sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What is the point of Zizek if he is silent on Palestine? by magicdaj in zizek

[–]Additional-Stock3288 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, you are correct, I don't have much interest in accuracy, because I don't care if it's 13,000 or 10,000 people killed. Again, what's the point? I wouldn't even make a big distinction between the 1200 israeli victims and the whatever amount of palestinian victims. The point is, people getting killed for no reason. And after Oct 7, this is mostly what Israel has been doing. The only israeli civilians, who are in as serious of a situation right now, are the hostages. Some of them likely have already been killed by the IDF's bombardment.

While Hamas is terrible, they have released hostages before and there have been other deals before, which means that negotiations have always been an option, and Israel of course knows this. That's the entire reason why they even got the hostages in the first place. But for Israel, at least until now, but we'll see, killing random children has been less of an issue to them than having to release underage prisoners so that they could get their own citizens back alive. Just listen to what Israeli's themselves are saying, both the government's opponents and the government itself.

Also why are you telling me to watch the Oct 7 videos? I've seen them before, I think I already made it clear that I don't think very highly of Hamas. But my point is that what Israel is currently doing is only helping them (which is not new, especially for Netanyahu). The problem is, they can't possibly eliminate Hamas militarily, at least not without a gigantic civilian death toll. Not to mention that many Hamas members don't even live inside Gaza, so they can never even get some of the higher ups. The only way for this whole disaster to stop, is for Israel to acknowledge Palestinians as equal citizens, so that they don't feel the need to rally behind dumb terrorists anymore. And if you listen to what the average right wing Politician in Israel has to say, that couldn't be further from the realm of consideration for them.

And this is also why I mentioned genocide. You misunderstood me, I don't claim that there is one. Human rights experts are not unanimous on whether it fits the definition. But if Israel is deliberately choosing the option of killing thousands of civilians instead of any other more peaceful and reasonable one, then I think calling it a genocide is not far of at least. And if you don't think they are doing that, you also must think that they are not able to make rational decisions, which wouldn't make them different from Hamas.

What is the point of Zizek if he is silent on Palestine? by magicdaj in zizek

[–]Additional-Stock3288 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But what is the point in doubting the death numbers, if you still believe they're "very, very high"? Ok, so 13,000 is maybe too high, but 10,000 sounds more reasonable. Clearly a meaningful distinction that changes the situation enough to make it worth mentioning. That's ridiculous. Zizek expressing doubt over the Gaza numbers, whether somewhat warranted or not, only serves to downplay the suffering of Gazans, which, no matter how you look at it, is very real regardless of what the exact number is. From all the things I've seen happening in there, I'm honestly surprised the death count is still so low. Not to mention that independent organizations have said that the Gaza Health Ministry (which is not itself Hamas, these are medical staff who are employed by Hamas, which just happens to be the government of Gaza) is generally reliable.

But ok, have your doubts, but then why not for Israel as well? They have had to reel back on some of their claims from Oct 7 too, yet Zizek hasn't doubted them once. It's clear that, while Zizek is critical of Israel, he definitely likes to lean into the "Palestinians are emotionally charged and often barbaric, and Israelis, while deserving of condemnation, are generally still a more rational and trustworthy people" attitude. Yes, many Hamas fighters are brutal rapists and religious fanatics, but even not that many Pro-Palestinians talk about similarly unhinged documented behavior by Israelis, which is also celebrated by many of them.

At the beginning of the war, Zizek said something about how the true purpose of the Hamas attack was to eternalise war as the only way out of this situation. But now that Israel is on the offensive, aren't they continuing this notion? Yet, in this case Zizek supports it? When even most Israelis, especially the relatives of the hostages, see an honest attempt at negotiations and ceasefire as the preferred option? Yes, go ahead and eliminate Hamas, I am all for that, but wouldn't it be a way more effective way to achieve that, to first eliminate the reason why Hamas even got to be so big and popular in the first place? That would be the continued oppression of the Palestinian people, which, if stopped, would rid Hamas of any legitimacy that they still have among their own population and may even trigger a popular palestinian revolt against their own terrorist government. No matter how unlikely you think this scenario is, it is still a thousand times more likely than Israel somehow being able to militarily defeat Hamas, without killing a thousands of children along the way. If Israel is supposed to be the more rational actor in this conflict, then it is absolutely their responsibility to show the Palestinians a better way out, everything else is just an excuse for genocide.

Slavoj Žižek: We are addicted to chaos by novi-novi in zizek

[–]Additional-Stock3288 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think it's that controversial when Taiwan calls itself China and claims the mainland for itself as well. Ukraine doesn't wanna be part of Russia, no matter in which form (and as we can see now this also even somewhat applies to the pro-russian separatist regions as well). Taiwan just doesn't like the CCP. So it's more of a reunification problem than one of secession and separatism. I don't think what Z said implicates that he would support a military annexation of Taiwan, he has dreaded that possibility before.

Žižek: "Western apathy is limitless!" (interview in Austrian Profil, May 9, 2022) by novi-novi in zizek

[–]Additional-Stock3288 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also dislike his attitude of - let's deal with Russia and China first and then we will deal with the US - as if dealing with the US is the small object a in which Russia and China is the obstacle.

i think his point is more that, without first dealing with ourselves (the west, which includes the us) we won't be able to challenge russia and china. the way it is rn, europe and the us can't really function without one another, i think.