PDA

View Full Version : slavoj zizek




constituent
05-12-2008, 05:47 PM
though amy goodman (democracynow.org) is an unapologetic shill...... i would really like to recommend that everyone view today's show and what what he had to say about protest movements, etc. in modern america.

Danke
05-12-2008, 07:18 PM
though amy goodman (democracynow.org) is an unapologetic shill...... i would really like to recommend that everyone view today's show and what what he had to say about protest movements, etc. in modern america.


Not familiar with the site. I guess you are talking about the main video. Any idea on how far into it is the story your are referencing?

BTW, it takes a big man to admit he visits that site, you da man! :p

constituent
05-13-2008, 06:49 AM
Not familiar with the site. I guess you are talking about the main video. Any idea on how far into it is the story your are referencing?

BTW, it takes a big man to admit he visits that site, you da man! :p

it starts at about 11 minutes into the broadcast.

Todd
09-27-2011, 12:27 PM
though amy goodman (democracynow.org) is an unapologetic shill......

So is Slavoj Zizek.

Just discovered him the other day. Wanted to know more about him and found this old thread here.

Get a load of this guy.



Slavoj Žižek (pronounced [ˈslavoj ˈʒiʒɛk]; born 21 March 1949) is a Slovenian philosopher and critical theorist working in the traditions of Hegelianism, Marxism and Lacanian psychoanalysis




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mprYkXuaYr4 :rolleyes:

StilesBC
09-27-2011, 12:53 PM
He is a communist.

I heard a ranting interview of his on Al Jazeera during the Egypt uprising. He was arguing that it was the beginning of the long awaited "worker's revolution" against capitalist corruption. It was a pretty pathetic time to choose to make this argument as protesters were quite obviously demanding "freedom from oppression" not a strong central government that would guarantee them all higher and equal wages, as he was desperately trying to suggest.

I seem to remember him being confronted on this bizarre interpretation and him saying something to the effect, "they may not know that they want someone else making decisions for them, but that is what they really do want." As if to say, 'you might claim that you want the freedom to make decisions for yourself, but what you really mean is that you want the freedom to choose who makes those decisions for you.'

It was pretty insulting and egotistical. Only people enlightened like him are capable of knowing exactly what they want.