> Žižek’s emergence as an open right-winger is particularly significant because he has long tried to pose as an opponent of capitalism and even as a “Marxist” or a “post-Marxist.” In pseudo-left circles of intellectuals and semi-intellectuals he has been celebrated and courted accordingly.
> In Der Speigel, Žižek gives free rein to his hatred and contempt for the oppressed and disadvantaged. His article “A Carnival of Underdogs” culminates in the sentence: “Brutality towards those weaker animals, women, is a traditional feature of the ‘lower classes.’”
> Like all right-wing propagandists, Žižek cares little for facts and seizes on individual cases—real or invented—to slander whole social or ethnic groups. This technique is well known from the anti-Semitic inflammatory writings of the Nazis, only this time it is not Jews, but Muslims, who are the scapegoats.
> The starting point of Žižek’s tirades are the events of New Year’s Eve in Cologne, which he terms an “obscene carnival of the lower classes.”
> He repeatedly warns the readers of Der Spiegel not to be swayed by sympathy for the fate of refugees. “Even if many immigrants are more or less victims who have fled from devastated countries, this does not prevent them behaving despicably.”
> He fumes against “the politically correct liberal left,” which is mobilizing its resources to downplay the incident in Cologne, and refers to “efforts to enlighten immigrants” as “breathtaking stupidity.”
> Žižek divides mankind into “three kinds of subjects”–a “Western, ‘civilized, bourgeois, liberal-democratic subject”; “those who do not belong to the West and who are obsessed by their longing for the West”; and finally, “those fascistic nihilists whose envy of the West is transformed into a deadly self-destructive hatred.”
> “Europe needs to demand of the incoming Muslims that they respect European values,” he says, and, “Europe cannot just open its borders, as some on the left demand out of a feeling of guilt.”
Where were you when Zizek was exposed as a crypto-fascist new righter?
>you can't be leftist unless you hold white guilt social views
What is it with american """liberals""" who haven't the faintest understanding of political views
They can't see further than their own "left/right" scale
I thought this was satire until I actually opened the link
then I read the the comments
I admire Zizek for being able to stick with his principles when he has to deal with those people
I really like Zizeks view on the immigrant crisis. Europeans shouldn't blame themselves for the situation in the East. Though they did have a percent of the hand in it, so did Clapistan, China and Russia. They shouls take migrants in but not allow for shitty behaviour. A lot of the refugees want too much. Saudi Arabia and other rich sunni states should be taking in refugees too. Very reasonable position and I agree with it.
what would these sandniggers have to do before the milquetoast leftists would condemn them? apparently mass rape of women and children isn't enough to justify their deportation
Did you read the article? It's anything but apologetic:
>This is why the naive attempts to enlighten immigrants (explaining to them that our sexual mores are different, that a woman who walks in public in a mini skirt and smiles does not thereby signal sexual invitation, etc.) are examples of breath-taking stupidity – they know this and that's why they are doing it. They are well aware that what they are doing is foreign to our predominant culture, but they are doing it precisely to wound our sensitivities. The task is to change this stance of envy and revengeful aggressiveness, not to teach them what they already know very well.
he then goes on to contradict himself by saying
>The difficult lesson of this entire affair is thus that it is not enough to simply give voice to the underdogs the way they are: in order to enact actual emancipation, they have to be educated (by others and by themselves) into their freedom.
Doesn't seem like he's right wing, just that he fell into the trap of thinking political correctness has an effect on anything. Instead of using his time to fight real battles, he's gonna waste his time on nothing.
I'm not sure this is a contradiction.
In quote 1, he's talking about 'educating' the refugees into Western cultural norms.
In quote 2, he's referring to 'education' generally, with no specific reference to Western cultural norms. If he has in mind education of a different character, then he's not in contradiction. However the lack of clarity is bad style.
Zizek is one of the few remaining proponents of the respectable Old Left. They may be Bolshy bastards but at least they have integrity and their ideology is internally consistent. I will be happy to welcome them to the New Right/Alt-Right/Progressive Right once they get sick of having their privilege checked constantly.
When they bury Zizek in his uranium coffin tossed overboard a ship to sink in the Marianne trench the pounding of his fists against the thick hull will accompany them back to port. Winds all over the world will carry sniffs and fish ten thousand meters below the earth will rise to the surface.
After a period of political incertainty the earth people will look at each other and let their head rise again from their shoulder. They have lost Zizek, finally.
Two hundred years later an overly bright comet will make some scanners beep in an observatory and when they do focus their huge lenses on the bright pinpoint they will catch a glimpse of a hand tugging at a shirt of flames and light.
Astronomers will have to decide wether it is a moral good that they should alert the world of its inescapable doom, which is a great "huis clos"
>We tend to forget that there is nothing redeeming in suffering: being a victim at the bottom of the social ladder does not make you some kind of privileged voice of morality and justice.
