I think Žižek does have a slight reactionary element to him that I can't quite place my finger on and that's why he appeals to me. Fundamentally I like Marx and Hegel. But I strongly dislike identity politics, woke culture, cancel culture. I'm irony poisoned. I will use the words nigger, retard, faggot whenever I want and however I want. I want to be able to openly make fun of retarded and ugly trannies without facing any repercussions for it. Apart from that, I'm a regular standard communist.Post more of them.
>>24821360ywnbaw
>>24821360Greatest living philosophers???ZizekBadiouAgambenSloterdijkHardt&Negri(jk)VirilioBerardiLowy
>>24821360>Fundamentally I like Marx and HegelThe only people I've met IRL that liked Marx and weren't completely retarded were the most socially naive people I've ever met.
>>24821378Most people who like Marx and Hegel don’t actually read either
>>24821360What is it about this guy that people like so much? I can't stand him. He's a neurotic slob that spits when he talks. He genuinely disgusts me.
>>24821373Land is the philosopher of our century. Dugin is also good
>>24821546I used to like Dugin but then I turned against him gradually. My early writings were closer to him than what I'm penning now.
>>24821546Land is terrible and Dugin isn't a philosopher but a charlatan
>>24821373all marxistslop lol get to know some real philosophy please
>>24821573why
>>24821360>reactionaryThis is such a stupid word. It doesn't mean anything.
>>24821360Zizek supports Ukraine so he isn't a reactionary.
>>24821546>>24821550>>24821573His Templars of the Proletariat is pretty bad. Dugin just does not understand how to fight on the thematic-symbolic plane, that sort of psychological undertone war that philosophers do, but he is much more respectable than the liberal "philosophers" whose entire gimmick is being slimy enough to weasel out of an argumentative grasp, even if it means they have less of value to say. Dugin did raise at least one good point when he questioned why the symbolism of Russia was adopted. The star itself seems mystical in some way, and it's not like they adopted it from the American flag which took the star symbols from Washington's personal family crest. Where Dugin shines is in assessing things as ideology, rather than "left or right", which helps him break out of the liberal-capitalist cage and engage outside of the merchant class's psycho-spiritual dominion.
Zizek is just a liberal pretending to be a Marxist
>>24821609I think it's the other way around. He's adopting the language and symbols of liberalism in order to open up a sort of consciousness portal to stick his hand through so he can reach out and pull whoever takes it to the other side. If you're a liberal who has not taken the hand, he seems like a liberal. When you go through the portal you see that he is something else.
>>24821373Peterson
>>24821373Too political. Marxism is dead. Graham Harman and Ray Brassier mog
>>24821582Yes it does, it’s just that 99% of people are reactionaries by default
>>24821644>99% of people are reactionariesIt would be easier if you said who you thought was not a reactionary. Marx and Engels were reactionaries, reacting to liberalism and the industrial revolution.
>>24821653John Dewey is the only non reactionary political thinker. There, I said it.
>>24821659Who the hell is John Dewey?
>>24821664>who the hell is john DeweyThe guy who isn’t popular among academics and /pol/tards because he doesn’t appeal to anyone’s reactionary sensibilities
>>24821659Oh I just wikipedia'd it...>"He asserted that complete democracy was to be obtained not just by extending voting rights but also by ensuring that there exists a fully formed public opinion, accomplished by communication among citizens, experts, and politicians."I wonder what he would say today.
>>24821668He had a name for what is happening, “the eclipse of the public.”
>>24821667Well, half the people here don't think women should vote. Every day we're shown millions of reasons why they probably should not. Luckily, the idea that voting matters is irrelevant to begin with, so voting habits for women are negligible because the dual-party machine is going to filter in whatever elements are favorable to business and tolerance-expansion anyways, because society is just a market in a democracy. I'll have to read Dewey to see if he ever picked up on that, but it's something that's obvious today that a man living in a country that still had European high culture wouldn't understand when coming to a future where parties are made up of smaller intra-national groups and the iconography of an American town is a single road flanked by shining logos of gas stations and fast food chains.
