nettime's filosofer on Sat, 2 Mar 2002 03:50:57 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> That Zizek interview [3x]

Table of Contents:

   Re: <nettime> Zizek interview                                                   
     "porculus" <>                                                

   That Lovable Zizek Guy                                                          
     Bruce Sterling <>                                                

   Re: <nettime> Zizek interview                                                   
     Doug Henwood <>                                               


Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 22:13:44 +0100
From: "porculus" <>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Zizek interview

 > It functions as an ersatz enemy.
> You can still claim your stock market gains, but you can say, "I'm
> against tobacco companies." Now I should make it clear that I don't
> smoke. And I don't like tobacco companies. But this obsession with
> the danger of smoking isn't as simple as it might appear.

bah i heard montesquieu and even diderot had some interest in 'ebony wood',
zis just to say such contradicitions are az older as capitalism at least,
diderot was a nice & quick mind, a jewelery among glittering witty human
corporation yet

> Zizek: I'm tempted to say, "The Leninist part." I am a fighting
> atheist. My leanings are almost Maoist ones.

so kneel down sinner az i am all dayz and night

> Churches should be
> turned into grain silos or palaces of culture. What Christianity did,
> in a religiously mystified version, is give us the idea of rebirth.

er hombre christianity take it, steal it, imite it, all zuch verb could fit,
to pagan & so much it could be a fetichism..but we are less & less fetichist
lately, it'z kind of infantil perversion to dress up ones dark object of
desir, zpezialy the stinking dead, notice it..hope you notice it lately
it is see az bad taste

> For an example, let's take Judith Butler, and her thesis that our
> sexual identity isn't part of our nature but is socially constructed.
> Such a statement, such a feminist position, could only occur against
> a background of a Christian space.

er itz a kind shorty, it's as to say charia don't exist befor mahomet, or
infibulation is it usefull to make a research of 'paternity suit' in
all turpitude ? archeologie of back world is over, look around, no more
montain, just morn fields

> in South Africa, the ANC always appealed to universal Enlightenment
> values, and it was Buthelezi, the regime's black supporter in the pay
> of the CIA, who appealed to special African values.

humm i must admit itz a nice narrative proof by contradiction.

> It's not enough for gays
> to say, "we want our story to be heard." No, the gay narrative must
> contain a universal dimension, in the sense that their implicit claim

but hombre er..'the gay narrative'-contain- an universal dimension
and not cause 'it must' but cause rather it's simply obvious, and for some
times, anyway our west culture could easily testify of specially if
you chose an opus dei guide for visiting the vatican museum these late
days, these ones you know when balaguer is holly, these dont go
without saying er without 'narrative' as you would say..hell dont think i
jeer at your public kantian declaration of faith with community hybrid, why
not, but hope there is a place for narrative of not only bad intention and
desire to harm az this guy chomsky seems  to want to let its chances, but
also a kind of middle class sandwich-football-donutz narrative, well, mine &
who dare to pretend it is so related in so minute detail


Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:44:23 -0600
From: Bruce Sterling <>
Subject: That Lovable Zizek Guy

>BS: You describe the internal structure of anarchist groups as being
>authoritarian. Yet, the model popular with younger activists today is
>explicitly anti-hierarchical and consensus-oriented. Do you think
>there's something furtively authoritarian about such apparently
>freewheeling structures?

>Zizek: Absolutely. And I'm not bluffing here; I'm talking from
>personal experience. Maybe my experience is too narrow, but it's not
>limited to some mysterious Balkan region. I have contacts in England,
>France, Germany, and more - and all the time, beneath the mask of
>this consensus, there was one person accepted by some unwritten rules
>as the secret master. The totalitarianism was absolute in the sense
>that people pretended that they were equal, but they all obeyed him.
>The catch was that it was prohibited to state clearly that he was the
>boss. You had to fake some kind of equality. The real state of
>affairs couldn't be articulated. Which is why I'm deeply distrustful
>of this "let's just coordinate this in an egalitarian fashion." I'm
>more of a pessimist. In order to safeguard this equality, you have a
>more sinister figure of the master, who puts pressure on the others
>to safeguard the purity of the non-hierarchic principle. This is not
>just theory. I would be happy to hear of groups that are not caught
>in this strange dialectic.

*Hey, I've got one of those.

*An online, feudal-theocratic organization since 1998.

bruces, Viridian Pope-Emperor


Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 17:00:04 -0500
From: Doug Henwood <>
Subject: Re: <nettime> Zizek interview

quigley wrote:

>Thanks for posting the interview, Doug.  I have to say, as one who has
>read a lot of Zizek's work, attended lectures, and sat through a
>semester-long seminar with him at the New School, I'm amazed that you were
>able to get such direct and straightforward answers to your questions.

Thanks. I told him it was for a youthful audience of punk rockers (it 
was originally for Punk Planet, but the editor cut it at the last 
minute), and evidently he kept that in mind!



#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: contact: