Zizek Victory Thread

Fuck you

see, zizek fanboys don't even listen. You brainlet fags just masturbate to his strong foreign voice as it hits your dopamine receptors.

I think they're both fundamentally wrong and this debate is stupid, but they are at least civil, which is more than you can say about a great deal of political discourse these days.

Based Zizek, what's his entry level book for a pleb like me? Or should i read Marx first?

Attached: Ideology is Natural.jpg (1946x1346, 735K)

Zizek has been agreeing with JP on a lot.

For what?

Attached: 1527325651528.png (600x399, 337K)

He's being nice. At the end of the day he's not a mean guy.

Read For They Know Not What They Do, then Sublime Object. Don't read Sublime Object first.

Why'd you think he dislikes JBP anyway? He was having problems with SJWs and JBP is pretty much the only one who stands up to them.

>>two mental cripples babbling for an hour

but who has winning?

Peterson fags on suicide watch

Okay heh

Attached: DE60F1D0-A38F-4875-BE9C-00484EC69353.gif (500x255, 964K)

He doesn't want to turn away his audience, just inform them they are being misinformed

unironically based

Cope

Attached: image.png (674x728, 941K)

Sublime Object can't be understood without having a year of Lacanian vocabolary on your back.

For something contemporary and light, Mark Fishers Capitalist realism after the Commonist Manifesto.

only thing exposed tonight was zizeks transphobia, twitter has cancelled him

Where can I find a stream/pirated copy of the debate?

>I think they're both fundamentally wrong and this debate is stupid,
I do too and that was basically my supposition going in, but they honestly both seem like good men.

youtu.be/WGRC5AA1wF0

you guys are delusional, that wasn't even a debate.

i thought they were gonna fucking make out at the end

If this debate accomplished anything, it roused my cynicism for both psychoanalysis and most continental philosophy.

It was amazing.
Zizek was ok, but Peterson won.

0/10 didn't even mention fistfucking in the garden of eden

>"read more"
>not a debate

I posted this in the other thread but

>why the fuck did he put his hand on zizek shoulder when he was talking smiling awkwardly did he have a retard moment or something

he been canceled sis

MY GUY WON
YOUR GUY LOST

Attached: f4f.jpg (593x448, 32K)

I read Mark Fishers Capitalist realism and think it was comfy. What are more commie books analyzing popculture and depression from being wagie?

Attached: images (12).jpg (669x1080, 62K)

Commies are getting fucking desperate.

Not even 5-10 years ago they were all aboard the diversity identity politics train.

Now look at this backpedaling. Their days are numbered.

The psychoanalysis made me cringe but everything else was great

As a guy partial to Peterson and who thinks he's a good eprson he was simply not equipped to go against an actual intellectual entity. I feel bad for the dude.

>peterson won
Where are the Marxist user?

wtf im a post-modern cultural marxist now

It's dead, jim

why doesn't he just talk normal, it's not that fucking hard when you're a freaking adult lol

>I think they're both fundamentally wrong and this debate is stupid
Why do people say this without clarifying your own views? It just come across as pretentious.

How could anyone have this take

dude he blanked out after shaking his hand. he got star struck as they say

this is bait right

Who are these Marxists you are talking about?

Anyone who refers to themselves as one. Absconding with the banner makes them culpable.

BUT WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS!?!?

LMAO

the real winner was the security force that stopped the designated shooter

You just know

Attached: chQ97_DOxjFxbjdrmNXgJFg0KHXRSuwGUl_HLn8NGtY.jpg (986x661, 73K)

Don't you mean neo post modern marxist peterstein?

Part of his sophistry. peterson called him out on being an entertainer, should have mentioned the gish galloping but Peterson was so lost he wouldn't be able to latch on to one of zizeks offhand grand or absurd claims and go after it.

lol someone's going through a crisis of self-examination. Maybe the "cultural marxist" narrative sold to you wasn't true at all?

see below you, brainwashed fanboy

Peterson basically in tears. It's like someone meeting the Buddha

he been cancelled honey

kill yourself

Hi, Butterfly! :)
Would you like to submit to me now? ;b

fuck i dident notice this cringe as fuck omg

Please enlighten us on your great philosophy compared to these mental cripples.

BTFO'd
Zizek thought you well

Attached: wyp.png (500x621, 145K)

not really. As an ecological ethno-fascist, they are both pointless.

