Sunday, May 8, 2011

Žižek's crap

aTrifF

Guernica, the magazine of arts and politics publishes Žižek's The Un-Shock Doctrine. Take a paragraph that seems to define the topic at hand:
Why, then, the Idea of communism? For three reasons, which echo the Lacanian triad of the I-S-R: at the Imaginary level, because it is necessary to maintain continuity with the long tradition of radical millenarian and egalitarian rebellions; at the Symbolic level, because we need to determine the precise conditions under which, in each historical epoch, the space for communism may be opened up; finally, at the level of the Real, because we must assume the harshness of what Badiou calls the eternal communist invariants (egalitarian justice, voluntarism, terror, "trust in the people").
Lacan is to Žižek what mosquitoes are to smooth plumply flesh. As in today's advertising, one wouldn't expect a Žižekian paragraph without a Lacanian tag attached to it. It's de rigueur. Let's give it to him, Žižek knows how to impress naïve readers with appeals to authority and without establishing demonstrations. In this case, the need for communism is axiomatic, almost theological. Isn't faith blind? Of course, he will invoke the new St. Paul: Badiou, Badiou, enlighten us!

Žižek's constant invocations of terror and tough-guy clownish rhetoric reminds me of some stubborn symptom one desperately tries to hide as it sorely sticks out. There is terror everywhere. So, we need more of it! As per "communist invariant," I'd like to introduce the flatulent and idle bureaucracy known as the Vanguard of the People, Class of Classes: The Communist Party.

Egalitarian communism? My hairy ass.

6 comments:

Feminista said...

Bravo! Sacred cows need a good spanking once in a while.

R.L.R. said...

But why to be nostalgic when he still can enjoy a good chunk of Comunism (sort of) in Cuba and North Korea!

miamibourbaki said...

Thanks, I guess one must accept and separate the thinker from the performer. But then both are up measurement.

The Mike said...

I saw something of his on Netflix and thought some of the ideas interesting but his proofs for them built on shaky ground. I have not read him but wonder what the value may be in reading such a person's work to expand one's scope of thought. Then, I remember my own experiments years ago with reading the paraphernalia left by varying religious sects, which turned out to be a colossal waste of time.

miamibourbaki said...

The Mike: Zizek definitely thinks (he also performs). Read him, it's worth it.

Anonymous said...

This is taken out of context it was Zizek explaining the inevitablity of communism through Lacan it's just Zizek speaking through what he sees as the Lacanian lens it's not at all as simplistic and straightforward as Zizek commiting to the idea that communism is actually unavoidable