Resumen A diferencia de trabajos anteriores sobre el universalismo y el colonialismo en el pensamiento filosofico y politico de Žižek, el presente articulo se basa en profundas coincidencias con este pensamiento, asi como en irreductibles discrepancias con respecto a muchos de sus detractores. Todo esto no impide que se disienta con respecto a dos puntos fundamentales del filosofo esloveno: su posicion universalista abiertamente eurocentrica y su concepcion positiva del colonialismo. La doble divergencia es resumida y justificada en las siguientes doce tesis y en las objeciones que plantean a lo que se juzga inaceptable en el pensamiento žižekiano: 1) la conciencia y la critica del horror colonial no son legados europeos; 2) el colonialismo es el mismo opresion; 3) hay otros origenes fuera de Europa; 4) nunca se pierden todas las raices; 5) lo aparente puede ser lo universal; 6) el capitalismo nunca supera su particularidad; 7) el capitalismo sigue comportando la colonialidad; 8) la modernidad capitalista incluye una otredad que no es ni anterior ni posterior; 9) la otredad sabe como explotar lo europeo que la explota; 10) un sujeto puede encontrarse en mas de un universo; 11) no todo es comparable al ello fuera de Europa y Estados Unidos; y 12) es Europa la que se distorsiona al reflejarse en Estados Unidos. Abstract Unlike earlier work on universalism and colonialism in Žižek’s philosophical and political thought, this article draws on deep coincidences with this thought, as well as irreducible disagreements with many of its detractors. All this does not prevent that there are also divergences with respect to the two fundamental points of the Slovenian philosopher: his universalist openly Eurocentric position and his positive conception of colonialism. The double divergence is summarized and justified in the following twelve theses and in the objections they raise to what is deemed unacceptable in Žižekian thought: 1) the consciousness and critique of colonial horror are not European legacies; 2) colonialism is itself oppression; 3) there are other origins outside of Europe; 4) all roots are never lost; 5) the apparent can be the universal; 6) capitalism never overcomes its particularity; 7) capitalism continues to involve coloniality; 8) capitalist modernity includes an otherness that is neither anterior nor posterior; 9) otherness knows how to exploit the European that exploits it; 10) a subject can be found in more than one universe; 11) not everything is comparable to the id outside of Europe and the United States; and 12) it is Europe that is distorted when reflected in the United States.
摘要不同以往的工作普遍主义和殖民主义在思想filosofico和政治家本跟进Žiž克朗,是建立在深厚的共识的基础上,这个骨干,就是在思维差异对很多批评。尽管如此，他还是对斯洛文尼亚哲学的两个基本观点持不同意见:他公开的欧洲中心主义普遍主义立场和他对殖民主义的积极看法。双岔是和合理的下列12个论文简要提出什么反对意见来判断接受思想žižekiano:(1)良心和批评的恐怖不是遗留的欧洲殖民;2)殖民主义是同样的压迫;3)欧洲以外的其他来源;4)永远不要失去所有的根;5)表象可以是普遍的;6)资本主义从来没有超越它的特殊性;7)资本主义仍然包含殖民主义;8)资本主义现代性包括一种既不早也不晚的他者;9)他者知道如何剥削剥削他的欧洲人;10)一个主体可能存在于多个宇宙中;11)欧洲和美国以外的一切都无法与之相比;12)是欧洲被美国的反映所扭曲。Abstract Unlike也work on universalism and colonialism inŽiž克朗’s philosophical and political thought this条draws on deep coincidences with this thought, as well as irreducible disagreements许多of its detractors。所有这些都不能阻止斯洛文尼亚哲学家在他的两个基本观点上也存在分歧:他公开的以欧洲为中心的普遍主义立场和他对殖民主义的积极看法。double divergence is概括和justified in The twelve theses and in The objections they提高to what is deemed会员国inŽižekian thought: 1) The consciousness and critique of恐怖are not欧洲殖民legacies;2)殖民主义本身就是压迫;3)欧洲以外还有其他起源;4)所有的根永远不会消失;5)表象可以是普遍的;6)资本主义永远不会超越它的特殊性;7)资本主义继续涉及殖民主义;8)资本主义现代性包括一种既不早也不晚的异质性;9)别人知道如何利用利用它的欧洲人;10)一个主题可以在多个宇宙中发现;11)并非所有东西都能与欧洲和美国以外的id相媲美;12)在美国的反映中被扭曲的是欧洲。
{"title":"Žižek, universalismo y colonialismo: doce tesis para no aceptarlo todo","authors":"David Pavón-Cuéllar","doi":"10.5281/ZENODO.4052607","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4052607","url":null,"abstract":"Resumen A diferencia de trabajos anteriores sobre el universalismo y el colonialismo en el pensamiento filosofico y politico de Žižek, el presente articulo se basa en profundas coincidencias con este pensamiento, asi como en irreductibles discrepancias con respecto a muchos de sus detractores. Todo esto no impide que se disienta con respecto a dos puntos fundamentales del filosofo esloveno: su posicion universalista abiertamente eurocentrica y su concepcion positiva del colonialismo. La doble divergencia es resumida y justificada en las siguientes doce tesis y en las objeciones que plantean a lo que se juzga inaceptable en el pensamiento žižekiano: 1) la conciencia y la critica del horror colonial no son legados europeos; 2) el colonialismo es el mismo opresion; 3) hay otros origenes fuera de Europa; 4) nunca se pierden todas las raices; 5) lo aparente puede ser lo universal; 6) el capitalismo nunca supera su particularidad; 7) el capitalismo sigue comportando la colonialidad; 8) la modernidad capitalista incluye una otredad que no es ni anterior ni posterior; 9) la otredad sabe como explotar lo europeo que la explota; 10) un