Tags
Balkan, Buddhism, New Yorker, Noam Chomsky, Otniel Schneller, Paul Postal, Slavoj Žižek, United States
Can someone of my wise friends enlighten me on what’s so fascinating about Slavoj Žižek to Western taste? And what’s the guy’s problem with Buddhism? It seems to me he is simply trolling and i find him to be an attention HO, quite unattractive one too.
I went to his lecture here in Podgorica and i really don’t get it – first and foremost, because he simply doesn’t make sense. His are ramblings, literally.
Is it that he is the first smarta** from Balkans who learned English properly and took Balkan bluntness to an all new level?
Check out this infamous article: http://cabinetmagazine.org/issues/2/western.php
Firstly, it is built on false premises , secondly – even if this idiotic hypothesis was true – what’s exactly Žižek’s problem with Tibet and its religion?
(Tibet, rest assured, won’t be ‘assimilated in couple of decades’ – and not because US gvmnt’s heart bleeds for Tibetan cause, so they won’t allow it – but because it is one of the hot spots where US can pressure China’s ruling party – and in that way exercise some, even if minimal, upset – if not some control over it.)
He is not known to have spent any prolonged periods of time in Tibet, he doesn’t speak the language, probably does not hang around ethnic Tibetans either and certainly does not practice Buddhism – on what exactly he based his opinion? And why does it matter? Except that it’s funny – a somewhat typical Balkan gastarbeiter thing to do – dismissing the things you don’t get with an arrogant attitude which only an utterly ignorant person can permit themselves. There are countless jokes on gastarbeiter still circling all around ex Yugoslavia – it was mostly the uneducated work force that filled positions with minimal wage in Germany, where the word for ‘guest worker’ originated. Being incapable of learning the local language and integrate – “guest workers” of first generation had developed a cultish mentality of their own: they gathered in “Yugoslavian clubs”, eating their own food and listening to Serbian folk music ; from the heights of hills of grilled meat stuffed with onion and hypnotized by the two accords of the turbo-folc music & rivers of slivovitza, they disdained the culture of their host country – because they didn’t know any better.
That’s exactly how Slavoj Žižek’s verbal escapades come across to me.
If you want an intelligent reply to this verbal diarrhea of his – read Nathan, he explains it step by step: http://www.ethannichtern.com/tag/slavoj-zizek-buddhism/
But in Balkans you don’t get such detailed explanations under pretense that you misunderstood something – here you get punch in the face & i believe that’s the only reason Žižek choose to go ballistic on Buddhism and not on Christianity or Islam for example.
Or the other, in my view, bully – Chomsky. You’ll hear that he alone started the new shift of the scientific paradigm – if one has the slightest idea what is a shift in scientific paradigm – that immediately sets off the BS alarm; he certainly did not.
What he did is the following: having overdosed on Bakunin, an anarchist of times long gone and militant antisemite, about whom best part of contemporary anarchists don’t care the least – Chomsky thought that , given that he has Jewish blood, he’ll manage to get away with BS with which Bakunin, a CO Russian could not… well, next time he wants to enter Israel (and is not allowed into the country) he can indeed try “one of the tunnels connecting Gaza and Egypt” as he was recommended by MP Otniel Schneller.
Here is what some intelligent people have to say about Chomsky:
“Even on the rare occasions when Mr. Chomsky is dealing with facts and not with fantasies, he exaggerates by a factor of, plus or minus, four or five.”
Walter Laqueur, The New Republic, March 24, 1982
“After many years, I came to the conclusion that everything he says is false. He will lie just for the fun of it. Every one of his arguments was tinged and coded with falseness and pretense. It was like playing chess with extra pieces. It was all fake.” Paul Postal, The New Yorker, March 31, 2003
And here it is – exposed lie by lie, if you can stomach it: http://www.paulbogdanor.com/chomskyhoax.html
(I can’t, his discourse simply makes me sick.)