>>24821681Dewey doesn’t see democracy as just voting. If democracy was just voting, a twelve year old could refute it, and that’s why so many people become fascists after reading one page of Plato. Democracy is an ideal that requires a strong democratic culture and ethos to exist. This can only happen when people are forced to govern themselves.if voting is just a tool used by the state to control the people, you don’t live in a democracy.
>>24821693>Democracy is an idealCould you explain what you mean by this? It's clear to me what the ideas of a nationalist party are, or what a Marxist party would be, but not this. There's no image that comes to mind.>that’s why so many people become fascists after reading one page of PlatoWell Plato was a fascist so...>This can only happen when people are forced to govern themselvesThat's stoicism or epicureanism. Voting has nothing to do with governing oneself, particularly with dual party machinery involved because the candidates themselves don't represent all of the people in an increasingly diversified populace. He says he wants to promote plurality but that's impossible when all of the groups are competing in zero sum games with each other. Even inclusion is used to exclude whites and men in some areas.>if voting is just a tool used by the state to control the peopleBasically. All voting does is create buy-in. It manufactures consent. If you want to feel like you have a voice you have to vote for a "representative", who most of the time does not represent you or even care to but rather the people and groups more powerful than him that can benefit him. Town halls events occur but in places in California they just kick people who don't agree with their values out for disturbing the peace- typically this means riding the Democratic party line. Frankly, I don't see what Dewey's conception would look like in reference to America today.
>>24821659I'm from Europe and John Rawls is widely known and cited here. Do you consider him a reactionary too?
>>24821710> There's no image that comes to mind.Precisely. You can’t conceive of what democracy looks like because you have no real participation in any political process. Democracy cannot exist when people do not actually participate in governance. All political power in America is currently in the hands of the ultra wealthy corporate feudal overlords, people will never be able to even conceive of democracy until that power is handed to them and they are forced to be the ones who wield it and thus govern themselves. To imagine what democracy looks like, simply imagine the opposite of what currently exists. Our government never accomplishes anything, in fact it’s currently shut down. Thus, corporations get to freely do whatever they want. The state should be a tool that the people can use to stop corporations from fucking people over. For example, John Deere installs software on their tractors that Farmer’s can’t use, and they won’t allow any other technicians to use it. So when the tractor breaks down, the farmer is forced to haul his tractor to some john deere location and wait five months for them to fix it during a crucial harvest period, solely so john deere can make a profit. This is a PUBLIC problem, yet the PRIVATE sector has complete control over it. In a real, functioning country, it would be trivial for people to use the state to simply require corporations to let people use their software themselves after they purchase the hardware. However, nothing ever happens because there are ZERO avenues through which people can solve public problems. >he wants to promote plurality but that's impossible when all of the groups are competing in zero sum games with each otherI don’t see any zero sum games.
>>24821681>he doesn't know voting is only one of the methods by which democracy operates.
>>24821360>k Žižek does have a slight reactionary element to him that I can't quite place my finger onUnabashed Stalinism, Leninism? Dialectical convergence becoming tiresome for long marchers too, even when they've established reflexive control and the nominal moral high ground? Chemical and physical castration faddism is contemptibly evil-- water is wet. This is hardly 'reactionary' and seeing it as such ought to be the canary in the mimetic coal mine.
>>24821573Yes, even just a tiny bit of familiarity with Kant tosses Land straight into the garbage, and unfortunately we forced to be aware of him because of the current moment.
>>24821360>I want to be able to openly make fun of retarded and ugly tranniesBut not the fat, old, miserable, sweaty slob you posted? That is your hero? I can smell this dysgenic creature through my screen
I'm a leftist and socially conservative with reactionary tendenciesI don't really understand why you think acting like a vulgar thug somehow makes you reactionary?>I will use the words nigger, retard, faggot whenever I want and however I wantWhat kind of person do you think acts this way? I'd assume you'd use the first word to describe them
>>24822034YWNBAW
>>24821360Zizek is acting as if the pervert in order to force you to act against him and overthrow the Big Other intellectual: you like it because you want your dad to fuck your balls.
