>>2683292>The very left-right dichotomy is bullshit.1. Normie-tier take
2. You're the one who called him a leftist, you fucking retard. I'm pointing out why you're wrong. You're at post-modernist levels of "words have no meaning" here.
>You can call him anything but a "nationalist," lmao.1. He said it himself that he enlisted into the slovenian military at some point
2. Spends like 80% of his time telling anedoctes about how living in the soviet union was le bad
3. Talks about every single anti-soviet color revolution in a positive light
4. Supported euromaidan and other sus CIA shit
5. Clearly gestures towards european anti-immigrant sentiments
>I'm OP and I've read some to most of the significant works from them and this couldn't be further removed from the truth. Just because said academics are wrong all the time on one issue, it doesn't automatically follow that they are complete hacks. For example, Chomsky's language model, which turned out to be shit eventually, was very productive in the sense of pushing further the discipline of linguistics. I honestly think that you have a bad grasp of… well… the development of human thought, sciences.The point is that he literally talks and writes like Hegel and Deleuze and other such pseudo-intellectuals and posers. There's no substance to anything that's being said anywhere. It's just a form of sophistry to woo mid-wits such as yourself into thinking you engaging with something deep, as I have already stated. FFS I'm using the simplest and most straightforward language I possibly can, is this really that hard to understand?
>Innfluences arennot idols. Would you dare call Hegel Marx's idol?If Marx's entire point wasn't to showcase how Hegel was a retard who got everything exactly backwards, then yes absolutely. And if Marx wrote like a sophist who has nothing of value to say, instead of clear prose, then yes also absolutely. You can very reliably tell if a philosopher isn't totally worthless based on their stance on Hegel. If they call Hegel out on the fact he's an idiot then they're worth reading (Marx, Schoppenhauer, Nietzsche, etc…).
>Turning the attention of alienated individuals towards class terror is great.Yeah it'd be great if Zizek ever did that. Shame he never does though.
>Occam's razor, you filthy schizo. He published a very successful book that made him famous and kept maintaining that status.Congress for Cultural Freedom, fucking retard. The CIA has been promoting lefty anti-communist pseudo-intellectuals ever since the 50s. Zizek has contributed to every usual suspect imaginable, such as USAID and Soros backed foundations. He's friends and has little debates with other propped pseudo-intellectuals like Yuval Noah Harari. He almost certainly has dark money behind him, he glows in the dark.
>You've only confirmed ITT that you have no idea what you are talking about (=haven't read shit), but you are VERY oppinionated on the things you haven't read or understood.You have done nothing but use ad hominem attacks and insult me while I (originally) simply engaged with the flawed premised you put. You don't know anything about me and you don't know what I do or do not understand. You just looked at a simple paragraph with a pretty straightforward argument and immediately failed not only to understand it, but immediately construed an immense amount assumptions about someone who you fundamentally do not know. You're clearly a person who who's quick to lay judgement via superficial premises and assumptions; you live in the world of doxa. A prime target for a sophist like Zizek.