Attached: 1433454644.png (1242x1699, 1.25M)

Was pretty weird how JBP kept resorting to psychoanalysis because that's the field he is most familiar with.

What if in the proshesh of shetting your housh in order, you realishe that the reashon your housh ish in dishorder ish the schtructure of the shoshiety you live in?

Seriously. I kept imagining myself in his position just not knowing what to say.

Capitalism is indestructible, it easily absorbs and molds whatever you throw at it, commies thought that they could use these marginalized groups as the vanguard of their revolution, but now they have to renounce them as their struggle becomes just another corporate product and marketing strategy.

A North American yokel vs. a European sophisticate. Of course Zizek won. It couldn't have gone any other way.

Zizeks two movies

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pervert's_Guide_to_Ideology

yea...i feel bad

Attached: 1451145031200.png (633x758, 23K)

I got the impression Peterson got out of the debate wanting to have a couple of beers with Zizek. He seemed infatuated with him, like his initial idea of who he would be was smashed and what he actually got was an absolute lad.

How many times did they enthusiastically announce that they agreed with each other?

Unga tribe victorious because unga tribe best tribe

>as a
>(insert niche political ideology that makes me feel as though I am superior and smarter than my peers)-ist
oh, user

Attached: 1554457183244.png (964x898, 2.49M)

>ecological ethno-fascist
Is it about China and their greenhouse gas emisson? Then I'm interested.

Right. It has to be the feeling of being special and different. It's just tempting to pretend it's something more complex than that.

>Peterson basically in tears
when isn't he?

you are right it is pretentious, I shouldnt have said it

It's because Zizek isn't the scarecrow of communism he is used to arguing against.

The controlled opposition was supposed to lose.

Ill give zizek this, watching peterstein squirm as zizek was poking at the JQ was hilarious.

Shut up

i think the dude was just mentally tired

Suprised he didn't Google a joke

thank you I was afraid to post this because all the mean altrights of Yea Forums mocks Mark Fisher for been committed suicide.

youtube.com/watch?v=wr8BVozyp1g

I felt the worst when Jordan started fanboying Zizek then got visibly shook when he realised the debate was still ongoing.

genocide the browns

Sounds like Zizek converted the man.

Attached: tripfags.jpg (800x450, 46K)

I posted the 2nd one, the first one is much better

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pervert's_Guide_to_Cinema

i think the reason zizek did not understand is cultural. peterson exists in north america for a reason and NA needs Petersons to remind them how to wipe their own asses..

It was a friendly discussion no one got owned mainly because Zizek refused to defend marxism in any meaningful way. The most interesting for me was to realize that Zizek is a reactionary, he laid out the exact case as a reactionary would and then instead of going back argued for stasis which after a certain passing of time could only be categorized as reactionary. Zizek's deep criticism of Peterson was that of the implicit liberal ideology of progress. I didn't think it would turn out this way but fundamentally I'm on Zizek's side even though I largely consider him a pseud. All around a strange event for me. People thinking that there was some deep ownage going on just weren't able to intellectually follow the debate. They agreed on 90% of non-semantic points brought up. The fundamental difference was Zizek's firm Reaktion to Peterson's prudent hope for progress, but they actually talked about what matters, which is a good.

Attached: Saint Paul.jpg (599x445, 173K)

Peterson couldn't help but bow in the presence of greatness.

This. People saying either exposed the other must be shitposting or deluded. Zizek repeatedly agreed with Peterson

Yeah kek feel really bad for Peterson.

peterson at this moment
youtu.be/Zzu8ZxBHMWk
rape anthem

Literally

I don't think either side "won" (they mostly talked past one another) but peterson fanboys were hoping for moments to go in youtube compilations or some nice jabs and burns that simply never happened. zizek came across much more humorous and open, and only went in on peterson once (where are the marxists?) and it really deflated peterson's serious concern act. zizek also seemed to win over the crowd with all the jokes, peterson came across as dry and lifeless in comparison

why?

literally Zizek's schtick

Someone pls post a rec of the stream I got here late.

Attached: benis.png (867x1199, 870K)

Zizek made a Marxist analysis during his 40mins. If you understand Marxism then that is clear. Zizek isn't a reactionary, he's just a bread and butter Marxist which seems reactionary in today's liberal hellworld.

We need to master neuroregeneration so that we can bring back EVOLA to rape Zizek. Literally.