sujeto puede encontrarse en mas de un universo; 11) no todo es comparable al ello fuera de Europa y Estados Unidos; y 12) es Europa la que se distorsiona al reflejarse en Estados Unidos. Abstract Unlike earlier work on universalism and colonialism in Žižek’s philosophical and political thought, this article draws on deep coincidences with this thought, as well as irreducible disagreements with many of its detractors. All this does not prevent that there are also divergences with respect to the two fundamental points of the Slovenian philosopher: his universalist openly Eurocentric position and his positive conception of colonialism. The double divergence is summarized and justified in the following twelve theses and in the objections they raise to what is deemed unacceptable in Žižekian thought: 1) the consciousness and critique of colonial horror are not European legacies; 2) colonialism is itself oppression; 3) there are other origins outside of Europe; 4) all roots are never lost; 5) the apparent can be the universal; 6) capitalism never overcomes its particularity; 7) capitalism continues to involve coloniality; 8) capitalist modernity includes an otherness that is neither anterior nor posterior; 9) otherness knows how to exploit the European that exploits it; 10) a subject can be found in more than one universe; 11) not everything is comparable to the id outside of Europe and the United States; and 12) it is Europe that is distorted when reflected in the United States.","PeriodicalId":296400,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Žižek Studies","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116634317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the most notorious remarks circulating as evidence of bankers’ arrogant disregard for the destructive effects of their high-risk financial strategies came in July 2007 from Charles Prince, the CEO of Citigroup. He said “as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance.” Then he added: “we’re still dancing.” At the time, the subprime mortgage market was in free fall. Yet over the preceding five months, Citigroup and Merrill Lynch had led Wall Street in creating and selling 50 billion dollars in new CDOs (collateralized debt obligations, a kind of derivative backed by mortgage bonds). Prince thought the “pools of liquidity” were deep enough—the amount of available capital big enough—to immunize the big banks from the collapse of subprime. Despite the plummeting subprime mortgage market, Wall Street had kept on issuing CDOs; the total dollar amount for the year 486.8 billion.1 In the words of one investor, “We knew the collateral for the CDOs had collapsed. And yet everything went on, as if nothing had changed.”2 The International Monetary Fund would subsequently estimate losses related to USgenerated subprime mortgage assets at one trillion dollars. The psychoanalytic term for this keeping on, this repetition, is drive. Drive is a keeping on beyond pleasure, beyond use, beyond desire. In the reflexive turn of the drive, drive’s loop back
{"title":"Still Dancing: drive as a category of political economy","authors":"J. Dean","doi":"10.4324/9781315610726-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315610726-3","url":null,"abstract":"One of the most notorious remarks circulating as evidence of bankers’ arrogant disregard for the destructive effects of their high-risk financial strategies came in July 2007 from Charles Prince, the CEO of Citigroup. He said “as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance.” Then he added: “we’re still dancing.” At the time, the subprime mortgage market was in free fall. Yet over the preceding five months, Citigroup and Merrill Lynch had led Wall Street in creating and selling 50 billion dollars in new CDOs (collateralized debt obligations, a kind of derivative backed by mortgage bonds). Prince thought the “pools of liquidity” were deep enough—the amount of available capital big enough—to immunize the big banks from the collapse of subprime. Despite the plummeting subprime mortgage market, Wall Street had kept on issuing CDOs; the total dollar amount for the year 486.8 billion.1 In the words of one investor, “We knew the collateral for the CDOs had collapsed. And yet everything went on, as if nothing had changed.”2 The International Monetary Fund would subsequently estimate losses related to USgenerated subprime mortgage assets at one trillion dollars. The psychoanalytic term for this keeping on, this repetition, is drive. Drive is a keeping on beyond pleasure, beyond use, beyond desire. In the reflexive turn of the drive, drive’s loop back","PeriodicalId":296400,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Žižek Studies","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124622732","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-03-18DOI: 10.1057/9781137361516_17
J. Dean
