My Deep Archer from Zizek.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGNLj8P59dk

For the first time I must dis-agree with Zizek. Playing devil's advocate is precisely the way that one not only enflames sentiment (much like Zizek's precious "racist jokes", which all most certainly enflame some people), but it all so exposes one's true intentions. As Nietzsche (admittedly of a school distinct from Zizek's field of study) said: Distrust all those in whom the will to punish is great. I know from having participated in College Debate that people not only use "rape" (which in California now has actually become an ambiguous term owing to the flowing of political correctness into the legal system and the passing of some ridiculous laws under feminist auspices) and "feminism" (both interchangeably and together) as impenetrable (no pun intended) barriers to discussion that renders the community at risk from proto-Fascism because people are afraid to condemn feminism, but all so in many instances the very style of rhetoric is all so blatantly violent. And yet they get away with it, even as they argue against violence, without a second thought to their logical consistency! So obviously there is no longer a discussion at hand here. The best arbiter would be to ask: "Well now what is the WARRANT for why rape is bad?" It throws people, but it forces them to examine the fact that even though their position APPEARS ubiquitous, they cannot find a single argument for it, because in fact they are engaged in the kind of violent thinking that they are condemning. Dm.A.A.

Yes. I would love it if all people "woke up" and realised that there is no such thing as Racism or Sexism because both of these are reifications based upon logocentric readings of history.

But we all have to lower out standards.

Zizek can idealise all he wants. I have been so shocked personally by just the stupidity of college kids that I am past the point of taking these "real problems" seriously. WHY SO SERIOUS?

Dm.A.A.