prole Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 if you're an elitist douchebag, that is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 [video:youtube] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehead Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 [video:youtube]v=Gw8LPn4irao So, do the most potential solutions to the politico-economic environmental crises lie outside of the State and the markets as the philosopher suggests? Is he suggesting a libertarian approach but doesn’t the wrong application of it also lead to the crisis of the commons? Or, are the extraordinary concentrations of power characteristic of late stage capitalism necessary to transition to the next stage of humanity? Will wholesale emancipated individuality eventually be seen as a transient feature of late 20th/early 21th century life? Regarding one salient development, there didn’t seem to be much fanfare surrounding the announcement of the creation of artificial life designed using a computer. What should be the logical response to the monumental landmark announced by J. Craig Venter? Is the poison also potentially the antidote (e.g., quantum information science)? If it were possible, should we send probes into one of the many futures to assess the potential outcome of this development? If art is a lie that lets us recognize the truth, should we exalt art over science? Will hubris be the defining feature of humanity? Should we worship an embodiment of the notion of creative destruction (what the Hindus call Shiva) as one of the demiurges? Is sanity merely a matter of reference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrox Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 [video:youtube] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted June 13, 2010 Author Share Posted June 13, 2010 [video:youtube]v=Gw8LPn4irao Zizek is a trip isn't he? More often than not he totally nails it. The contrast between him and the "geniuses" cited in the original article couldn't be starker. Apparently, communists are the only ones seriously contemplating a living future on Earth instead of trying to jettison off it or attempting to transcend its challenges altogether by wiring an electro-pocket pussy to their Ipads. So, do the most potential solutions to the politico-economic environmental crises lie outside of the State and the markets as the philosopher suggests? Is he suggesting a libertarian approach but doesn’t the wrong application of it also lead to the crisis of the commons? Hasn't this question always been been central to political practice in the modern era? One Big Union, the Party, and other forms of collective organization lying "outside" these realms have been the means through which subaltern power is expressed. While Zizek is fairly dismissive of democratic socialism, the State is obviously still a terrain of struggle and neither have we somehow transcended the fundamentally mass nature of politics. A "libertarian approach" is a fallacy when our challenges are irreducibly social and global. That's the kernel of communism, as I see it. The failures of the Left post-'68 can largely be placed at the doorstep of "libertarian" identity politics and a retreat from the analytic centrality of capitalism and the move toward lifestyle politics. Or, are the extraordinary concentrations of power characteristic of late stage capitalism necessary to transition to the next stage of humanity? Is thinking of human history in terms of "stages" helpful for you? The notion that extraordinary concentrations of power are necessary for anything beyond the existence and reproduction of themselves seems a teleological quagmire. Will wholesale emancipated individuality eventually be seen as a transient feature of late 20th/early 21th century life? Is that what you call this? If so, why would you bother dabbling in anything critical or describing itself as liberatory? Regarding one salient development, there didn’t seem to be much fanfare surrounding the announcement of the creation of artificial life designed using a computer. What should be the logical response to the monumental landmark announced by J. Craig Venter? Do you see much fanfare regarding anything "real" anymore? We've passed though the looking glass into pure spectacle. Maybe nuking the Gulf Spill or a massive alien landing will wake us from our slumber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.