> But you , Doug, don't have much ability to influence North Korean
>policy either, or the policy of 4-5 billion people's governments
>anymore than you can change or control the U.S. government.
I thought a fundamental principle of socialism was solidarity with the oppressed around the world. It's interesting that you & Carrol think that we should limit our critiques to our own country, which doesn't have much to do with international solidarity, does it?
>So, why pronouncements about how N. Korea should change it bizarre,
>exotic , "oriental", "otherdrenched" personality cult, etc. anymore
>than pronouncements about the U.S. pulling out troops and giving
>reparations ?
We've been through this already. Giant pictures of the leader all over the place are a pretty creepy thing, regardless of the location of the pix or the ethnicity of the leader.
I'd love to see that tea service that Sukarno gave to Kim Il Sung, wouldn't you? And that plastic heron from Billy Graham!
>Zizek's comparison of the N. Korean conception of Kim Il Sung as
>leader and European courtly love is gross Eurocentrism, ridiculous
>universalizing of European history and consciousness,
Hmm, so they have nothing in common? Nothing like a dehumanizing veneration of the adored object?
> and this from an intellectual trend which is so quick to deny
>universals and essences.
Zizek is not part of the hated "postmodernist" trend, if that's what you're saying.
Just saw the man this morning at Verso's office; he thanked me for forwarding him all the comments from his critics here, and said wait til you see his book on "totalitarianism," due out in January. Very pro-Lenin, or so he claims.
Doug