Zizek within the limits of mere reason

[Chris Burford]

At 18:26 18/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Ken:
>>Give it up, you have no idea what Zizek (or, I suspect, Hegel) is talking
>>about, and I suspect you aren't very interested in actually figuring it out.
>>Bad faith and insincerity are hardly good substitutes for trying to
>>understand
>>something (I did mention burning bridges didn't I?).  Your 'critique' is
>>meaningless and pays no specific attention to any of Zizek's writings.
>
>Assertion after assertion -- no evidence.  Getting into a snit because
>someone doesn't agree with your interpretation?  There is no
>authoritarianism like liberalism that wants to claim the mantle of "radical
>thought."
>
>*****   The Independent (London)
>April 24, 1999, Saturday
>SECTION: FEATURES; Pg. 12
>HEADLINE: THE BOOKS INTERVIEW: THE GIANT OF LJUBLJANA; SLAVOJ ZIZEK,
>SLOVENIA'S SUPERSTAR PHILOSOPHER, BACKS THE WAR AGAINST HIS EX-BOSSES. GUY
>MANNES-ABBOTT MET HIM
>
>BYLINE: Guy Mannes-Abbott
>
>...The Slovenians were the first to be attacked by Slobodan Milosevic's
>Serbia, in the three-day war of 1990. That conflict revealed the extent of
>international apathy towards Milosevic's aggressive nationalism, which has
>culminated in the Kosovan war. Today, Zizek lambasts "the interminable
>procrastination" of Western governments and says that "I definitely support
>the bombing" of Milosevic's regime by Nato. But he argues that Milosevic is
>also symptomatic of the New World Order, and that our real focus should be
>on creating "transnational political movements" to counter it....   *****
>
>Did Zizek write a letter of protest to _The Independent_, demanding the
>retraction of the headline that says "Slavoj Zizek...Backs the War..." and
>of his quated statement ("I definitely support the bombing")?  It's much
>more honest to take the position that Max, Nathan, Chris Burford, etc. took
>here.

Eh?

As I understand the NLR article, Zizek was criticising the west's policy of
appeasement of undemocratic regimes which would at least partially collude
with the west while continuing to suppress national rights. I am wary of
what innuendo Yoshie is attributing to me about "supporting the bombing". I
supported the right of the Albanian Kosovo's to fight back, and considered
they should be aided so long as they did not violate the national rights of
others. 

But the imperialist policy of appeasement can be seen at present in Russia.
The west is probably well pleased with the Duma election. It restricts the
power of the Communists, and so long as Putin is committed to working with
the west, he will in due course learn that no matter how many Chechens he
kills, it will weaken Russia to try to solve this contradiction by force.

Zizek's language may be obscure, but as a Slovene it is not surprising that
he supported the rights of other nationalities of the former Yugoslavia not
to be oppressed by Serb chauvinism.

Yoshie seems only to be opposed to the war policy of imperialism, and not
to its appeasement policy. That will not undermine imperialism's claim to
global humanitarian legitimacy.

Chris Burford

London