/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6281474]

Who's the true face of the left: Zizek, or Russell Brand?

[Anonymous No.6281500]

>>6281474
>implying unified left
>implying truth
>implying just once won't hurt

[Anonymous No.6281510]

>>6281500
Just once what?

[Anonymous No.6281515]

>Zizek
>Actually has a double PhD in Philosophy & Psychoanalysis
>Actually taken seriously in Academia
>Hegelian wizard
>Published numerous books
>Lectures all around the world
>Doesn't just make dumb jokes but theoratical jokes

>Brand
>Had relations with a ROTHSCHILD and Katy Perry
>Worth around $15M, what a revolutionary leftie!
>Comedian, no formal education
>Drug addict
>Pseudo Buhddist newage spiritualism
>Can't even go against Farage in a debate

This thread is a joke fuck off

[Anonymous No.6281521]

>>6281515
What do philosophy and psychoanalysis have to do with uniting the left and being its face?

[Anonymous No.6281522]

there is no face of the left

we're past the time of philosopher kings

zizek's only role to play for the proletariat, or any intellectual's role, is merely to the attempt to pose crystalline questions we all ask ourselves through a glass darkly

[Anonymous No.6281542]

>>6281515
>drug addict
>sex fiend
>no real education
>pseudo-spiritual crap
so you're saying Brand wins because he is more representative of the left, yeah?

[Anonymous No.6281551]

>>6281521
>Highly educated guy vs a Comedian who might not be even funny
The fact that you bother mentioning Brand is absolute idiocy and the fact that he's given media coverage is a farce beyond absurdity.

>>6281522
You mean the whole of Critical Theory.

[Anonymous No.6281558]

What do you guys have against love and consciousness? Brand is a good gut, his heart's in the right place. Bankers make too muchoney anyway.

[Anonymous No.6281563]

>>6281510
meth

[Anonymous No.6281564]

>>6281551
Critical theory is less than useless. Anyone who thinks or claims otherwise has been conned.

[Anonymous No.6281728]

>>6281563
I thought he went to rehab

[Anonymous No.6281758]

>Who's the true face of the left: Zizek, or Russell Brand?


Zizek campaigned to overthrow a Socialist state, ran for president for the Liberal party and supports the fascists in Ukraine.

Brand is a millionaire media dickhead and silly hippy but has also campaigned for actual leftist causes.

Their both cunts but Brand is at least a bit left wing so him.

[Anonymous No.6281759]

>>6281515
>Published numerous books

More like he published one book numerous times

[Anonymous No.6281761]

>>6281758
>the fascists
RIDF pls

[Anonymous No.6281764]

>>6281542
#rekt

[Anonymous No.6281771]

>>6281761
Defiantly not fascists

[Anonymous No.6281851]

>>6281771
At least Ukraine didn't annex Crimea and invade a sovereign state. Putinism is actually fascism.

[Anonymous No.6281860]

>>6281558
Y'know who else makes too much money? Shit comedians

[Anonymous No.6281864]

>>6281851
>At least Ukraine didn't annex Crimea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_transfer_of_Crimea

[Anonymous No.6281873]

>>6281864
Because Ukraine was an independent state not under Soviet control at that point in time.
Keep trying, Vlad, I'm sure you'll trick someone somehow.

[Anonymous No.6281874]

>>6281771
>Defiantly
are you sure?

[Anonymous No.6281881]

>>6281873
The people of Crimea where forced to join Ukraine against their wishes by the thug Khrushchev, they protested at the time and declared independence when the USSR was breaking up, Crimea is not Ukrainian.

[Anonymous No.6281891]

>>6281851
>At least Ukraine didn't annex Crimea and invade a sovereign state. Putinism is actually fascism.
Ukraine annexed Crimea _thrice_. In 1954, in 1991 and in 1994. This is why the Crimeans are so pissed off at the Ukraine.

Anyways, annexing and invading doesn't making something 'fascism'. G. W. Bush invaded Iraq; is 'Bushism actually fascism'?

