Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Žižek vs Peterson

at almost 3 minutes long this debate is an easy bite-sized snippet showcasing two titans of garbage at their most concise
[Image: JazGXPG.png]
Right from the start, the event was not actually a debate, an event with two speakers and a devastatingly vague speaking topic "Happiness: Marxism vs Capitalism", and I think it was presumed that Žižek would champion Marxism and Peterson would champion capitalism, which is a pretty shit assumption.

The structure of the "debate" was a 30 minute prepared statement each, followed by a 10 minute response. Given there was no moot, both speakers were almost doomed to speak past each other for 30 minutes and have very little time to actually speak to differences in their worldviews and whatever.

Even worse, Peterson appeared to have turned up to the event with no idea who Žižek actually was or what any of his ideas were, dedicating his 30 minute block to a bizarrely clumsy and poorly-read criticism of the Communist Manifesto, then an appeal to GDP as his slam-dunk proof that capitalism was good.

Žižek in his 30 minute block read from a prewritten script that occasionally ripped into Peterson by chance but basically talked to the topic of the "debate", starting by addressing China which utilises both communism and capitalism, and then repudiating how we value happiness, Marxism, capitalism, democracy.

In Peterson's 10 minute response started with "haha wtf I thought this guy was an uninformed Marxist hack who I could take down with a couple of one-liners haha"
then they just made out for the next half hour or so. I did not listen to the audience questions.
[Image: JazGXPG.png]
Honestly enjoyed Žižek's 30 minute bit in it's own right, but worth listening at 1.5x speed
[Image: JazGXPG.png]
Man I got no internet, and this is 2.5 hours of not being able to listen properly at work.

I will save this for later.
Liams Wrote:make a car out of scrap metal from genie lamps
Yeah the word debate really needs to be in quote marks. There's not that much to organize before a debate that would take priority over getting your two speakers talking about the same thing.
Maybe I need to read the communist manifesto myself because I didn't mind Peterson's opening at all. He gave himself a mission, and carried it out. Zizek in comparison had more of a stream of consciousness. I don't think Zizek should be championing 'half' communist China's economic success as for the happiness of the majority. You can't look over the human rights abuse, historically or right now.
Something I don't get: he states how white liberals degrade themselves, which has a "profit" of embodying "the lie of Identity Politics" allowing people to assign their own identity. He then compares blaming their European roots and external enemies as similar to Nazism. Which side is he on here?
"In difficult times, you’re going to be saying something. Don’t talk about how big your challenge is. Talk about how big your dick is." ~ Joel Dongsteen

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)