>This technique is well known from the anti-Semitic inflammatory writings of the Nazis
Oy vey, >not-so-subtle implications of Zizek being ebil nazi
*furiously rubs hands together with enough force to power a single shower head*
Which of the three parts of mankind is Zizek part of?
>By Peter Schwarz
>Schwartz was born in 1946 to Klara and Benjamin Schwartz, Hungarian Jews who had been in concentration camps and were living in a displaced persons camp in Stuttgart, Germany
>tfw SJW hijacking of the left will bring about a new age of glorious fascism
>Žižek’s emergence as an open right-winger is particularly significant because he has long tried to pose as an opponent of capitalism and even as a “Marxist” or a “post-Marxist.” In pseudo-left circles of intellectuals and semi-intellectuals he has been celebrated and courted accordingly.
Zizek has always been self-promoting fame hound, he knows if he wants to break into american tv he needs to take a rightwing turn, then he can get a place on foxnews next to nial furgeson..the guy is like hillary clinton, he says whatever stupid shit he thinks people want to hear
Zizek has always been consistent in his rejection of New Left style social democracy and identity politics. He correctly identifies these phenomena as distractions from class consciousness and actual emancipatory action.
>tfw I'll get to hang leftists, bankers and non-whites from lampposts in my lifetime
I was starting to think it wouldn't happen
>implying there won't be a civil war resulting in the rise of a new Caesar to create the new Empire of the West
what's funny to me is how now that Trump is riding high on his vow to "behead ISIS" the NY Times doesn't even cover ISIS anymore...I thnk they chopped a couple aid workers heads off last week or the week before but it was just one of those little "AP Newswire" stories and didn't get a full write up. Clearly ISIS is manufactured by the CIA to give justification to attack Syria and reinvade Iraq, but once the narrative got out of their control and started helping an "outsider" they pulled the plug on the story...seriously, I read the NY Times everyday, haven't heard a peep about ISIS in weeks...last fall it was like you'd think ISIS was about to invade Poland or some shit...if Trump or Sander doesn't win the presidency then American democracy confirmed sham.
>then American democracy confirmed sham
What, only THEN?
>Fascism will fizzle out just like the left did
that's how u can tell leftism was never a serious threat to jewish capitalism, the nazis siezed the reigns of power in Germany and suddenly the whole world has to united to kill them all, but Stalin and Mao take over half the planet and we decide we can "peacefully co-exist", you can see which system is the real threat...marxism fizzled out after the creation of israel and communism was no longer useful to the jews, but fascism had to be stomped out immediately not left to "fizzle"
Except the left has fizzled out. The vast majority of the population in developed countries think that free-market tautologies like austerity and Laffer Curves are common sense when empirically they haven't worked once, and thinking that market mandated structures are the only possible way to structure a society
The left has been reduced to defending shitty social issues, while the right wingers continue to frame all discourse about what's really important
I thought Zizek was sympathetic to the refugees. There's an interview of him saying something like, "of course I don't like them but I'll let them in because it's a matter of justice." Goddammit Zizek, why change your mind?
And what, the leaks after leaks of the shit the US pulls isn't an exposure of how vile the American government, and its "democracy", is? Americans barely batted an eye when the NSA leak happened, a week or two of wailing and a month later nobody remembered or cared any more. There is nothing to "expose" any more, you just look the other way and as long as the injustice doesn't affect you or those you know it doesn't matter.
good luck getting the MASSES to see past the "shitty social issues"
the whole political process is a fucking joke -- remember how geriatric right wing politicians were dragged out by the media so that they could point and laugh at the oh so medieval homophobes?
as if something as trivial as gay marriage should influence anything beyond state politics...
Zizek wrote an article stating that most opposition to ISIS is in fact to fight (not necessarily through actual violence) someone else through ISIS
e.g. the left says "ISIS is bad and the west created it so we have an obligation to import millions of refugees" while the right says "ISIS is merely distilled Islam so we shouldn't let all these Islamic people in", neither really care about ISIS
let's not even start on the US's foreign policy
doesn't take a genius to work out but worth mentioning
>good luck getting the MASSES to see past the "shitty social issues"
Masses like those electing politicians on the basis of "he'll slash the budget" and "he'll make free enterprise come back to my country"? Those are already there, and forcing left wingers to go on the defensive every single time an expenditure issue comes along
why? if they're oppressed because they are lazy criminals wouldn't that give them an extremely warped view of "justice"? perhaps we should ask the successful people for advice on our ethical ideas rather than failures, poor people have a "idgaf, gotta get over!" attitude which lead to corruption and vice, hardly moral exemplars
you think obama got voted into the white house because the zitfaced uni students assessed and agreed with his economic policies?
get real man, reason why the right wing doesn't get much public support is precisely because the left manipulates people into focusing on trivial "social issues" and use emotionally charged buzzwords to paint the opposition as some mint julip drinking homophobic plantation owner.
