2008-2010 wasn't me.
- Sep 21, 2004
- AFL Club
No; he doesn't.JP gives him entire schools, organisations - Zizek drops the entire subject and his ticks take-over and we are back in the land of sparkling disconnected ideas.
At least JP knows of the criticisms of his characterisation pomoneomarxists. His counter is just incredibly weak.
The substituion of the proles/bourg for identity groups just doesn't work. He's tried to overlay his criticism of identity politics on to Marxism. It doesn't belong there.
Id pol is about groups asserting their own group's desires. It demonstrates agancy, and often can be done within a capitalist framework. Also, poo history goes out of it's way to contest the oppressed/oppressor dynamic that JP bastardises. I can recall seeing a pomo history of the colonial wars, and it emphasised the agency of Indigenous warriors in becoming the arseholes themselves in weapon construction and treatment of others.
Marxism made the point that history was happening to the proletariat. They weren't choosing; this was what would happen. And it absolutely rejected capitalism.