I mean Fisher is a depressed broke dude and his book doesn't discuss anything like a commie commune or an afterlife to a fall of capital. Like accelerationism, it's really just descriptive.
Hence even Zizek giving up on a positive outlook.
Zizek has contrarian (to leftists) opinons on military that didn't make it into the discussion at all.

Attached: captainism.jpg (640x640, 55K)

Attached: Zizek loss.jpg (512x485, 38K)

Nothing with the quantity of population, only focus on the quality(purity)?
In eco-eth-fasc 60 billion 50% brown 50% white earth is worse than 100 billion 100%white?

hahaha

The fact that Peterson was surprised by Zizek agreeing with him is what exposed Peterson as a grifter who doesn't even bother to research things he's going to talk about.

youtube.com/watch?v=WGRC5AA1wF0

>boxer tries to hug his opponent mid-fight
>gets punched
as i'm typing this Peterson and Zizek are heading to a bar to finish their conversation over some beers

Psychoanalysis is Zizek's entire play book

you're so disgusting

This, and like a jew, he slithered away from that label. Those holding up the flags of their ideologies need to be held culpable.

This debate is going to be released in book form isn't it.

read less than nothing, then you'll understand why he's talks all follow a similar format, because the true theory is not applicable to that setting

Exactly, Zizek was on so many levels, he was clearly just fucking with him.
Zizek was being nice, but Peterson clearly didn't really know anything about Zizek coming into this, and he could tell once it began. He agreed with him on many things because Peterson's understanding of Marxism is so shallow, there were no weeds to dig into. Like you said, Peterson was clearly infatuated with him, but I'm sure Zizek wouldn't mind never seeing him again.

nigga press the mofuking enter key!!!!1

I mean sure zizek won but he also rambled into his own routine without much relevance for the last 20 minutes.

>The controlled opposition was supposed to lose
JBP was the one who challenged Zizek in the first place

Zizek didn't know where the fuck he was an often appealed to a golden mean to make his nonsense seem less radical. "all negative feelings that are framed in a moral context is pathological so just let your wife cheat on you, you don't want to feel bad feelings and there is no character that might grow from negative feelings like conservatives claim, also there is no truth beside what we create in our own minds because god doesn't exist"

Then he throws the idiots a bone and says something bad about social justice warriors so they don't find him a total anathema, if they even catch the grand claims he makes before be moves on to some incoherent anecdote or platitude.

more like because it's the first marxist he's ever actually spoken to

Umm user....your not getting it.

Sam Hyde was the shooter

That will come down to whether Peterson's shame over his performance or his greed to make money wins out.

Attached: PGmk6hi.png (872x109, 9K)

not thinking someone is a winner is the same as saying claiming someone is a winner is being a brainlet its just cope

zizek tackled all the talking points he had outlined in his essays published online, postmodern neo marxist, peterson not actually knowing anything(who noticed peterson never dropped the jungbomb) and now the youtube essayists will make stinkpieces about him proving zizeks win

peterson did fine tho, no worse than zizek at least...

yeah, this is so weird that peterson's subreddit is torn apart now

What did she think of this debate, bros?

Attached: 1502673559528.jpg (900x1200, 113K)

Thanks comrad/bucko.

Why wouldn't they? Zizek isn't an identity politics leftist, and idpol's are the people Peterson goes after

fuck off back to plebbit

>stalemate for capitalists vs communists
lol no. Capitalism has more than proven it's superior to communism in every single way.
Capitalism = bread stores
Communism = bread lines

based reddit spy

I agree.
Also, the last part, about Trump not being a fascist. When will people understand this?

kek

Read Hegel first.

samefag

That counts as a DESTRUCTION and OWNAGE in my books desu senpaitachi

IN CONCLUSION

JP is what we always knew him to be; a superficial thinker only smarter than dumb liberals and ID leftists.

she doesn't think

like come on

He didnt. He admited to be marxist just not posrmodernist.

The weak willed will always go with whoever appears stronger

The fact is, zizeks brand of marxism is a backtracking after the failed identity politics revolution was coopted.

The truth is, we are not some rural agrarian proletariat anymore.

If there is a revolution in a developed nation it will be 'right wing'. Zizek is on the out. Radicalism traditionalism is coming back.

Realistically though, there will be no revolution and this foul capitalism we have now will only grow more involuted for our lifetime.

they both did terribly up until the closing questions.
Peterson was, predictably, on the verge of tears during his diatribe.
Zizek read, unintelligibly, from a pre-written script that almost completely missed the point.
and when they finally got into the swing of things they agreed on everything

Which was your guy Naziboi?