So we are in agreement then godammit
What was so unclear about my original point? The left is confined to social issues (and as such can only use those to win), whereas the right has the dominance in important issues like the economy
Was that so hard to understand?
everyone knows the left has been reduced to tranny bathroom rights and affirmative action slots for rich african oligarchs, is anyone seriously debating their complete impotence with regard to the economy? it's over man, you lost. if ur as smart as u think u are start a business and succeed in capitalism, i.e. deal with it
It's just that since WW2 the "international elite" / Jews have discovered more sophisticated methods of crushing opposition. They don't need massive bloodshed any more, but they are waging war on us constantly and we are so downtrodden that we can't even summon up the will to fight back.
thats because they've taken you out of the competition by turning u into an infantile neet or irelevnant academic...if you want to take the country back you have to build business that can compete and eventually defeat them, you're losing because you think you're not playing
This is a very fine example of how gross a simplification the left/right dichotomy is.
I'm a leftist. I'd be construed as an extremist leftist by an American, being Scandinavian and all. I too consider political correctness counterproductive, and I do find mass immigration highly problematic.
The left/right dichotomy is politics simplified to the point of making it impossible to even discuss.
Also, get the fuck back to /pol/.
>obama being elected was largely an economic decision as the final answer?
there was nothing radical about obama other than his skin, the fact that so many faux-leftist thought he was the new malcomx just shows how blinded by race they are...he was always a wall street favorite, remember kucinich was the sanders of that election, not obama
Couple of things about Saudi Arabia m8.
First, they have taken a large share of refugees. The misunderstanding that they aren't taking in any refugees stems from the fact that Syrians (for example) aren't labelled refugees in Saudi Arabia, but guests.
The UNHCR spokesman in the Middle East, Nabil Othman, estimates there are about 500.000 Syrians in Saudi Arabia.
Secondly, if you're fleeing from religious extremism, you really wouldn't want to go to Saudi Arabia. They're barbaric degenerates.
I cheered when I first read it. There is nobility in experience, but there is nothing noble in suffering. These days, everyone is running to their doctors desperately looking for a psych diagnosis of some kind, upon which they blame all that is wrong with their lives and absolve themselves of responsibility.
> Žižek divides mankind into “three kinds of subjects”–a “Western, ‘civilized, bourgeois, liberal-democratic subject”; “those who do not belong to the West and who are obsessed by their longing for the West”; and finally, “those fascistic nihilists whose envy of the West is transformed into a deadly self-destructive hatred.”
Actually, that was Alain Badiou.
>The starting point of Žižek’s tirades are the events of New Year’s Eve in Cologne, which he terms an “obscene carnival of the lower classes.” The incidents in Cologne have been systematically blown out of proportion by the media in order to whip up a hysterical campaign against immigrants and Muslims. To date, there is no evidence that anything happened other than what regularly takes place in similar mass gatherings where much alcohol is involved.
So basically, the Peter Schwarz is implicitly calling the victims of the mass-molestation racists? Native germans apparently do this all the time, but the victims don't report it. But lo and behold, when the perpetrators are north africans, they run to the police. Is there any other explanation than racism for the discrepancy?
Schwarz is a victim-blaming piece of shit who should check his privilege.
And PC leftism is so absurd that they are now unable to move at all without stepping on someones toes.
my favorite part of the whole mass rape was that not one of those poor syrian refugees was actually from syria...moreover, how the fuck is an adult male of military age a refugee? there's no such thing, the correct term for that is "deserter".
I can't remember in which video it was that Zizek talked about it, but what he said was essentially:
>you can make fun of mohammed with drawings and so on and then say "well it is free speech"
>but if you make a joke about say, women being raped, or jews, then you're a woman hater and an anti-semite and so on and you're doing hate speech
There's a video, I think it might actually be from VICE, and yeah I know
but they go out and ask people in the Middle-East/Syria, women mainly if I remember, about what they think of all these men just leaving. Pretty funny all things considered.
>you can make fun of mohammed with drawings and so on and then say "well it is free speech"
the problem is that this doesn't happen and leftists will rush to the defence of Islamic violence in response to drawings
it's hilarious because Muhammad was by all leftist measures an awful person
But that is exactly what they did, in the name of free speech and so on. The reason it's "accepted" by these liberal hacks is that it's part of a greater composition of "Western values" and doesn't explicitly say something. It's a drawing mocking a religious character and despite it being related to Islam, the golden religious goose liberals love, it still falls under that elusive "free speech" nonsense that prevails in our media, and as Zizek says in the video, it's because it isn't part of European "culture"/tradition, it's still in the realm of being okay to make fun of(as opposed to mistreatment of women, nazis, jews, and so on). It isn't some politician or journalist saying or writing something "problematic", it's a cartoonist's scribble.
