, Thursday, 4 June 2020 12:39 (three years ago) link
whenever he's actually deigned to take a concrete position on something specific it's always been some basic liberal and/or conservative bullshit, with marxist/hegelian rhetoric thrown in to appease those who still want to believe he's a revolutionary. "no message to deliver" fuck off back to the academy you pearl clutching hack
these celebrity leftists always turn out like this, he & chomsky are way more similar than different in this regard
― 1312 (Left), Thursday, 4 June 2020 13:18 (three years ago) link
this guy has always had seriously dodgy views on race (as well as gender, sexuality etc) which "the white radical left" has been way too keen on obfuscating/excusing
― 1312 (Left), Thursday, 4 June 2020 13:22 (three years ago) link
motherfuck him and hegel
Zizek. Apparently the new frontier of emancipatory philosophy is “indigenous people couldn’t understand their genocide as being wrong without western theory.” Impressive! pic.twitter.com/6chPxe3aCH— Ben Miller (@benwritesthings) July 4, 2020
― If you choose too long a name, your new display name will be truncated in (Left), Saturday, 4 July 2020 19:03 (three years ago) link
celebrity leftist here casually writing liberal-fascist defend-western-values screeds for russian state media
fox news levels of empathy for the police here
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/493408-white-racism-fight-guilty/amp/
― If you choose too long a name, your new display name will be truncated in (Left), Saturday, 4 July 2020 19:24 (three years ago) link
happy international men's day pic.twitter.com/no1MZGamwU— zo (@gramscifancam) November 19, 2020
― early-Woolf semantic prosody (Hadrian VIII), Thursday, 19 November 2020 19:28 (three years ago) link
been laughing at this for 3 days pic.twitter.com/e2XtNpKX46— the thicc husband & father (@lukeisamazing) February 10, 2021
― John Wesley Glasscock (Hadrian VIII), Thursday, 11 February 2021 17:55 (three years ago) link
just saw him at a cafe in Bloomsbury, he was looking unusually dapper / kempt
― Sudden Birdnet Thus (Camaraderie at Arms Length), Thursday, 7 July 2022 11:57 (one year ago) link
get ready for your new Chief Adviser
― big movers, hot steppers + long shaker intros (breastcrawl), Thursday, 7 July 2022 13:03 (one year ago) link