Zizek stated that, for the left, there are more ways that the political correctness. Do you agree with him?

So my understanding of this:
>Jordan immediately attacks classic marxism and the communist manifesto
>Zizek partially addresses 'happiness' and makes no real defense of communism, but attacks capitalism
>Peterson comes to realize Zizek is not his archetype of evil leftist and starts hitting on him and asks why he's associating himself with Marxist when he's so cool
>Zizek attacks Peterson's conception of modern marxists by asking him where are his ideal of Marxists?
>Peterson can't name names but brings up a statistic and explains in a roundabout manner they're just there, and that includes SJW's
>they sorta fellate each other the rest of the debate, Peterson getting laughed at because his demeanor and speech is so uncomfortable
>awkward ending remarks from Jordan about learning new views, rally from Zizek
So am I a brainlet or did 'happiness' and the 'capitalism vs. communism' subtitle not really go anywhere or barely got addressed? As a debate this kinda felt like a mess.

is that ontilogicool?

Because Peterson to his dismay found out that he actually agreed with the tenants of Marx as outlined by Zizek

The lobsters have found a shiny new lobster master and Peterson falls down in the hierarchy kek

"no"

Attached: file.png (722x747, 100K)

Dumb cutie-ironyposter

>When zizek starts going off about toilets

Attached: 1551641434229.png (226x267, 68K)

Given that the title of the book is not OF life but FOR life, it's clear that this is a larp.

>music by Brian Eno
>one of the movies directed by Jeff Mangums wife

How does he know so many cool people?

Attached: Hegel.gif (282x400, 174K)

Because Zizek was meant to offer a defence of Marxism; which he didn't do, and explicitly admitted an economic Marxists model lacks relevance. On the other hand, JP didn't attack Marxism or defend capitalism and looked amateurish in the first hour

>baseless claims
whats new

Attached: 4.png (657x423, 50K)

>but peterson fanboys were hoping for moments to go in youtube compilations or some nice jabs and burns that simply never happened
>peterson fanboys
Have you actually read the threads about it on Yea Forums? It was 80% of it Zizekfags pretending everything the guy said was a "burn" that Peterson was just too dumb to notice when for the most part they were either harmless questions or silly idiosyncratic banter.

"yes"

Attached: 1531381766531.jpg (960x960, 130K)

jeff has a wife???

>They agreed on 90% of non-semantic points brought up
I think they just didn't address the bulk of what was said, they would just pick out one thing after a stream of consciousness and claim they agree with it.

>this is what brainlets who cannot actually engage with the material focus on

Attached: wigners-friend.jpg (600x174, 22K)

yes, post modernity as envisioned by knee-chee

JP should debate an actual postmodern neo-marxist, like Stiegler

Only because Peterson acted like a fucking schoolboy improvising to a lesson he didnt prepare for. He should have simply said that dog ate his copy of Zizeks book and couldnt read it.

Lots of Chapos there right now

Time will tell, not really here to debate you, just discuss.

We learned that Zizek has given up any hope that radical change would bring something better and we've also learned that Peterson doesn't read anymore.

I'm Jeff's wife. Ask me anything.

>pretentious image macro

Peterson agreed with certain aspects of Marx's work in the past.

Yeah because he got blown the fuck out lmao
And it's usually the other way around

actual postmodern neo-marxists don't debate

It was people who aren't suckered into the illusion focus on. They look for ways to get a laugh out of two pseuds and their publicity stunt.

Zizek kept it civil but actually was pretty brutal. He numerously implied Peterson should read a fucking book, is naive and ignorant etc.

zizek propped up identity politics 10 years ago.

Now he realizes he is both wrong and a relic of a failed revolution. So he goes back to more traditionalist marxism as his defense.

they don't exist

They're good lads overall.

does he semen stains your mountaintops every night?

i can't believe zizek actually used pic related as a pivot point to destroy peterson. it literally made him fumble for words when it was his turn..

Attached: 1481784083908.gif (440x440, 2.37M)

Yeah, Astra Taylor, and she looks like a jewess.

If anything this "debate" might make some American followers of Peterson actually read some European authors.

Overall I think Zizek went easy on Peterson after he noticed they were mostly preoccupied with the same issues and the Peterson simply didn't have the theoretical background Zizek has.

I don't fucking care about either dude and didn't watch the debate but my fucking god this is a mewling and pathetic post.