Ah yes that's the one. It's a pretty shit video, or interview rather, the woman talks way too much and constantly interrupts Zizek.
>my favorite part of the whole mass rape was that not one of those poor syrian refugees was actually from syria...
Before this shit started I never realised what a bunch of fucking degenerate scumbags North Africans were. They need to be gassed, seriously.
my leftist friends hate me because they believe in some degeneracy and live inside of their safe-zones
my conservative friends hate me because i don't give a shit about their 100 year-old issues and label me as a liberal
>mfw instead of uniting against the neo.-imperialist and muslim aggressors we're divided
I wonder if he's admitted to himself that "political correctness" (I hate this term but w/e) is really just weaponised language control used by the left/establishment to suppress dissident ideas and has fuck all to do with people's feelings
the left can't exist without PC
What he said. It saddens me to see so many young people drifting aimlessly and without achievement. They all have anxiety, or PTSD, or depression, or whatever, and they refuse to even try taking control of their lives because of their condition.
God forbid they ever make a positive change, no, they'll just continue like this, presumably forever.
The far left and far right hate globalism. Moderates on both sides are willing to form opinions based on reality rather than ideology, and globalism as a positive force is well-supported by evidence.
National Socialism is probably the single most degenerate ideology in political philosophy. Nationalism always leads to war and rampant militarism. it also causes social divides, bigotry, and especially xenophobia. And not all socialist systems are created equally, some are obviously better than others. Humans need to focus on creating a more peaceful, healthier world; with a society that is democratic, well educated, and secure in their peace of mind.
Are you implying he's wrong? American political discourse has been so poisoned over the years by the remnants of McCarthyism that socialist and liberal are viewed as insults rather than legitimate political terms.
I have no idea who these "On the Ground News" people are, but this is the video:
I really thought it was VICE, seems like a VICE thing to do.
you know, about political correctness
if you examine most politically "incorrect" statements you will notice they're often factually incorrect, being rife with all sorts of dumb shit: race and gender essentialism, historical ignorance, revisionism, colonisation denialism, ignorance on topics like gender dysphoria and mental illness, naive moral anti-realism, free will metaphysics used as a tool against disenfranchised groups (why didn't the poor make the free choice to pull himself out of poverty) and so on
another type of politically incorrect statements are simply value judgements, like "trannies have a zyklon b deficiency"
is there anything defensible about this? why is it important that everyone can hear another mini Hitler rant about the niggers and the fags and decline of western civilization and so on
it exists solely because of the disgusting socioeconomic state certain races are in, which itself is a result of those small tiny historical influences like slavery, years of economic oppression that prevented black people from achieving any wealth, redlining, segregation, literal race riots breaking out when negros are deemed too rich (greenwood, Tulsa)
if you believe its possible to get smart successful under these circumstances, youre retarded
>it exists solely because of the disgusting socioeconomic state certain races are in
yeah man twin studies and adoption studies don't mean anything experienced sociologists never thought of controlling for socioeconomic factors or nothing
Muslims in the west only rape because they're not given enough benefits and someone drew a picture of their prophet it has nothing to do with culture or genetics (99% of Egyptian women have been sexually assaulted but that's irrelevant ok)
political correctness only exists to make sure we all only tell the Truth™ at all times peace love and tabula rasa ok, praise chomsky
I would ask you to imagine a circumstance in which you were both right. That minorities have been abysmally treated, for no justifiable reason, and this has had a horrific effect on them in the past and at present. And also that they are in some way genetically different such that their behavior or capabilities are diminished or simply different. It is also laughably ridiculous to assume that all the people Europeans have attacked, and vice versa, are a homogenous entity.
Now I'm not saying this is the case, because I don't believe either of us are geneticists? And i don't believe geneticists themselves have unraveled the meaning of the human genome, let alone its differences in different populations?
You don't actually have anything to back up either of these suppositions. You have no factual genetic evidence, and you have no unquestionable historical-sociological theory. You are doing the exact same thing as the racist, scientifically, and even intellectually speaking. You are just on different sides.
When you say 'it exists solely because', you mean 'it might exist partly because'.
>99.5 of genes are shared by all humans
nonesense, europeans and asians have anywhere from 2-5% neanderthal dna, while africans have none...so maybe pure humans are just more prone to violence and rape and cavemans are more prone to advanced mathematics and art
Honestly, if you complain a lot about "white guilt" like it's a serious problem, you probably are racist. I'm not even saying it doesn't exist, but it's pretty clear some white people just want to emulate the victim status that minorities get instead of fixing anything broken about the system.
You think neanderthals didn't share genes with homo sapiens before they interbred? Also learn to distinguish between interspecies variation and genome-wide variation, dipshit. Those neanderthal genetics you ramble about are also shared by Australian Aboriginals and Native Americans.
