/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7271108]

http://www.browndailyherald.com/2015/10/19/bewes-ravindranathan-zizeks-hypocrisy/

/lit/ I normally don't shitpost, but I honestly can't help myself. I found this gem of an article over at the Brown Herald Daily by two professors about Zizek's lecture at their college. I can't believe that two educators at a university could not only miss entirely Zizek's point, but then go forward to publish a semi-academic critique about said misunderstanding.

Basically they say that he is a racist and trivializes the struggle of others by using jokes to get his point across. I know it is a meme that Zizek always calls for inaction, but ironically these fine people are literally forcing Slavoj into a complete state of inaction. How is he going to break down racist and hierarchical institutions by not mocking them? Answer that you english professors.

Anyways, read the article if you anons want to become enraged.

[Anonymous No.7271176]

>>7271108
Social democrat professors at the top of their game cling to milquetoast political positions because they know how good they have it. Zizek threatens the careful illusion they've built which convinces their students that they are somehow the arbiters of a revolutionary Barney-morality where kindness and meakness lead to substantial change that runs against the "nature" of many people. Unfortunately, criticizing professors who fear anything edgier than a basketball gets one shouted at here for being from /pol/, so have fun with that.

[Anonymous No.7271201]

You see my friends *tugs shirt* what we have here is pure *rubs nose* ideology. This reminds me of a joke about a moth *tugs shirt and rubs nose* at the psychiatrist. Shee he is there because the light is on but *gestures wildly* what he reveals to us his maladies and so on and so forth. This absolutely shocked me the first time I heard it. In many ways I relate to *sniffles and shifts position* and in many ways I to am only hear because the light is on so on and so forth.

[Anonymous No.7272116]

>>7271108
I'm going to give this thread a bump.

[Anonymous No.7273551]

>>7271108
Progressives generally hate Zizek because he refuses to play the identity politics game. It has nothing to do with anything he says, it's because he won't eat from the trash can of ideology, and is therefore not part of the tribe.

He's one of the few people who will willingly self identify as a Cultural Marxist, and yet SJWs can't stand him

[Anonymous No.7273559]

>>7271108
>I can't believe that two educators at a university could not only miss entirely Zizek's point, but then go forward to publish a semi-academic critique about said misunderstanding.
That's par the course for at least 75% of people talking about Žižek tbh

[Anonymous No.7273568]

I agree with most of what Zizek has to say, yet still feel a strong urge to despise/look down upon him.

Any embarrassing incidents in his carer?

[Anonymous No.7273569]

>>7271108
>I can't believe that two educators at a university could not only miss entirely Zizek's point, but then go forward to publish a semi-academic critique about said misunderstanding.

replace "Zizek" with any other controversial academic, and that sentence still holds true

[Anonymous No.7273572]

>>7273551
>cultural marxist

kill yourself

[Anonymous No.7273575]

>>7273569
also

>Brown University

place is a cesspool of twats so far up their own asses they look like those little mozarella knots

great pussy there tho

[Anonymous No.7273624]

>>7271108
>Amongst the supposed corrections to generally held misconceptions that Žižek offered in his talk was the notion that Native Americans killed more buffaloes than the whites who would then settle America — but only after praying to the buffalo spirit. It is ridiculous, he said, to claim that they lived in greater harmony with nature. And Native Americans, he affirmed — basing his claim on what he had heard from some of his “Indian friends” — preferred to be called “Indians.” For the term “Native Americans” could only imply that whites were somehow more “cultural Americans.” At least the term “Indian” had the advantage of continually recalling white stupidity. This was one of the countless instances in the lecture where a historical struggle and a real project of political representation found itself trivialized.

The Zhizh is correct in all of this. Indian is used interchangeably with Native American, Indigenous American, and First Nations (Canada) in both anthropology and Native groups. Although originally a dumb misnomer, the advent of pan-Indianism has led to a recognition of historical and social-status similarities between disparate tribes/bands/groups that otherwise had no relation to each other pre-conquest. As for buffalo, it is in fact true that Plains Indians slaughtered bison en masse, as the historical population of the animal was unfathomable anywhere from 30-60 million individual bison upon Euro contact. Lakota, Crow, etc., did not in fact use all the buffalo, as the racist hippie would have it, but often hunted only for parts if that was the desire: bones, tongues, skins, humps, and fetuses were prized, and the remains would be left for scavenger animals and the elements. This is not mean they were wasteful, ungrateful, or themselves were responsible for the near extinction of bison, as traditional hunting methods (which, again, were massive slaughters) did nothing to stunt the population. It was in fact European weapons and capitalist consumerism that caused bison to become extinct/nearly extinct but Plains Indians did aid Euros in their consumerism. The point here isn't to say that Indians are just as bad as Europeans, but only that the image of the environmentalist par excellence Indian is a noble savage myth that lacks nuance.

[Anonymous No.7273787]

>>7271201

i appreciate you anon

[Anonymous No.7273986]

>>7273575
>the my ex gf went to Brown
B-back the fuck off?

[Anonymous No.7275583]

bup

[Anonymous No.7275598]

Zizek will be right wing within 10 years tbh

[Anonymous No.7275608]

>>7275598
>muh left-right wing dichotomy

[Anonymous No.7275931]

>>7273568
Look up the public spat he had with Chomsky.

[Anonymous No.7275966]

>>7275598

Nah, he's just operating firmly in the Marxist tradition.

I'm active in a socialist organisation in Australia, and we're starting to see huge fault-lines between left-liberal "progressive" groups and Marxist groups.

My party is comparatively more open to gender, race, and feminist issues, using intersectionality thinking with a Marxist lens (unlike, say, Socialist Alternative, who are much stricter class determinists; that's not an attack, they've just chosen a 'purer' Marxist line).

But there's all these groups who have proceeded straight to established conclusions ('racism is bad') with a general ignorance of traditions of thought on the topics, WHY racism is bad from a theoretical perspective (there's a solid line of Marxist reasoning). Literally 'muh feels' politics and post-New Left dogma getting presented as a platform. Despite decades of involvement in prominent LGBT movements, for instance, a recent LGBT conference moved a motion banning any socialist/Marxist groups from participation in the rest of the conference. It's nuts.

Even our soft socialdemocrats are starting to get the shits with it I think

[Anonymous No.7276056]

>>7275966
>I'm active in a socialist organisation in Australia
all you fuckheads do is fight each other over student politics
can't wait till the New Right hits Australia tbh

[Anonymous No.7276069]

>>7276056

yeah right on m8 the tree of Straya must be watered with the blood of VB aussie aussie oi oi oi Reclaim Australia Adam and Steveo not MOHAMMED and Hakim Ok :DDD

[Anonymous No.7276092]

>>7276069
same shit they were saying about SD before they were polling #1

[Anonymous No.7276139]

>>7276092

A pack of cunts polling at #1 is still a pack of cunts

[Anonymous No.7276227]

What's a good entry point to Zizek?

[Anonymous No.7276251]

>>7276139
honest question how do you reconcile your beliefs with your fetishisation of Islam?