>As a debate this kinda felt like a mess.
that's what happens when the jannie moderator is immensely less intelligent than both shitposters

Radicalism traditionalism is a trend

>zizek propped up identity politics 10 years ago.
source for this?

What did he say?

This face says everything

Attached: Zrzut ekranu (86).png (1920x1080, 1.1M)

its one of zizeks models, keep up buddy

what do you even mean by this?
he should be held guilty for the crimes of the soviet union because he uses marxist methods of analysis?

JP was like "please, don't kill me. I agree with you" the whole time

Zizek needs to level up his opponent. When the fuck are we gonna see him and Land together?

when?

Peterson should have debated Linkola.

He was always edgy and critical to new left, better post your proofs

Not in mine but in our daughter's.

That's what the debate itself was set-up to make you think, you fool.

If that's what really happened then it was stupid because Zizek never explained WHY Peterson was wrong. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he was just recommending literature that Peterson would find interesting considering they both agreed on almost everything they discussed.

this desu

The "who are these neo-marxists?" bit made me hopeful that Peterson would actually try to read some of the French authors he likes to attack so much.

I know he won't but for a second there it seemed like he had a moment of doubt.

JBP: *Cries*
Zizek: "Awsh, shit 'ere ve go again *sniff*."

>my gott, this guy is so fucking boring

>still being up at 5am

I know it is, you posted it in the other thread pseud.

do you think jordan will offer his daughter to Zizek now?

Attached: jbp daughter.jpg (576x1024, 53K)

>this projection
This is the hardest I've ever seen Zizek agreeing with anyone in a conversation.

Can't wait for some youtuber to cut this debate up into a 19 minute clip of Zizek bullying Peterson a la Vic Berger. A lot of great potential in these two hours

Notice that Zizek quickly agreed with JP claim that SJWs are committing a sleight of hand with marxist ideology.

When Zizek exclaimed his terror at China, I could only think of Land.

"I don't want the totalitarian nightmare of China"
"Why don't you want good things?"

Fake and gay. You don't need Land to understand accelerationism, he said nothing original.
It's all marxism with scifi fanfiction.

Historical precedent tells us, yes

Attached: image.jpg (467x627, 54K)

its 11:05 in Toronto dude not even that late?

If you're going to go that road he needs to read Kant, Hegel, Freud, and Lacan all before reaching Zizek.

Imagine fucking Zizek.

Hot.

This hero worship shit is so fucking cringeworthy

Accelerationism is Deleuzo-Guattarianism more so than Marxism

Fucking cringe.
But you do us a great service.

Attached: horror.jpg (992x858, 213K)

He literally adressed most Petersons point in initial expose. For example the notion that capitalism is ultimate system was countered with example of china which shows that capitalism doesnt need democracy or personal freedom and can turn into technocratic totalitarian nightmare etc etc. Problem is that Peterson didnt get that Zizeks points were challenging to his ideas and simply agreed with them.

Attached: 3955BADD-2EBD-405E-ACBD-CD0D7258B512.jpg (1254x1734, 362K)

Which is pretty sad because JP talking points were shallow and disjointed as fuck. he was more sharing general platitudes, and pop-psychology.

Does Zizek have the best daughter?

Are you trans?

modern discourse in a nutshell

Attached: yeah.jpg (375x231, 14K)

dude I just land is a reference to accelerationism... shows how self-conscious you guys are just breathe

this didn't even happen. when zizek mentions accelerationism he's referring to the classic althusserian version

Peterson was doing a Pinker, arguing it was capitalism that elaviated living standards since the time of the industrial revolution.
Zizek pointed out that le free market won't do anything for global problems such as climate issues and so another form of governance is cruicial (and also that he's pessimist it will come).
Nobody thinks our technological advances will revert tomorrow and capitalism can't be stopped anyway, so defending it and the stratification of power is just unnecessary.

Attached: kacyh.jpg (693x924, 48K)

That's his daughter...

Zizek isn't my hero though

Attached: a.jpg (250x250, 51K)

Land is an edgy Deleuze with that distinct schizoboomer flavour.

No

Welcome to the Desert of the Real discusses and in a round about way supports the involuted fractionalization of identity politics based on his ideas of relativism.

The Parallax View expands on this (while you can see he is realizing his mistake with Living in the End Times)

I have a feeling The Universal Exception expands on this, but I have not read it.

And what is DG?
The tragedy of marxist failure turned as farce.