How he rose to academic prominence in the first place – is indeed beyond my comprehension. Except that – imho – he’s an attention HO too. As per the imaginary shift , here on what it comes down to, explained clearly: Noam Chomsky, America’s Village Idiot http://theanti-chomskyanredoubt.blogspot.com/2006/07/noam-chomsky-americas-village-idiot.html
(I disagree only on one count – with author’s derogatively use of sophistry – which in academic circles is passe.)
I do know that if you posted hate speeches like that on any internet forum in English language – except the supremacist ones – you’d get banned promptly; how come these two, in my opinion, pretenders made it – is a subject for careful analyzes and a wake up call to us all.
Basically, what Chomsky has been screaming from the top of his lungs is DIE, DIE AMERICA – his hatred for Israel is secondary ; Žižek calls for return to bolshevism – and not to mild Leninist kind, but to the hard’core Stalinism. And the latter probably doesn’t even mean it – it’s merely bluffing and a publicity stunt. And even if you bother to understand what he is trying to communicate in between tirades about Marx, Lacan and bashings of Shunryu Suzuki – even if his faked or not neurotic tics don’t bother you – there is very little to hear. Simply, in my opinion, he is fake.
There can’t be any wisdom, not even in disguise, where there is hate – and especially where there is ‘hate for no reason’ which Kabbalists happen to consider the root of all evil.
Haaretz Article on Chomsky being denied entry to Israel: http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/noam-chomsky-denied-entry-into-israel-and-west-bank-1.290701
Slavoj Žižek: A Radical Critique http://tendancecoatesy.wordpress.com/2011/03/04/slavoj-zizek-a-radical-critique/
Žižek, the Borat of philosophy http://www.newstatesman.com/film/2007/04/slavoj-zizek-intellectual
Lena –
I think that the west’s fascination with “pseudo-intellectual bullies” here may be an assumption, or at best painting too broad a stroke on the picture. As for the “village idiot” – I thought that our latest village idiot was Mitt Romney. I may have to update my information. 😉
Blessings,
Bonnie
Could be Bonnie, could be! The thing is that both came to us as ‘widely popular in the West’ intellectuals; which in case of Zizek is particularly odd given that he is originally from these parts. “West” is a generalized term here, of course – but the fact is that they both have impressive following, both are are ‘celebrities’ in academia – and both have nothing to do with what we here usually consider an intellectual to be – hence the title.
Reblogged this on BookRepublic.
I need to re-read Žižek’s article and you rich posting to make a proper comment. Am a bit lost as to were the Yugoslav guest arbeiter comes in, so must read again, but of course the overseas workers are always the types you outlined; from every country and culture. And of course they are real. that is, they are the reality, and the ones that the host nation population depend on to define their view of the other culture and indeed multiculturalism.
I thought Žižek’s point about Western Buddhism was salient, and again real, in the same sense as described as above. I can see clearly where he got his inspiration for the description of Lhasa’s Dalia Lama’s residence and monastry: from the pages of the Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundra, who uses the same language and words in discussing Christ.
You need to understand where Chomsky is coming from. Of course he is open for pot shots, but if you come from Latin America his argument can be persuasive. I am not saying his argument should be twisted to fit, but I am also not making an emotional appeal here. Viewed from East-West, your points about the USSR ring strong and clear. Viewed from the North-South axis they don’t.
Hi managuagunnwashere! I appreciate your taking time to read and comment – and i am really glad if some of it made sense to you!
I am not sure what to make of this: “Viewed from East-West, your points about the USSR ring strong and clear. Viewed from the North-South axis they don’t.” Certainly , i will ponder on it and if i come up with anything remotely sensible, i shall post more.
Thanks! I’ll admit it made sense as I was able to associate it to other work, but was shocked when I saw the stuff about Tibet, as it seems to have been lifted straight our of ”The Unbearable Lightness of Being” by Kundera, so not too impressed with that. Still getting used to the new-look on Chomsky here, who I regard in rather high light! I find what he says fits the USA’s absurdist role in Latin America.
Oh, i see what you mean! I want to double check with a wonderful friend of mine who is Mexican originally, but living in Central Europe, i count on her to enlighten me on the matter! It’s taking more time than planned – first fire the other day , and last night my old hp died, so… lol, you can imagine! (Typing this on new lap top – still feeling like an elephant in a crystal shop!)
