Kelley wrote:
> well, there is *still* nothing new in the analysis. it has been said, at
> least on this list, from its very beginning:
The sad thing is that Doug himself has written and continues to write material on the third way so much better than anything included in Zizek's article -- better in part because Doug's work avoids the tang of conspiracy theory which (as Ken noted) seems to haunt Zizek's piece -- and except for that "tang of conspiracy" the article is utterly banal.
Carrol