Attached: oyster shuckers.jpg (777x960, 112K)

Are you mine? :)

That was the deal so he would go easy on him

ur mums gonna be mewling these testes later tonight m8

Althusser too.

...

People under capitalism never have to wait in line or go without bread. It never happens.

Thats one of his wifes

>Problem is that Peterson didnt get that Zizeks points were challenging to his ideas
Yeah, it was clear that this will go over both peterson's and his fans' heads.

>Africa, Asia, India, Latin America

>Welcome to the Desert of the Real discusses and in a round about way supports the involuted fractionalization of identity politics based on his ideas of relativism.
>The Parallax View expands on this (while you can see he is realizing his mistake with Living in the End Times)
>I have a feeling The Universal Exception expands on this, but I have not read it.
more like "i have not read any of these but i know no one else has either"

KOLTORAL MARTZISM *sniff sniff* AN SO ON AN SO FORT. MEESTER PEETERSEN,*sniff sniff* WOULD YOU LET ME *sniff sniff* FACK YOUR DAUTER? I WOULD LAV TO FACK YOUR GIRL, PLEESE.

yeah they just die instead, much more convenient!

I don't care what Zizek and other memers say, there's a fuck ton of cross over and comradery between pomo and Marxism. That being said Zizek did "win" the "debate"

>People under capitalism never have to wait in line or go without bread. It never happens.
lol, yeah food banks totally aren't a thing and like a fifth of burgers definitely aren't on food stamps either

Edge Pinker
He's basically all of the worst aspects of Zizek and Peterson.

Attached: acceloclean.png (585x370, 72K)

No.

No thats his ex wife "fashion model and writer Analia Hounie, daughter of an Argentine Lacanian psychoanalyst"

I don't even care who won but Peterson looked lost and like he was about to cry.

When a literal tankie wins the free market of ideas.

The only thing I have not read was the universal exception. The others are his 'landmark' works and most people who engage with his ideas read them.

I dont have time to read every goddam book though. I am a fucking layman after all. Not that any of the retards on this website would ever admit to be anything less than amateurs/

>Anal Honey
She latter married Lionel Butz

I mentioned in my last post land was just a reference to accelerationism I dont know why it has made you so mad

Zizek always aggressively agrees with people like this. I remember him once explaining how he uses "you don't have any idea how right you are" instead of "you're wrong" purely because of its dialectical effect, but don't know what lecture it was.

witnessed

>66666
fucking demon mammon begone

>HE MENTIONED LAND!!!
>n-n-not wh-w-what i m-meant
>MUMMY GOT A JOB!

Read Marx.

lmao i can totally imagine this happening

>Zizek has been describing himself as a pessimist lately

What was the black pill that finally did him in? Reading Baudrillard? Fishers suicide?

>of course I agree with you
>proceeds to explain why you're wrong
You haven't been listening very closely, have you?

His view on socialism btw forces me to call him a marxists realist - Under socialism you will be sufficiently miserable to enjoy the little things and the mechanism of redistribution is so decrepit that it will protect nature from human rapacity. It's honest marxism if there ever was one.

Attached: StAloysiusGonzaga.jpg (913x1309, 620K)

your just making his point more valid you know....

he's a sophist

Let us imagine zizek on rogan

Any counterexamples are Not Real Captialism. No I will not explain.

This guy gets it. Why should the affluent middle class be forced to wait in line during a shortage when they can just step over the corpses of the poor to buy overpriced bread instead?

>I couldn't read any of your work

what a hack lmao

PSA: IGNORE ALL "SOPHIST" LARPERS

The worst part of this debate is all the lowest of the low brow marxists who will use "their victory" to justify saying their retarded shit.

aCcElShItS wrecked by digits again.
youtu.be/DHSQwExlEfk

Attached: Accelerationism.jpg (1440x1109, 468K)

Agreed. Peterson was especially likeable, since he couldn't manipulate the conversation like he normally does.

Thaddeus Russel

>checks the number of Americans currently below the poverty line
>over 40 million
Yeah, capitalism is doing great.

Shouldn't I have sex first

marx's revolutionary subject was the urban proletariat you absolute testicle sack

what the fuck's a marxist, anyway?

samefag

marxism is too prone to fundamental corruption. It's why the "real marxism has never been tried meme" gets laughed at. The manifestations of marxism we get are those that sufficiently become self-propagating systems.

Zizek lacks pragmatism and praxis.

When the fires burn around him, he will sit in his room, irrelevant as always.

