Zizek: more bad at the Platypus love-in

December 2nd, 2011

Catching the clap at the Zizek love-in gives you early onset dementia

Zizek lucid: ‘You know, Ayn Rand was right: Money is the strongest means or instrument for freedom. She means this: We exchange only if both parties want it. At least formally, both sides of the exchange get something. Without money, direct means of domination will need to be restored. Of course, I don’t accept her premise: either the rule of money, or direct domination. Nonetheless, isn’t there a correct point? One can criticize money as an alienated form. But how can we actually organize complex social interaction outside money without direct domination?’

A few moments later Zizek forgets this insight and comments dementedly: “In 1923 already, Stalin nominated 100,000 mid-level cadre. Trotsky was stupid, playing arrogant games, and didn’t notice this. He thought that he had created the Red Army and had popular appeal. But, in the diaries of Dmitrov, Stalin said that Trotsky was much more popular in the early 1920s, but Stalin controlled the cadre and so won out. If Trotsky had won, who knows what would have happened? It would have been something different, but who knows what?”

We know what, Ziz: workers would be gnawing out canal trenches with their teeth, just like they did under Stalin.

http://platypus1917.org/2011/12/01/occupy-movement-interview-with-slavoj-zizek/

3 Responses to “Zizek: more bad at the Platypus love-in”

  1. Pam C. Says:

    http://platypus1917.org/category/pr/editorial-statement-of-purpose-and-submission-guidelines/

    ’nuff said.

  2. Pam C. Says:

    http://platypus1917.org/2007/11/01/platypus-review-editorial-statement-of-purpose/

    ’nuff said.

  3. principiadialectica.co.uk Says:

    The worst of this drivel is how Zizek says that ‘Stalin nominated 100,000 mid-level cadre.’ as if Trotsky would have been any different! The country was suffering from mass illiteracy – anyone who could read was appointed ‘mid level cadre’ – none of the party bosses had the luxury to pick and choose.
    Once this ‘cadre’ was in place they would dance to whoever was pulling the strings at the Kremlin, and whatever rhetoric Trotsky spun about permanent revolution, the only thing that was to remain permanent was brutal, mass exploitation in this barrack room society.
    Zizek may have read a lot of Hegel but he doesn’t understand any of it clearly.

Leave a Reply