[Anonymous No.6281900]

>>6281891
Do you think everyone is as gullible as your countrymen, Ivan?
No, Bushism isn't practically fascism, it's neoconservatism, which is worse.

[Anonymous No.6281914]

>>6281900

haha oh wow

[Anonymous No.6282168]

>>6281542
yikes

[Anonymous No.6282220]

Both are controlled opposition. It's all an Illuminati psyop.

[Anonymous No.6282252]

Don't mind me, i'm just here being the last bastion of modernist rationality in the left.

[Anonymous No.6282259]

>>6281515
>PhD in Psychoanalysis
I stopped reading.

[Anonymous No.6282316]

>>6282252
But he's a shill

[Anonymous No.6282344]

>>6282252
>modernist rationality
Lell.

[Anonymous No.6282378]

>>6281542
kek

Jizzwreck (that's how you pronounce it) is a scholar and an intelligent American society of liberals would regard him as Christ-figure
Unfortunately they're not, Brand is definitely more famous in Murca than Ziz will ever be, and the left is full of idiots who can't poltik

[Anonymous No.6282386]

>>6282378
>the left is full of idiots
As always

[Anonymous No.6282482]

>>6282252

>Don't mind me, I've been anus torned by Foucault on live twice.

Oh and
>Rationality
Enjoy your discipline spreading attitude.

[Anonymous No.6282488]

>>6282482
>Foucault
He's even worse than Lacan

[Anonymous No.6282498]

>>6282488

>Implying trash bins aren't a new toy of the dominants of systematical power relations bewteen trash and trash bins.

Pls stop shilling for you group m8

[Anonymous No.6282517]

>>6282498
>Implying power relations are bad
>Implying we'd be better off as a society without power structures and discipline
>Implying this form of thought isn't one of the biggest problems with the left

[Anonymous No.6282520]

>>6282488
What?

[Anonymous No.6282529]

>>6282517

>Implying I didn't say systematical
>Implying trying to correct me isn't pure discipline
>Implying I'm not erercizing a counter-power to the trash bin oppression
>Implying implications

[Anonymous No.6282538]

>>6282529

[Anonymous No.6282568]

>>6281759

Are we talking about John Green now?

[Anonymous No.6282667]

>>6281558
>Doesn't realize the amount of women he's cheated on
lol

[Anonymous No.6282692]

The following is Russel Brand. Pic related is Zizek

>Unless of course we consider that the concept of property is preposterous, like a Native American chief, Great Elk or one of them, who when us lot (By “us” I suppose I mean white Europeans. You might not be one; I hope you’re not, actually. Sorry for unconsciously addressing this book to imperialists)

>Gandhi, an extremely efficient revolutionary, is perhaps most admired for his excellent deployment of “nonviolent protest.” The ingenuity of nonviolence is not immediately obvious to us, the inheritors of a world built upon martial means, but the principle is almost like mathematics. Authorities are trained to deal with a particular kind of conflict, violent conflict, so by using violent means you are entering the territory that they are best qualified to control. Also, by becoming violent you are tuning in to the frequency that you are trying to overcome, the frequency of violation, violence FM.

>“Be the change you wish to see in the world,” said Gandhi. If you want a nonviolent world, you cannot use violence to achieve it.

>Human beings, who want the best for their families. David Cameron said, in a rare foray into compassion, “Hug a hoodie.” He was right—we should. We should also cuddle a copper. Was that a bit “Yeah, man,” a bit reductive? It will be: The solution will not be rarefied, the Revolution will be televised, and it will be easy and based on simple things, like interconnectivity and union. Or love.

>In fact, I must mention that I was interviewed by the police during the writing of this book, and the WPC who questioned me was so resolutely lovely, judicious, and kind, I nearly gave up on the whole revolutionary caper. There were cups of tea and codes of conduct and tales of public marches in her former life. In fact, though, this just confirms my thesis that people are beautiful and Revolution inevitable. We don’t need to grow compassion in a petri dish; everyone’s fine—we just have to scrape away a few repellent systems.