Well Lookie Here, We Got Us a Academic
The other day, we featured Urban Infidel’s excellent work covering the “Occupy” protest at Manhattan’s Zucotti Square. (See our post: Repeat After Me: You Can Make Sweet, Sweet Love to Animals.) The whole thing had Fester wondering what kind of a man would say such bizarre things. Well, the New York Observer reports that it was Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek (H/T Urban Infidel):
The Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek turned up at Zuccotti Park to address the Occupy Wall Street demonstration on Sunday, offering up a seminar on Radicalism 101 for an appreciative crowd.
(Read it all here.) So who is this bearded bard of the Bohemian brotherhood? In Fester’s opinion, he’s a babbling pseudo-intellectual anarchist who is so thoroughly “academic” in his thinking that he’s finally become unmoored to reality. But don’t take Fester’s word for it — let’s read a few choice quotations from Žižek’s January 2009 article in The New Republic (all emphasis in original):
- “I claim that jihadis are really motivated neither by religion nor by a Leftist sense of justice, but by resentment … .”
- ” [T]he ‘antagonism’ between liberal tolerance and ethnic or religious fundamentalism is inherent to the universe of global capitalism: in their very opposition, they are the two faces of the same system. ”
- “In this precise sense of violence, Gandhi was more violent than Hitler: Gandhi’s movement effectively endeavored to interrupt the basic functioning of the British colonial state.”
- [Given the context, we're not entirely sure what he meant by this little gem, but we reproduce it anyway. Be your own judge.] ”Mr. Kirsch’s reasoning culminates towards the end of his text, where he ‘demonstrates’ that I advocate the annihilation of Jews (with some minor exceptions, true).”
Then there’s this lovely quote from an interview he gave in 2002:
BS: You’ve also left some of your readers scratching their heads over the positive things you’ve been writing about Christianity lately. What is it in Christianity you find worthy?
Zizek: I’m tempted to say, “The Leninist part.” I am a fighting atheist. My leanings are almost Maoist ones. Churches should be turned into grain silos or palaces of culture. ”
And of course, there’s his utterly insipid statement that so many things are possible these days that you can have sex with animals. So flaky are Žižek’s thought processes that other academics have described his rhetoric as “a stream of nonconsecutive units arranged in arbitrary sequences that solicit a sporadic and discontinuous attention” and “a dizzying array of wildly entertaining and often quite maddening rhetorical strategies … deployed in order to beguile, browbeat, dumbfound, dazzle, confuse, mislead, overwhelm, and generally subdue the reader into acceptance.” Fester agrees!
Are we really supposed to take these folks seriously?