Peterstein, who both lost this debate and appears intellectually less knowledgeable, still has a more profound and important affect on he world than zizek and the few Yea Forums trannies that follow him ever will have.

>Implying any Marxist thought Peterson was the gatekeeper to revitalising Marxism within the political landscape
Go back to watching football you fucking goober

Attached: zizek_frown.png (916x935, 918K)

cope

>just ignores reality

ok buddy, enjoy your irrelevancy.

There is an is this interview with Land (vastabrupt.com/2018/08/15/ideology-intelligence-and-capital-nick-land/) where he talks a little bit about his disappointment with the state of affairs in the late nineties.

One gets the impression Land's edge comes from not being over the left's failure.

Nah

He already debated Chomsky didn't he? I don't think there's any actual conservative "intellectual" worth his time. Lobsterguy is as good as they get.

Attached: zizek.png (493x767, 569K)

him namedropping Derrida and Foucault was a bad play given both were frank critics of marxism

How? He really does agree with people when he does that.
An important part of Hegelianism is that seemingly contradictory moments of understanding, if properly developed, connect into a single universal Reason. That's what he's doing. It's very elegant.

The biggest problem with this debate that Peterson did not even read Marx's works.
He is free to hate him obviously, but if you are up against a person who has wrote several academic papers on Marx's works, how can you go into a debate without even reading the original books at least?
It was stupid

>clean your room
Yeah, fucking Peterson and my gam-gam both kek
Shrivel up and do one

YOU are ignoring reality overgrown shitstain. marx never wrote about the rural or the peasants making a revolution, it was the URBAN workers that were going to do it. You like peterson are talking ab out shit you have no idea about. go fuck off and die you boring lifeless shell

yea, the cognitive dissonance in your head knows it too.

modernist bullshit. you still need daddy to tell you what to do and everything will be all right. the true honest pragmatism starts with the acceptance that "praxis" is useless naivete and that in all likelihood nothing will get better.

If Peterson wasn't stupid he wouldn't have been so vehemently anti-Marxist to begin with.

Jared Taylor in a debate on individual rights of association.

I want to watch zizek's tranny fanboys reeee when he agrees with them on racial seperation.

notice though that a peasant is not the same as an agrarian proletarian. for example, russia was mostly made of peasants in 1917, but by 1940 the majority of that sector was shifted into a brand new agrarian proletariat.

what distinguishes one class from the other is their relation to production, not geographical location or relative wealth or what 'sector' they're on.

>and yet all the successful revolutions were agrarian when put in practice

Shows how fucking retarded it all was and how big of an idiot you are.

When Zizek talked about South Africa he veered into dangerous territory

why do you keep calling zizek fans trannies when he explicitly disowns that agenda? did you actually watch the debate?

This is what I believe. Good thought but could never reach any real result.

Revive Evola from the grave to debate zizek

He's already well known for his stance on respectful distain towards your "neighbour"
Its like all the zizek bashers on here don't know a thing about him

evola would have a heart attack and die again the second he witnessed the modern world

because I enjoy making fun of you flimsy, weak, leftist faggots.

this so goddam much.

Peterson has probably never read a nonfiction book longer than 200 pages.

How so? It's a natural reaction to the system we find ourselves in.

Why should zizek have to respect his fanbase? His fans are all mental masturbation pseuds or actual marxist sissyfag pseuds.

>I never read evola the post

The psudeo-intellectualism on this board is too damn high.

Based

reminds me of reviewbrah

If we're talking about who 'won' in this debate, which comes down to who stumped the other one with a solid question, then Zizek won with the 'name some marxists' question.

Peterson won't name the Jews that want to subvert western civilisation (or any civilisation for that matter including their own). You know Peterson was stumped because he goes on the attack, and wouldn't let up as easy if the roles were reversed. As Peterson says 'be very precise in your speech', but his answer to 'name a marxist' was anything but precise. He has created a 'cultural-marxist' strawman which in 2016-2018 was a piece of the puzzle the mainstream was missing in terms of understanding what is wrong with the current politically correct climate.

But Peterson's failure comes from his own lack of specificity, and if you have been following his career since he entered the public space he has essentially gone the way of a stand up comedian. He started out as an edgy voice, took up an agent, and is now watching what he says (i.e political correctness) when it comes to getting to the fundamental issues with our society.