You should've kept reading anon:
"...'barbarian' lower class refugees who steal, harass our citizens, behave violently towards women, defecate in public... Instead of dismissing all this as racist propaganda, one should gather the courage to discern a moment of truth in it: brutality, up to outright cruelty towards the weak, animals, women, etc, is a traditional feature of the “lower classes”; one of their strategies of resisting those in power always was a terrifying display of brutality aimed at disturbing the middle-class sense of decency."
While you might honor the oppressed classes by claiming them to be introspective of their position, the reality is much more crude and reactionary.
Displacing people from cultures where it isn't customary for women to even show their hair, into modern western cultures where even public advertising is often pornographic could not possibly lead to sexual frustrations and rampant crimes(rape, sexual harassment) of the sort that is caused by sexual frustration?
You even need to have an argument that this could not possibly be true any more it seems.
there are plenty of sexually frustrated white people but unlike those of african origin (the rape posses were morrocan) they instead wack it to degenerate japanese cartoons in the privacy of their own home
half chinese, half white. he was ashamed of being asian for some reason so I guess I can't say that his ethnicity didn't contribute to his worldview but I think he did identify as a white guy.
>This guy DARES to criticize our modern leftist circlejrek, therefore he must be a racist right-winger!!!!!!111!!!!
>also did I mention RACISM and SEXISM becasue everyone who even slightly disagrees with me is a RACIST and SEXIST and literally everything wrong with the world can be traced back to RACISM and SEXISM (◡‿◡)
>also economics aren't real because the government has an infinite magic pot of gold and everything would be just fine if it wasn't for those RACISTS and SEXISTS >:((((
I mean I'm not denying that racism and sexism exists but this is just getting ridiculous. Can we have Stalin back please?
>the nazis siezed the reigns of power in Germany and suddenly the whole world has to united to kill them all
pretty sure that hitler threw the first stone in every possible instance there, son
he had no choice after the unfair treaty against germany from ww1, he did what he had to in order to save his country from debt slavery after being stabbed in the back by zionist jews both within germany and abroad
>implying the establishment is in any way left-wing and not just ultraliberalism with a thin coating of PC
>"trannies have a zyklon b deficiency"
Good one. Borrowing that.
Testosterone leads to behavioral change. Increases ambition, motivation, and risk-tolerance. Also promotes pro-social behavior in bargaining games, esp. when given to women (whereas women who got placebo but thought they got testosterone acted like dicks).
I mean, I'm an idiot, but I'm sincere when I'm saying I have a hard time seeing how anyone can believe in non-essentialism when science basically discredits it.
>>We tend to forget that there is nothing redeeming in suffering: being a victim at the bottom of the social ladder does not make you some kind of privileged voice of morality and justice.
The scariest thing about all this is how the above sentiment is not common sense.
nah, academia has become increasingly irrelevant. the 'influential' media-meme academics, especially in america are pretty much all social liberals, concerned about tenures, speaking appointments etc. Whereas the silicon valley types (eg. the google guys, peter thiel, etc.) are just a more pragmatic, politically correct strand of neo-reaction in both their goals and ambitions.
Do you know how to read a scientific statement and draw conclusions? The fact that women who got placebos and thought they got testosterone acted in the way that you're supposed to act (i.e. the social construct of a man) is evidence against gender essentialism.
they not all political correct, see the lynching of brendon eich, on the other hand if his best engineers are trannies and fags then he should have checked himself before causing a braindrain
>implying africans/indians weren't living on mudhuts before we got there
>implying they didn't revert to barbarism according to every conceivable metric as soon as white people had to stop baby seating them
race and gender essentialism
>read: denying the proven reality of sex/gender differences in rationality/intelligence/creativity because muh feels
"trannies have a zyklon b deficiency"
>implying this is not true
What's the application of race/gender essentialism at the individual level, though? Aside from the obvious "women can get pregnant" in relation to the job market. Wouldn't not hiring someone solely because of his skin colour be equal to "muh feels" as well (given several candidates of similar qualifications)?
>Wouldn't not hiring someone solely because of his skin colour be equal to "muh feels" as well (given several candidates of similar qualifications)?
but you leftists are the ones for hiring underqualified dindus bcause muh divershitty
brah, clinton signed NAFTA and ended "welfare as we know it" not to mention increased the prison population and sent in Worldbank and IMF stooges to fuck up the former Soviet republics with "shock therapy"
reversion to the mean, my friend. they might be on the right side of the bell-curve, but still doesn't mean it's a good idea to just let them in on the european gene pool. besides we are genetically programmed to look out for our closest biological kin, and 'diversity' can disrupt that order in many ways
You should be embarrassed, because it's clear to pretty much everyone that this isn't true. Zizek hasn't changed his stance at all, the political climate has just shifted and he's still publishing papers about current events so he gets attacked. Go see what he was saying in 2005 about liberals and it was exactly the same.
zizek is a lightweight, it just shows the poverty of public discourse that this guy is the only guy writing at an adult level...sure, when he writes an op-ed for the ny times it's probably the best thing to grace those pages in months, but only because the ny times is a mouthpiece for zionist banking outfits which publish the most bland mind numbing and least insightful "commentary" humanly possible
there are tons of hard hitting marxists and social critics writing today, they just aren't self promote meme-men with funny jokes and sexy book titles, you call urself a leftist and u think zizek is worth a shit? laff
I think you have touched on why he is such an intellectual heavyweight. he is able to condense philosophy into 5 second sound bites that the masses can understand. well not understand but be entertained. they will then proceed to take selfies with their iphones in high fashion then post it with a tweet about the evils of consumerism. but at least he has found a way to make it a part of the pop discourse again in his small part. remember the wider audience he is trying to reach is more familiar with the works of jayden smith.
here's my proven realities
vast number of men shitpost on image boards with discredited 18th century pseudoscience despite having all the opportuniies to succeed
ergo, men are clearly the losers in the intelligence comparison
they also commit like 90% of the crime too
i guess we all know what this means , time to build that anti-man wall, dick carriers have clearly proven they are incapable of living in a civilized society
richard wolff, isvan metszaros, i'm not really into childish fantasies anymore so i cant remember them all off the top of my head, but there are tons of resentful professors out there who have to publish books, go pick up a copy of "new left review", "monthly review" or "rethinking marxism" and then read the book reviews, any decent uni is going to have subscription to all of those
>anyone that isn't an identity political """"""left"""""" liberal / """"""anarchist"""""" is a actually a Hitler
But...you do have a y chromosome. So you have the same ability as any man (even if you think you're a dog in a horses stable). Anyway I fap to trannies, no shame in it, I'll call you a woman if you want but I'm just humouring you out of politeness - I don't wanna trigger people
Is anybody disagreeing with me that the author in the OP just quotes lines from Zizeks latest article and adds
>I don't like that view, it's racist
after every quote?
And is the author in the OP denying that there's gonna be problems when 100.000 more (young) men than women enter an area.
The only point I find worth a thought is to what extent the European nations should go down with the military, where Zizek just seen no other way.
Have you even been to Europe?
Anyway this isn't much a development desu
Most intellects you meet aren't left "liberals"
They all generally wear that mask though because their lives can be ruined otherwise and their not so stupid as to be ignorant of that fact
Effective censorship still exists and its kinda disgusting how much you see in say academia
It's an insidious censorship too
Here's a good video from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education on it
Don't those people consume internet porn just as much?
You manichees only make the world a more boring place.
Yes often much more but that makes it worse, think if your only association with a woman's hair and elbows is when you're masturbating to her naked body and all other aspects of her except the sexual are not considered. It doesn't help that most of the porn stars are western. Many young arabs think or assume that western women would give it up to anybody.
By the way sexual harrasment is pretty bad in many of these countries and is quite ugly. They'll yell at women and be really creepy that they want to talk to. Women usually ignore it and get away but if you saw the men's actions, it makes sense why they went crazy when they went to Europe especially at New Years.
I knew a religious Egyptian who had a chance to go to Denmark to teach but he refused it because he saw video of the women dressed how they do walking around. He said he wouldn't be able to handle it well.
>experiencing injustice doesn't necessarily teach a person anything about justice
this is what privileged (see: SHELTERED) children think.
>there is nothing redeeming in suffering
>I'm not a big pussy because I'm afraid and reject anything that isn't comfortable.
It's bigger than just the refugees, the bourgeois live in a bubble and their cognitive dissonance is so astounding that I'm wasting my time even pointing it out.
>ergo, men are clearly the losers in the intelligence comparison
more proven realities time:
men are more creative than women
there are more extremely intelligent men than women
men are more drawn to fringe activities because women have higher social value and privilege
women do better in educational situations that put an emphasis on rote process and obedience
>i guess we all know what this means , time to build that anti-man wall, dick carriers have clearly proven they are incapable of living in a civilized society
men commit more crime due to genetic differences, they're also responsible for the vast majority of worthwhile contributions to art and science due to genetic differences.
>this is what privileged (see: SHELTERED) children think.
Why isn't it true? I've never seen a mature conception of justice come form someone who's "oppressed." At best it's superficial and pragmatic.
This was very interesting
Is the current movement of trying to not offend anybody a backlash of another movement or just an entirely new thought in itself.
Personally I think its the former, due to the strong sense of European nationalism that lead to Nazism, which today is so demonized anything associated with it is seen as evil
clearly that's because you are incapable of seeing outside of the bourgeois bubble that you've lived your entire privileged life in. In reality the migrants in cologne who sexually assaulted the germans were simply enacting radical justice for the horrors the West has done on the Arab world. Who are you to question that justice when you're entire wellbeing has been paid for by the rape and slaughter of Arab lands?
>race and gender essentialism.
