> Nope. Finally got to see the Laibach video, though, with its running
> commentary by Slavoj Zizek. Pretty hilarious. They can't be fascists
> because they act like fascists, and real fascists don't act like
> fascists, they try to appear reasonable. By acting like
laibach--and the entire NSK cabal of which they're a part-- are decidedly a-fascistic (as in a negation of, not alpha). think 'devo' (early: kent state -> _are we not men_), then transplant it to YU/slovenia with all that that entails, and you'll Get the Concept. michael benson, who made the mockurockumentary (_predictions of fire_) is a real gem.
> totalitarians, they undermine totalitarians. He makes a similar
> argument about Ayn Rand - her over-conformity is actually subversive
> <http://www.lacan.com/frameXII5.htm>, which is kind of hard to
> accept, given all those undergrad Rand reading groups and the success
> of her protege, Alan Greenspan.
it's easier to accept if you don't valorize subversion as ipso facto good. (pretty 'radical,' i know...) anything, no matter how imbecilic, is subversive when pushed to suf- ficient extremity.
malapropos, i did a focus group with genesis p. orridge a while ago. stylin' dude!
cheers, t