I often hear Chomsky referred to as “the self hating Jew” which makes me laugh. Zizek is an idiot, too. I don’t get the attraction. They’re both so angry, and so, so arrogant. Definitely not to my tastes, anyway.
You wrote some really thoughtful stuff, thanks.
Thank you for stopping by and commenting, Rebecca! I had problems with pc for couple of days, sorry for the late reply 😦
Zizek gets an audience because he tells rude jokes, and is otherwise entertaining to many people. If you think he’s just trolling, why are you responding to his provocations?
Thanks for stopping by, Luther! Hmm, i am afraid i disagree on audience being attracted by Zizek’s being funny, i believe he’s taken way more seriously than that – undeserved though. As per your question, i presume the motivation here is the same as yours to comment on my post – intellectual curiosity 😉
Best,
L.R.S.
Your article is a delightful appetizer that intrigues me as what you will write about next! I am not familiar with Zizek, but did not care for his essay on Buddhism. HOw can he comment with authority when he has never sat and faced the wall of “himself?”
Thank you for bring this to the public’s attention. I got the feeling that Zizek was nothing but a old stiff cold fart. I did not plan on laughing much today, but I just finished a big belly laugh reading what you wrote about Zizek being a smarta! LOL LOL
I find what he rights to be boring. He appears lost in his intellectual mind – meandering like a doddering old professor that read too many books and forgot to smell the flowers.
Have you read The War Against Women, by Marilyn French? It seems the patriarchy has made a mess of the world. The repression of women in politics, cultural and economics has been devastating. It is so refreshing to read your blog.
Thank you, livvy!!! I am so glad we agree on Zizek – and that you saw through him as well! You know, what actually set me off was an interview of his where he goes like (paraphrasing) ‘humanity – yeah, an general, some cool artwork here and there, but individually – 99% of people are idiots…” (I’ll try to find the exaact quote for you, it’s an interview for a UK newspaper.) Geezus!!! WTF??? Have you ever heard anyone wise referring to the rest of humanity like that?! No bl**dy way! And excuse me – his peaks are what you here at intro to Kabbalah, the free 45 min class anyone can hear in nearest Kabbalah Center; who does he think he is?! I know there is also ‘cultural difference’ moment – but if you are from these parts (like him), your BS radar immediately starts blinking! And also – albeit i had ticks when i was a kid and i know what an issue it is – his is OBNOXIOUS, he either needs to get a treatment, or to refrain from public speeches, it looks insane – he is pulling his ears and scratching his nose and doing full range of this movements NON STOP! I promise that at one point i was almost sure that too was faked! Aghh! Lol!
Whoo hooo as they say in the south, luv your passion! I still have to research more about Zizek. I found a you tube video that I will watch in full tomorrow:
I think this will help others, like myself get a feel for Zizek’s rhetoric.
Thank you Jane!!! Much appreciated!
p.s.s. livvy – here it is, his interview for Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/jun/10/slavoj-zizek-humanity-ok-people-boring
p.s. i think i found the title of Russian translation of the book – Мэрилин Френч Необъявленная война против женщин, i’ll get it as soon as i am in Moscow! (It’s easier than to order via Amazon from here – they have special set of crazy rules for non-EU countries, like – using couriers such as TNT, which are crazy expensive, sending your stuff to customs – so you need to pay taxes etc., at the end, the book costs 4-5 times more than it’s original price 😦 )
exuse the slip up. meant to say “writes.”
Oh my, I read the article (.p.s.s. livvy – here it is, his interview for Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/jun/10/slavoj-zizek-humanity-ok-people-boring)
If this is how this philosopher is speaking, he is disgusting. There is something wrong, terribly wrong. I could not believe what I was reading. But they were the quotes of Zizek. I cannot watch the video I posted till later today but certainly will.
Thank you for bringing attention to Zizek. Bombastic, gassy, and rude. These are the images that arose in my mind while reading.
