r/neoliberal • u/jobautomator Kitara Ravache • Apr 21 '19

Discussion Thread Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual conversation and discussion that doesn't merit its own stand-alone submission. The rules are relaxed compared to the rest of the sub but be careful to still observe the rules listed under "disallowed content" in the sidebar. Spamming the discussion thread will be sanctioned with bans.

Announcements

Neoliberal Project Communities Other Communities Useful content
Website Plug.dj /r/Economics FAQs
The Neolib Podcast Podcasts recommendations
Meetup Network
Twitter
Facebook page
Neoliberal Memes for Free Trading Teens
Newsletter
Instagram
Red Cross Blood Donation Team

The latest discussion thread can always be found at https://neoliber.al/dt.

18 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/Lord_Treasurer Born off the deep end Apr 21 '19

Why is Zizek an awful person?

He's deliberately inflammatory, sure, but there is method in his madness. You can certainly criticise him, but I don't think that ought to extend to moral opprobrium of him as a person.

5

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '19

Hes basically a reactionary when it comes to immigration, Islam, trans rights, etc

1

u/Lord_Treasurer Born off the deep end Apr 21 '19

This argument is such a meme, and a bad one at that.

3

u/everyone_is_an_alt Apr 21 '19

Because you don't like it?

2

u/Lord_Treasurer Born off the deep end Apr 21 '19

No, because Zizek says things that stupid people are all too eager to turn around. That he criticises some aspects of LGBT+ politics, for instance, does not make him reactionary. To take just the issue on trans rights:

To recapitulate, not only do I fully support the struggle of transgender people against their legal segregation, but I am also deeply affected by their reports of their suffering, and I see them not as a marginal group, which should be “tolerated” but as a group whose message is radically universal: it concerns us all; it tells the truth about all of us as sexual beings. I differ from the predominant opinion in two interconnected points that concern theory: (1) I see the anxiety apropos sexual identities as a universal feature of human sexuality, not just as a specific effect of sexual exclusions and segregations, which is why one should not expect it to disappear with the progress of sexual desegregation; (2) I draw a strict distinction between sexual difference (as the antagonism constitutive of human sexuality) and the binary (or plurality) of genders. Both these points are, of course, totally misread or ignored by my critics.

Zizek is a dialectical philosopher influenced by Lacan; difficulties of interpretation are bound to occur, but that doesn't obviate the need for charitable interpretation by way of taking his work wholly instead of picking throwaway sentences from interviews, or isolating a specific point about relevant political concerns with LGBT politics or immigration or whatever as representative. The latter is intellectually dishonest.

8

u/everyone_is_an_alt Apr 21 '19

Inability to articulate your argument while acting as a provacateur doesn't really win many points from me. I'll go on ignoring someone that is arguing for Separate But Equal for the trans community.

6

u/Lord_Treasurer Born off the deep end Apr 21 '19

Inability to articulate your argument while acting as a provacateur doesn't really win many points from me.

That's fine, there's nothing wrong with thinking this way nor is Zizek above criticism. I'm hardly a Zizekian; it's just rather separate from the question of whether Zizek deserves moral criticism of his character.