Gender essentialism is pretty much valid. The biological differences between men and women are so drastic that men and womens' lives will always play out way differently, and in predictable ways, even in the most egalitarian imaginable society, that the constructs of 'male' and 'female' are legitimate.
> historical ignorance.
Explain. There is PC historical ignorance ("there was a deliberate genocide committed against native Americans") as well as anti-PC historical ignorance ("there was no Nazi holocaust"). Historical ignorance per-se is not PC or un-PC, it occurs on both the left and the right.
Again, there are 'halal' PC versions of historical revisionism that are acceptable on the left... Not a left or right, PC or un-PC thing.
> colonisation denialism
People deny that colonialism happened?
> ignorance on topics like gender dysphoria and mental illness.
What, you mean like the ignorance of not knowing that 'gender dysphoria' diagnostic criteria change in response to the political climate rather than actual research? The ignorance of thinking that the same DSM that once categorized homosexuality as a mental illness, the profession that once entertained 'blacks wanting to run away from their masters' as a medical diagnosis, is now super reliable on matters of gender because the current definition of gender dysphoria agrees with your political biases?
> naive moral anti-realism.
I don't see moral anti-realism as being a big part of anti-PC dialogue. If anything the PC types themselves are likely to espouse moral relativism (which amounts to anti-realism when you parse out the logic) albeit extremely selectively and hypocritically.
But aside from the fact that you are totally ignorant on all the matters you just brought up, the real reason you're wrong is because yes, in a sane society, people DO have the right to express wrong ideas. Who are you going to appoint the commissar of wrong ideas, and how do you know he's 100% right about everything.
I'm telling you man, I should be paid to educate ideological zombies like you.
Even if you're right and race /ethnicity doesn't exist (it does) and savages acting savagely isn't genetic (it is) but rather solely the result of class inequality (it isn't), this still does not mean we should allow savages to flood in and simultaneously take advantage of and destroy civilization, you fucking genetic dead end. Moderate-to-high segregation of ethno-states is the rational conclusion no matter which way you look at it.
i have arrived at the same conclusion after studying several highly erudite racial blogs... if our civilization hopes a ethno-federate europa based on paganism and reactionary volkisch culure is our only hope.... deus vult!
The Western world purposely engineered the terrorism threat through its intelligence agencies to curtail the freedoms of its citizenry and steer us to a 3rd World War thus reducing the population & solving overpopulation genocide-fashion, anyway, so Zizek's views on immigration/Muslims have nothing to do with anything and won't stop the current and upcoming even greater madness. In fact, I don't know much about Zizek, but I wouldn't be EXCESSIVELY surprised if it turned he is what is called a "change-agent" or a so-called "shill" ... no offense, my fellow /lit/erati who are not used to conspiracy theories on their beloved board which is supposed to be about literature.
no Eurasian insanity is due to the fact that they're born of loveless marriages that are more an expression of power dynamics than anything else
dad went to Asia because he couldn't hack it with white women and married his third world fuckdoll (who grows to resent the child she had)
I don't know how a child could come out of that well adjusted
name a african leader who isn't corrupt as shit, has 50 mistresses or just bad shit insane telling ppl to fuck babies to cure aids, etc. don't u think there's something wrong when educated people in africa believe in magic?
the ruling class wants more population, all wealth cames from labor, the more people u have to labor the more wealth u can get...terrorism was engineered in order to "niggerize" the muslim world, once muslims think being a jihadi dickhead is cool then they've lost...just like african americans got tricked into glorifying thug culture, if you can get someone to embrace and identify as a criminal or murderer then you can leverage any power against them...
i'm fairly certain that's not what he said, but even if so, that's not far from what 99% of people commonly profess to believe in polite society
that one could take chomsky as an exemplar of this type of thinking, considering he's (unlike the vast majority of intellectuals) acknowledging simple reality is kind of stupid
it's a simple point: yes, american black people might be a little more retarded on average as they were bred to be farm animals, and are more likely to be retarded the more farm animal admixture they have, but what to do about it? i can't think of a single justifiable policy one could come up with based on such a conclusion
you're welcome to take a shot at it
>just like african americans got tricked into glorifying thug culture
I like your attitude on this stuff, however, I believe the elite is actually quite worried about world overpopulation. While population growth is declining in more developed countries, where it would, like you say, be better to have more, since more population = more labor = more wealth, less developed countries are exploding in population. An overpopulation crisis.
>actually quite worried about world overpopulation
To clarify, this is not humanistically, but pragmatically. More population = harder to control and more depletion of resources. If less people are alive, it's obv. easier to control them, you need less resources to.
the entirety of affirmative action is predicated on the idea that people are equal and that the system is preventing certain groups from unlocking their true potential
Not the other person, but that doesn't really make sense to me. I mean, have you ever wondered why most men produce testosterone like they're the last man on Earth? Historical anthropologists and paleontologists are pretty sure that the current strain of 7 billion humans is descended from about 2,000 individuals. And the Y chromosome can be traced back 66,000 years, whereas human mitochondrial DNA can be traced to a single common ancestor about 130-140,000 years ago. To me, it's starting to look like all men are descended from a guy who was more or less forced to have a crazy libido, and even so couldn't have sex with all the human females left in the world. He left some for his sons.