How can he have so many followers? Because he speaks about sex and curses, purposely acts an eccentric madman? This is what I gleaned from the interview. We are lost in a sea of muck if Zizek is everyone’s idea of an intellectually stimulant to one’s mind. He berates humanity. Misinthrope. Dangerous.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misanthropy
Thank you for taking the time to read, livvy! I couldn’t agree more with you!
Wow
This is the most worthless rightwing trash I have read for a long time.
You suck up lies about Zizek and Chomsky. It is fine to disagree with them but get your facts right!
As for Zizek and Buddhism, well he both praises and criticises it. He approves of some of the teachings and he understands it’s inner orientation but he also thinks that real actual Buddhism is not the same as the pure philosophy (about which he also has issues – doesn’t any thinking person question everything?) and he thinks that real Buddhists such as the Daili Lama and TD Suzuki have interesting personal histories and there own rationalisations which they claim to be Buddhist philosophy but which in some cases turn out to be pure BULLSHIT.
Thank you for reading and commenting. Obviously we disagree, but i do respect the time you took – and also that you did write what you think.
PSY Borg, I enjoyed reading your comment as well as Ruth’s.
I think (and it really doesnn’t matter what I think) before one can comment on Buddhism, one must face the wall a number of years, do sesshins…to understand one’s own mind and the machinations of one’s mind which is everyone’s mind. Language is babel. Letting go of thinking in sesshin happens after sitting in meditation. Realization after realization arises, mind goes blank…many things occur. The act of not speaking in sesshin changes how the participants of the retreat feel. We begin to care for one another without saying words. We begin to live in the tense present of the present tense in beginningless traceless intersecting time and space. One must let go of all preconceived ideas. It does happen but one must watch one’s mind everyday….alll day…its cunning ways, it machinations to understand why the world is “as it is,” in the tense present presenting moment. There is no need to reply to my comment…all of it is the language of babel…and no one is on the same page in the tense present of the presenting moment. We cannot rationalize our way of it. Do meditation a number of years consistently and one can begin to look at things quiet differently. The world takes on a different tone. (endless tones actually) Words limit me when writing here. I cannot express in words what I have gleaned personally from meditating for 10 years consistently. Have a wonderful day.
Thank you so much for commenting, dear friend! I was somewhat taken aback by PSY Borg’s choice of words – but then i do respect everyone’s take on what i write and i am actually honored if my essays spur an emotion or provoke a thought… I think it’s positive that we get excited about philosophy – not to many do, albeit when philosophy is used as masque for hate speeches on religious and ethnic intolerance, i do know it’s dangerous…
Good point. Using Carl Sagan’s “baloney detection kit” helps one discern the tense present presenting moment in space and time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan
What we do right now, in this moment, that changes the way things “are.”
Have a wonderful day!
Thank you, you too, dear! Happy Halloween!
Excellent efforts.l was amazed reading your post.Thank you so much for visiting my site.Have a great day.jalal
I loved your blog, Jalal and i am really glad we cyber-met!
I don’t quite have the time to comment much on this post, but some of the information contained within it is false (which, to me, is enough of a reason to question all other information it contains). Either you didn’t check all of your sources, or you are knowingly perpetuating “lies” that other people have made up. The first PDF by Paul Bogdanor on “The Chomsky Hoax,” while I’ve only spent minutes reading it, is full of lies itself. It took me about two minutes to find official US documents supporting one of Chomsky’s claims, whereas Bogdanor’s “truth” about it is really a matter of differences in rhetoric that creates a false interpretation of Chomsky’s original claim. I would be highly suspicious of these criticisms of Chomsky if the author is relying so much on twisting rhetoric and apparently not expecting his audience to do their homework.
Thanks for commenting, Cass! If you will have the time to list the points you believe to be inaccurate, i will be able to reply with facts – like this, i can only wish you Happy Holidays & Merry Christmas 🙂
Read a book on 19th century Russian anarchists recently. They were a scary and bloodthirsty bunch, with a good sprinkling of psychopaths. And don’t anyone worry about Tibetan culture — it’s alive and well in India!
