Slavoj Žižek argues that the solution to a conflict dominated by fundamentalists depends on combining two extremes.
It's dogshit
Hamas and Israeli hardliners are two sides of the same coin. The choice is not one hardline faction or the other; it is between fundamentalists and all those who still believe in the possibility of peaceful co-existence. There can be no compromise between Palestinian and Israeli extremists, who must be combatted with a full-throated defense of Palestinian rights that goes hand-in-hand with an unwavering commitment to the fight against anti-Semitism.
Utopian as this may sound, the two struggles are of a piece. We can and should unconditionally support Israel’s right to defend itself against terrorist attacks. But we also must unconditionally sympathize with the truly desperate and hopeless conditions faced by Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories. Those who think there is a “contradiction” in this position are the ones who are effectively blocking a solution.
We can and should unconditionally defend US slave owners' property rights. But we also must unconditionally sympathize with the truly desperate and hopeless conditions faced by enslaved people.
We can and should unconditionally support Nazi Germany's right to rid itself of undesirables. But we also must unconditionally sympathize with the truly desperate and hopeless conditions faced by those placed in concentration camps.
We can and should unconditionally support Israel’s right to defend itself
Fucking why must we do this, Zizek?
For one, I reject any definition of "defense" that includes bombing territory you do not control. Attacking in retribution is what it is. Second, accepting Israel's right to "defend" itself can only occur if you accept the right of "Israel" (meaning a Jewish ethnostate at the eastern end of the Mediterranean) to be something that ought to exist in the first place. To do this is to accept Zionism on its face as some sort of axiom. Why should any self-proclaimed socialist accept any ethnostate? A society that does not accept all cultures as equal is not one that should be propped up or supported.
He also accepts the framing of "anyone opposed to Israel is an anti-semite", but takes the slightly more nuanced view that "anyone who supports Palestinian statehood is not necessarily an anti-Semite". How brave.
Anyway this is trash. Almost everyone now recognizes that letting white people draw lines on a map is a recipe for disaster except in the case of Israel for some reason.
Those who think there is a “contradiction” in this position are the ones who are effectively blocking a solution.
Oh, so ideas are the things blocking things from change. Here, I thought it was the people with guns upholding an imperial project. If we just change people's minds, the conflict will be resolved. What a relief, that sounds way easier.
Did this guy ever even pretend to be a materialist or did lacan fry his brain from the outset?
It is honestly incredible that every single theorist I was introduced to in college social history (as an alternative to Marxist theorists) has turned out to be complete and utter dogshit.
Hamas and Israeli hardliners are two sides of the same coin. The choice is not one hardline faction or the other; it is between fundamentalists and all those who still believe in the possibility of peaceful co-existence.
Bro why should there be "peaceful co-existence" between a people and an invading nation, the very existence of which in any capacity is contingent on the violent forceful displacement and genocide of the said people?
I thought this guy does his research? Doesn't he know about how Israel came to be, how it destroyed Palestine and relentlessly torments the survivors in a concentration camp hell? Has Zizek gone senile?
We can and should unconditionally support Israel’s right to defend itself against terrorist attacks. But we also must unconditionally sympathize with the truly desperate and hopeless conditions faced by Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories. Those who think there is a “contradiction” in this position are the ones who are effectively blocking a solution.
we can and should unconditionally support a lion's right to defend itself from the person its eating. but we also must unconditionally sympathize with the conditions faced by the person being eaten by the lion. those who think there is a contradiction is blocking the solution!
I wasn’t expecting much, but goddamnit did he really have to go with the pogrom comparison? It’s beyond intellectually bankrupt, completely ignores the historical context of pogroms being against the disenfranchised, not committed by them. Using it here has serious “reverse racism” vibes.
"You have to understand here, the HREAL antisemitism is not the idea that Jews cannot integrate into civilizations outside Israel and so forth. Rather the - and this will be controversial - solution to the Israel-Palestine contradiction is that we must support ONLY the hard-line Zionist and Islamist factions if we are to be impartial to reality."
Didn't even need to read the article as soon as I saw the title I knew it would be some stupid shit
Don't even know what to say about this guy anymore. I'm not going to read this whole thing, but the excerpt sounds like a generic western lib op-ed. Is this just what he does now? Goddamn, dude. Either his brain is cooked or he's on the CIA payroll now.
I hope he creamed himself at least 10 times while writing this pseudo intellectual garbage caus that would be the only good thing that it would have brought to this world
okay you folx talked about how he's the court jester for neoliberalism and like somewhere in my stupid head i still harbored some doubt that even if he's a lib, he has his own thoughts and like some kind of unique perspective that is worth understanding critically. but this is just the most braindead strain of liberal zionism it is possible to hold. it is awash in cliches. if there is some kind of hidden bit, it's that he is proud of its useless stupidity. good fucking god.