>>24822034>be disgusting stinking fat ass>women still get closer to you than (you)ywnbaw
>>24821867What's evil about a eunuch?
i'm pretty sure that if a communist dictatorship were erected, that bloke zizek might actually be executed before myself. We might find ourselves sharing a minute place in some humid, poorly ventilated dungeon, though—wedged between mouldy, cracked pipes and a load of famished rats, each of us pretending not to notice the other’s ideological stench. i mean, it happening - I don't think i'm spewing nonsense in stating that he’s the world’s most well-known Marxist - wouldn't perplex me.i find the clash between dudes like zizek and modern leftists to be one about which not enough people have written. he is a totalitarian scumbag, though. if you happen to disagree, check out his participation in the french revolution documentary made by the bbc, in which zizek has facial orgasms when the events discussed relate to the terror. To such an extent that one is inevitably saturated with secondhand embarrassment (and I, who typically remain untouched by the cringes of others, found myself cringing nonetheless.)
>>24821613This has been the defining dynamic between liberalism and Marxism for the last few decades. So much of the marxist ideology gets dressed up in liberal terminology or phrases that seem liberal but aren't.>critical theory (not critical thinking)>democratic socialism (voting in communism)>civil rights (privileges for red categories)
>>24822714That's interesting, but who really cares about the different flavors of leftist? All leftists are people who kissed the ring and render themselves completely uninteresting thereby. They have submitted to The Lie. You don't have to be "right wing" to be interesting, but you cannot be leftist and actually interesting beyond a passing glance.
>>24821360>I'm a regular standard communistJust become a natsoc, nigger.
>>24821360liking slavoj zizek is the political equivalent of safehorny
>>24822034He's been married 4 times and has two sons
if you had an inkling of philosophical history, this retard would've been thrown in the trash bin long ago
>>24821614peterson fell off after 2019 lmao
>>24821373nice listwhere is mohammed poojeet hindpoofag hijab on this list? he sold it to go to oxford and have heightened intelligence and win debates i wonder what his humiliation ritual should be give me ideas
>>24823127Meds schizo
>>24821360Can someone tell me what makes Zizek a communist? I have never seen him defend socialist countries, he was even a dissident against Jugoslavia as far as I know. I have never heard him propose any policy that was socialist/communist. I guess this is why he's the only "Marxist" you see interviewed on mainstream channels
>>24821360It's good to be reminded there are still some communists left who actually wants people to flourish rather than having them retreat into dysgenic hedonism. It feels like everyone's lost their fucking mind lately.
>>24821360Im on the exact same boat as you even though im personally a little bit less edgy. I think the alienation from your identity, gender, race and so on into a political and specially a marketing too is absolutely dystopic, as if you're just not allowed to be black anymore without having to be part of some wider american centric concept of black culture or that as a woman I should stand for every last woman ever no matter how shitty they are. Personally I can easily reconcile my gripes with the modern left by rightfully claiming the CIA steered it into this position to try and disable socialism from happening again. Socialism is easily one of the most historically persecuted ideologies of all time and I just believe the elite figured out the ideal way to counter it wouldn't be by the use of violence (as they were doing up until the 70s) but by blending into them and destroying it from the inside. Now big Hollywood movies preach this oversimplified version of class war with superheros and moral righteousness while most modern leftists are really just looking to have a moral high horse on others rather than bringing about real change. Zizek himself claims this is the defining trait of the modern left, endless moralising without worrying about real issues beyond the idea of looking pretty by worrying about them. Socialism was never explicitly about empathy or being morally right and those things can activly stand in the way of it working, as seen with idk those retarded anti gun activists who claim to be revolutionaries at the same timeI don't really have historical backing for this beyond the fact the people who spread this type of drivel are usually american or very in favor of them so it's probably some CIA shit, just coincidences and noooticing
>>24821360It's a rhetorical absurdity that we've let liberals steal the word "progressive" when the only thing they progress towards is either emotionless autocracy based on stealing the soul out of everyone to make them the same grey meat, or to the base state of nature I.E. anarchy; making them the ultimate reactionaries.