Ohh, i want to visit India so much!!! My father had been there for work for couple of months, mind you it was decades ago – and he is still speaking of it as if it was yesterday, he is so impressed! Everyone close to me who visited – loved it, just recently my best friend and his fiancee stayed in an asharam, i really want to visit too! Omg, you are so right about Russian anarchists, such a deviant bunch! Which book is it, do you think i can find it in these parts?
Great post moderndayruth. First off, I really enjoy Zizek (currently reading “The Sublime Object of Ideology”). And when I was younger I spent some time devouring Chomsky, but now I am much more attracted to theory than facts; and Chomsky is 80% facts. I am not the type of person to defend or attack Zizek. I find him incredibly entertaining, and this is fine by me. Philosophers are always extraordinary people, and they are always pariah’s. Zizek’s thing is saying stuff you don’t like or want to hear, and then, yes, making a joke so we all feel ok about him pissing us off. 🙂
He has often referred to himself as a fascist or Leninist, or what-have-you, but we all know he’s a capitalist, pure and true. I buy his books with money after all (everybody’s gotta eat). But both of these men are presenting quite radical notions of approaching and interpreting the world, and I think that is important. In fact, I think that’s very important. Just as a solid critique of them is important.
So, thank you!
Thank you so much for taking the time to read and comment! Goodness, i never thought this post will become such a big deal! I don’t even remember why i was so irked back then and what prompted me to write this rant, but it did turn out way more emotional then most of the things i write… The thing is that it does seem to push other’s buttons, so many of the comments on it are also quite emotional. I am not sure what is it about Anarchism – and in particular about Bakunin that winds up people, but at P.E.N. conference in Budapest last autumn i literally had one participant psychically attacking me after i had read my paper which mentioned him (Bakunin) in quite negative context! So you can imagine how pleased i was to read what you wrote – it’s very important to me to learn different points of view and to correct my own. Thank you once again for your eloquent and wise words!
Wow! You gotta watch those anarchists. Admittedly, I have a few Bakunin texts. He presents a great critique of Marx, but it’s, well–I’m writing this in the hope that no one will attack me–very amateur and, well, adolescent. But, to his defense, while Marx was in the library, Bakunin was in the streets… he also escaped Siberia. So, he’s got that going for him! 😀
I read his polemics with Marx too. He caused Jewish people much suffering with his ramblings, he enticed pogroms. I am Jewish, i think that it’s natural i feel strong antagonism towards him. But, generally – i presume you are somewhat familiar with ex-Yugoslav wars, those too started from writings – from “Nachertaniye” i.e. program of national politics of Serbia by Garashanin in1844 (where the idea of so called “Great Serbia” was outlined.) Serbian Academy of Science – and mostly men of pen re-vampirised the concept in the late 20th century and you know how it ended for all of us… Balkan is a ‘powder keg’ anyway and little was needed to start the chaos. That’s why writers and philosophers should stay away from radicalism, even in ideas – because as much as an idea will be viewed in the West merely as an idea – you never know where in the world some group of psychos might decide to actually act on it… 😦
What the **** is a smarta**?
Here, Nick http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=smartass
This link is Zizek in a nutshell http://www.lacan.com/zizekchro1.htm. Chomsky is one of the most respected intellectuals of our time, i simply don’t know what to say to you… of course he criticizes the US. The US is the leading hegemonic empire in modern era and as a citizen of that empire he feels the need for intellectuals to criticize what they see as wrong…. constant war and maintaining over a 1000 military bases around the world. Also Zizek does not doubt the true nature of Buddhist Belief to my knowledge he criticizes what he see’s as the ideology of belief being used to commit crimes read Zen at War by Brian Victoria.
Thanks for commenting, Vj. Well, what can i say, except that i totally disagree with you? I absolutely do not consider Chomsky to be ‘the most respected intellectuals of our time’, not even a respected intellectual and i am a phd candidate in applied linguistics myself.
Do you mean that Chomsky is not one of the most academically respected and notable scholar among contemporary linguists (at least in the field of linguistics) ?
Just from curiosity.
Not so sure about Tibet not being assimilated. The Chinese are supremely ruthless. But their culture, like so many others, will always be alive and well in India.
Thanks goodness for that, dear friend! I apologize for the late reply, i was down with fever last two days :(((((