>double down on NATO and kick out the Americans!
>vote biden and push him left!
And other v.aush-grade takes
Lmao are Haztards defending the EU now?
lol I just read that picture, word for word fascist "third positionism" aimed at repainting capitalism>independent Europe against American degenerate capitalism and Asiatic Bolshevik Authoritarian Barbarism!
The man is a fat fascist cunt.
a record high of brainworms in this post
Matt Christman has been vindicated once more
Zizek is still better than chapo lol
Solidarity with Comrade Von Der Leyen and austerity.
exactly why I opposed Brexit, strong federal EU is the only hope for freedom from total american control
lololol the EU has spent the last few months loyally lining up behind the USA to sanction Russia and impoverish the proletariat across Europe.
I thought the chapos used to suck Zizek off
I honestly still have a hard time believing he wrote this crap. It checks off all the typical NATO shill boxes.
>>1032823>a stronger EU independent from the US
Do you think that the US withdrawing from NATO means that Europe and the Us will be pitted against each other? Delusional, nothing would change economically. America should still withdraw from NATO but it doesn't mean much, really.
Pacifism is certainly not the problem its the murder and genocide enjoyers of ukrainian civilians.
saboteur hands wrote this
What about murder and genocide enjoyers of Donbass civilians?
what does the text in the video say
fuck, i meant picture.
Can someone explain WHY zizek is doing this? Rather than just saying he's retarded? We know he's not retarded. So what is this? Does someone have a gun to his head? Why would he publish in the Guardian when they wouldn't publish his shit for the last 6 years? What is going on here?
He's criticizing liberal hypocrisy.
He tried to 5d chess a pro-Assange message into a major natoid rag but in a true Zizek fashion went off of the deep end trying to be subversive
dismissing him as plain retarded is just silly>>1035854
his first article seemed like, "at least in the West we have the pretense of freedom, and we must fight for that, versus russian nationalism/materialism, where there is no pretense of freedom", but who cares about the pretense, anyone with a brain knows we don't have actual freedom in the west and things are getting worse and worse, we are ruled by racist fascist neocons.
so how exactly does that argument make sense?
and then in the second article, i don't know i'm not exactly the smartest person, but Putin's explanation of his invasion at least makes sense, and I've never heard anyone in the West engage in it. So according to zizek, putin should just allow the US to put as many missiles/biolabs in ukraine as they want, and if Putin ever retaliates, he's "always wrong" for doing that? i really feel like zizek's entire argument must be going over my head because that doesn't seem to make much sense.
Anon, read the entire article closely and you'll see that he uses NATOid rhetoric to conclude that the typical NATOid positions on the Iraq war or the treatment of Assange is ultimately hypocritical. This is just how he writes his political commentaries.
I don't like his method of critique either.
are you suggesting that reading his article and concluding “this doesn’t make sense” is his actual intended strategy writing these articles?
No, the sort of conclusion he's aiming at is something along the lines of "you're a hypocrite because you don't truly want what you desire".
but zizek has said many time things along the line of…
the left needs to be more appealing to offer an alternative to right wing nationalism. and he praises bernie for this. he has even praised aoc although i forget why, and that was another very confusing thing.
so obviously zizek is not an idiot. so why would he offer no compelling argument at all for why we should prefer the west to russian domination, considering the leaders in the west are all about as bad as people can possibly be, what difference does it really make.
zizek, the guy who claims he hates hames joyce for being narcissisticly obtuse, and praises Beckett for his simplicity, zizek is going to, on the precipice of ww3, make these bad arguments like we should prefer the west because of its “universality”? when anyone living in the west could tell you we don’t have that anymore, if we ever did. it doesnt seem characteristic of him to be making such an obscure argument that only 1 or 2 ppl on this entire leftist forum will even attempt to defend. and just saying hes an idiot is also an idiotic criticism, at least explain how someone so thoughtful and genius could be pumping out stuff that even his biggest fans can’t find a way to defend
He's making such arguments because he needs to use the language of a NATOid shill in order to perform his immanent critique.
Obviously, he believes in what he is saying to some extent, but if thats the case then can the same also be said when he when he hangs a Stalin poster over his bed or when he calls himself a Marxist, communist, etc?
This is just how he writes his political commentaries.>>1035883
could you provide an example? some people may argue his political writing has been more clear until just recently
>>1026960>And why does realizing that Russia had genuine reasons make one the same as a nazi?
because russia is the nazis of our time
Zizek will always be based to me. idk what he's saying half the time though and some of his points are just going to lost on me. and ya know what? that's okay.
just linking/googling zizek articles doesn’t support your argument “this is just how he writes political articles”.
His Occupy Wall Street speech turned me into a commie. Not even ashamed to admit it, it's such a good speech.
is anyone going to make an attempt to explain why he wrote of these guardian articles other than saying "his political writing has always been like this" which it obviously hasn't and that's why people are shocked by the guardian articles and not the stuff he published in RT?
apparently he voiced support for NATO bombing his own country in the 90s, which if true means this isn't really surprising. he rarely writes about international relations
>>1034850>America should still withdraw from NATO
Do Ziggaz really think this?
USA pulling out of NATO makes about as many sense as nazi Germany pulling out of the Anti-Comintern Axis.
based Mottas shitting on Zizek.
>No, Slavoj Žižek is neither a Marxist nor a radical philosopher. He isn't a lunatic who expresses nonsense just because he wants to draw attention. On the contrary, he is a very well-read apologist of capitalist barbarism and a conscious anti-communist. As such, he vilifies the 20th century's socialism, he shamelessly attacks Lenin and promotes, either openly or covertly, the murderous imperialist alliance of NATO. Even when he pretends to defend communism, Žižek does it only in words, as an abstract theoretical issue, deliberately separating it from its social and political field of application.http://www.idcommunism.com/2022/07/slavoj-zizek-apologist-of-capitalism-disguised-as-marxist-philosopher.html?m=1
Reminder that once again Marxist-Leninists have always called Zizek a fraud and anticommunist cretin. And we've been proven right, again.
Death to Zizek and his acolytes.
Unique IPs: 29