So that's why all humans are terribly inbred, but not to an extent that it would horribly cripple our thinking, and why we have this genetic memory of being the "last man/woman on Earth."
And this is of course pure extrapolation.
>To me, it's starting to look like all men are descended from a guy who was more or less forced to have a crazy libido,
Ehh, you can explain low genetic diversity on the Y-chromosome easier
That guy didn't need to have a "crazy libido", it's enough that all the lineages from the other guys from the same point in time died out, which is easy since bottlenecks in the history of humans led to tiny populations.
All you need is some randomness
This is why 4chan will always be better than reddit. Redditors try to belittle and end up getting belittled themselves. 4channers have enough vitriol to sustain the creative fire of the entire human race, if the entire human race were to come on 4chan.
Yea, and I'm realizing that the same thing probably happened on the female side, but much, much earlier in human history. 2 severe bottlenecks, one for each sex. Rather an odd coincidence.
those that benefit from affirmative action are the ones most likely to be discriminated against for no reason other than looking more like a former slave without having slave mind. probably for the best.
immigration if properly managed will reap the best (gotta have a point system, etc.)
basically, yes, on average there may be some races that are more retarded, but can you come up with a policy that will allow us to reap the potential of the non-retarded ones?
also, would we want to live in a society where some are deemed subhuman? might be worth it to not to go there, even if there's a drag on resources.
think this through a little more in-depth
bro the the higher iq people from north europe, east asia and the levant all have high neanderthal dna percent...what if the neanderthals were superior to human but did what european whites are doing and population suicided by interbreeding with humans and just not fucking enough...what happens when white people get bred out and the only people with a sense of freedom are gone to history...earth will look like a giant bengladesh
And what's the inevitable result of people fighting amongst themselves?
Weapons to incapacitate would more imply death, no? as opposed to mere social control? It's literally a matter of logistics, let the people die out by fighting amongst themselves and you don't have to worry about a large enough population to revolt significantly against your superior weaponry and the mere logistics of psychologically controlling them all.
You've never heard about the overpopulation problem, and how the elite think it's quite the important problem to "fix"?
>And what's the inevitable result of people fighting amongst themselves?
To clarify (again), why keep them continually fighting to keep them controlled, instead of just letting them fight enough (controlling them easily in the meanwhile) so, in the end, there's a decently reasonable amount to control by a police state, psychotoxic chemicals in their food & drink supply (which cost more for a larger population), strict laws, etc...?
Nigga, All humans share 50% of their DNA with any random fucking banana you buy at a store. We all share 90% the same DNA as anybody's pet cat. You think a comparative handful of Neanderthal genes really makes that much of a difference?
Yes, but what is genius without sufficient knowledge? ability without the chance to develop it?
People with high IQs don't matter if they aren't given enough pieces of the puzzle --- keep certain things out of public knowledge, in classified memos circulating amongst the elite, aim some propaganda at more intelligent people, perhaps even give them fancy Rosicrucian and Freemasonic clubs to move up through the ranks in --- and the intelligent will be neutralized too.
Not only that, but population control would probably assume keeping the dipshits alive and killing the geniuses who don't convert to the Satanic elite religion after brainwashing/offers to convert. Think Pol Pot.
The correct policy is being that natural hierarchies exist, equality is a lie, and egalitarianism is a system of policies built on a lie, the following is then true and advisable:
>The rot set in with “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”. There is your race denialism right there.
>If you want to get out of the trap, say after me: “All men were not created equal, some should command some should obey, some should not merely obey, but are naturally slaves, and should not be allowed to make their own decisions. If found wandering loose causing problems, should be placed under the control of an owner. Women’s sexual choices are apt to be dangerous to society and to themselves, thus fertile age women should always be controlled by husbands or fathers. A women not subject to a man is suffering misfortune, as for example an orphan or widow, or is wicked and needs punishment, as for example a harlot.”
>As soon as you denounce the declaration of independence and the emancipation of women the logical case the Jews are a big problem collapses. And the emotional case for hating Jews is the same as that of any market dominant minority, envy and covetousness, which is also at the root of declaration of independence and the emancipation of women.
>Getting rid of the Jews will not help you. The problem is inside your head. They are not emitting evil mind control rays at you. You have been emitting evil mind control rays at them. Umpteenth wave feminism is the logical consequence of the failure to divorce Queen Caroline.
Given pic related, what's his plan in supporting DiEM25 (the movement of the Greek ex-finance minister)?