Reminder: the average 'socialist' in 2025 will literally exclude any (theoretical) contribution from anyone who doesn't love trannies because that kind of ideological """purity""" is more important to them.
>>24821360Zizek is critical of identity politics, woke culture, cancel culture and he makes dirty jokes from time to time. But he has also said the right-wing is debasing culture and society, and has turned politics into an obscene public spectacle. His description of contemporary right-wing populism was Silvio Berlusconi in Italy. You have a kind of new authoritarian (or quasi-authoritarian state that adopts more powers) but you can also make fun of everything and engage in whatever perversions you like. You can say nigger, retard, faggot, whatever.At any rate, Zizek has been pushing the left to become the "common decency" party. Like taking up the mantle of public manners, politeness, and basic decency (treating people well), which might be thought of as a conservative idea in some sense. This is a different thing from woke culture, which is all about moralizing and punishing / prohibiting certain actions, and is a symptom of the same tendency towards decadence. When there's no "common decency" or shared mores in place, there's no standard to prevent individuals from enroaching on each other (annoying or "harassing" other people), you get an explosion of moral rules, which is an endless process of cancelling people (or trying to), or basically people harassing each other because they also feel like they're being harassed all the time.>>24821613Reminds me a little of Laibach, the Slovenian art band that plays with totalitarian imagery. He has talked about them. They play with ideology as a kind of Rorschach test, and people see different things in them.https://youtu.be/teoLBpfuK1U>>24822099There's long been a tendency on the right and in certain hyper-reactionary authoritarian movements to glamorize criminality, Mafia-style gangs and the like. In the 1930s it was Al Capone (something Orwell wrote about). This has been an open position for a long time. They like that image because it's just take charge and get shit done, as opposed to the ineffective and effete liberal elites who only want to appoint study commissions or whatever. It's like being the bad kid in the neighborhood who then grows up to be a cop and rough up others. And the circle goes round and round:https://youtu.be/Y5anAVmd7EsAlso recruiting from the ranks of the lumpen, which Marx called the "scum, offal, refuse of all classes" and Engels "the depraved elements of all classes." Just look at Trump's otherwise inexplicable commutation of the sentence of the fraudster George Santos. Marx wrote that the mob was drawn partially from "discharged jailbirds." In this case it's literally true, and the message is "support me and I'll take care of you. Also if you've seen some of the videos of ICE abductions of migrants, they don't even really look like cops or feds in some cases, but more like Proud Boys who are also incompetent, out of shape, and sometimes unable to make arrests.
>>24823391>Socialism was never explicitly about empathy or being morally right and those things can activly stand in the way of it working, as seen with idk those retarded anti gun activists who claim to be revolutionaries at the same time>I don't really have historical backing for this beyond the fact the people who spread this type of drivel are usually american or very in favor of them so it's probably some CIA shit, just coincidences and noooticingI don't really go for the conspiracy narratives because the main reason is that I think Anglo-American progressivism actually does have longstanding roots that go way back further than the CIA. I mean hundreds of years ago. Really, it goes back to Christian reform communities in England (like the Lollards) who sought to create a morally upstanding, "right-living" society, and were generally pacifistic by inclination. It's not easy to summarize but it was middle-class, proto-bourgeois social phenomenon that emerged in a society controlled by a crypto-absolutist monarchy and French-speaking aristocracy with occasional outbursts of civil war.There are complicated reasons for all this but I think it's quite longstanding and it's integrally religious even if it doesn't explicity state that it is now. The fuel for radicalism was also found much more in continental Europe in the past few centuries than in Britain, Scandinavia or the U.S., and it's also the case that social and economic radicalism is often only catalyzed by communal / national revolts against subjugation (see the case of the Chinese revolution as led by Mao).
>>24821360I don’t know about reactionary but he’s definitely euro-centric. He sees Europe as the last bastion of anything worthwhile. And Russia-China as the worst thing ever. And he’s definitely a Nato expansionist.
Zizek is a credulous chomskyite soft-leftist. This is apparent if you can see beyond culture war signifiers.