I will say however that Peterson established the groundwork for today's youth to understand Christianity and Christ via a meta-narrative story context, and his Maps of Meaning work is substantial as what it is: a map. But it lacks the final groundwork that cements everything together.

Logos. I'm still figuring this stuff out myself. I'm currently regularly viewing and agreeing with Owen Benjamin and E Michael Richards. I'm reading the Bible (more interested New Testament than Genesis), and starting to discover the breathtaking beauty of Christian thought and values.

I'm not a converted christfag (yet).

Stop making up people to get mad at. Show me these marxist sissyfag pseuds

the proletariat are INDUSTRIAL URBAN WORKERS, fuckface. they are NOT synonymous with farmers or peasants. Marx even wrote about the peasant bourgoisie. You have no fucking idea what youre talking about just like peterson. STOP POSTING FUCKFACE also stop breathing thanks

He should've used that example to make a legitimate marxist observation, but instead made a lazy criticism. I can't see how anyone can say Zizek had control of the debate when he was completely lost

Generally what happens to people who begin to notice similarities within themselves and the target group, he now fears a group of people that make up less than 0.0001% of the population because he feels distain towards himself

evola lived into like the 70s. shit hasn't changed that much.

Only if he debates Max Stirner

The preoccupation with trannies, particularly with calling others trannies, is common among eggs; that user is likely in denial imo.

Insults won't convince anyone of anything important. If you think you're right then you ought to try and help us understand.

only the debate is actually a duel

>YOU KNOW IN SLOVENIA GAY MAN PUT HIS PENIS IN THE EARTH
>I SAY, "WE NEED HERE THOUGHT, NOT ACTION"

I've followed Zizek on-and-off for like 10 years and I still have no idea what the fuck he's talking about, but he's great to listen to.

Why the fuck do the Jews want to subvert western civilization?

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=22&v=7HCVYJzhwIE

>eggs
what the fuck is this tranny vernacular?

Post limit reached

Attached: 1555726527188.jpg (486x418, 52K)

>reads 7 pages of Evola

>there will never a 5 hour Zizek, Evola, Stirner meme table debate
I would unironically pay the money the Peterson vs. Zizek attendees payed to see it.

thats your best?

already outlined roughly in this thread. I suggest rereading the whole thread and look at points of contention with zizek.

ill save you about 5 years. its also bullshit and itself just a cheap substitute for the real. the unreal becoming of ever shifting possibility. christianity is ok but only stratifies this potential. but you have to learn it to unlearn it. like bruce lee, he taught expert martial artists not novices.

Don't worry about it. You'll find out when you learn to accept yourself.

kacy hill is so fucking beautiful bros

You release resources are limited and we, as in societies that exist with first world capitalist models, are going to fall the hardest when the resources run out because we've lost all functional skills?

Do you think people who are insulting you care about changing your mind?
They want you to be triggered. It's literally just bullying. They want you to stop posting forever, and maybe kill yourself.

replace Zizek with Marx himself.

Attached: 1555293949064.png (780x852, 473K)

Im an Evolian you onions boy but you obviously aren't very well versed if you think that there will be a "Traditionalist revolution" or even think that that's a coherent concept

we'll get it in heaven...

Attached: 1555399151609.gif (200x200, 91K)

I said it wont happen. You need to read more Evola clearly.

A right wing revolution is a different, not so coherent beast.

closer to fascism if anything. Also I CLEARLY fucking stated it likely would not happen. Just a better chance than an honest to god commie revolution.

Fuck you have shit reading comprehension.

Attached: 3DE46089-5337-48E9-B596-A9E1307C0651.jpg (320x272, 11K)

>I'm an Evolian

KYS

Attached: 1555394736889.jpg (900x584, 53K)

I can only agree with the sad sentiment that I will likely be disappointed in the long run with my pursuit into comprehending christianity and logos.

But the joy for me is getting ever closer to the elusive 'truth'. I've never felt closer to it in my life.

what do you mean by radical traditionalism? what would you label the society we live in currently? neoliberalism? how will it be different?

>radicalism[sic] traditionalism is coming back
>I clearly stated it would not happen
calm down schizo Evola isnt for your ilk
triggered

inherent biological nature + fascism + spiritualism mashup

Well, that's stupid and unethical.

Unironically laughed out loud.

Attached: 41e5bcdca774a3294b70395ac79d6035.jpg (236x189, 14K)

Attached: 1551729826540.jpg (249x229, 5K)

The proletariat are propertyless wage labourers. "Urban" is not a criterion that matters.