{"title":"The Real Internet","authors":"J. Dean","doi":"10.1057/9781137361516_17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137361516_17","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":296400,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Žižek Studies","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116194748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In a short pamphlet written in 1808 bearing the title Who thinks abstractly?, Hegel joined his contemporary debates concerning the importance of the recent French Revolution. His position basically reverts the arguments advanced by the German nationalists and by various conservatives like Joseph de Maistre or Edmund Burke: while these authors accuse the abstraction of the French principles (equality, liberty etc.) and oppose to it the richness of the local customs, traditions and common sense, Hegel argues that, on the contrary, it is the common sense and common people who think abstractly, while the presumably abstract principles of the French revolution open up the space in which a concrete understanding of human nature can take place. In today’s world, one could say that the legacy of human rights is in need of a similar Hegelian reversal. The general trend regarding human rights consists nowadays in a constant attack on the formal, empty, abstract nature of the declaration of human rights, and an emphasis on the possible alternatives to it, namely the plural, rich, vivid, authentic particular cultures, narratives, situations. To put it in Hegelian terms, this contemporary trend could be accounted as demanding a necessary passage from ‘abstract right’ to ‘morality’ – where morality is to be
{"title":"Which Critique of Human Rights? Evaluating the post-colonialist and the post-Althusserian alternatives","authors":"Alex Cistelecan","doi":"10.4324/9780203814031-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203814031-6","url":null,"abstract":"In a short pamphlet written in 1808 bearing the title Who thinks abstractly?, Hegel joined his contemporary debates concerning the importance of the recent French Revolution. His position basically reverts the arguments advanced by the German nationalists and by various conservatives like Joseph de Maistre or Edmund Burke: while these authors accuse the abstraction of the French principles (equality, liberty etc.) and oppose to it the richness of the local customs, traditions and common sense, Hegel argues that, on the contrary, it is the common sense and common people who think abstractly, while the presumably abstract principles of the French revolution open up the space in which a concrete understanding of human nature can take place. In today’s world, one could say that the legacy of human rights is in need of a similar Hegelian reversal. The general trend regarding human rights consists nowadays in a constant attack on the formal, empty, abstract nature of the declaration of human rights, and an emphasis on the possible alternatives to it, namely the plural, rich, vivid, authentic particular cultures, narratives, situations. To put it in Hegelian terms, this contemporary trend could be accounted as demanding a necessary passage from ‘abstract right’ to ‘morality’ – where morality is to be","PeriodicalId":296400,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Žižek Studies","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122030610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-02-17DOI: 10.5040/9781474272735.ch-008
S. Žižek
{"title":"Is God Dead, Unconscious, Evil, Impotent, Stupid ... Or Just Counterfactual?","authors":"S. Žižek","doi":"10.5040/9781474272735.ch-008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474272735.ch-008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":296400,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Žižek Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131356726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Events of the past year, from Egypt to the Occupy movements, are opening new vistas and throwing up big issues for debate. Can you break out of the framework of capitalism? Is there a relevant Marxist vision and strategy that speaks to the enormity of the problems humanity confronts and that yields liberatory solutions? In short, is a radically different, and better, world possible?This is the backdrop for my polemic against the political philosophy of Slavoj Zizek. This is a debate that takes in the lessons of the revolutions of the 20th century, the significance of Bob Avakian's new synthesis of communism, and the nature of the world capitalist system. I am arguing that Zizek's stance, despite his radical reputation, is actually harmful to the cause of revolution.
{"title":"Vilifying Communism and Accommodating Imperialism: The Sham and Shame of Slavoj Žižek’s 'Honest Pessimism'","authors":"Raymond Lotta","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2000959","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2000959","url":null,"abstract":"Events of the past year, from Egypt to the Occupy movements, are opening new vistas and throwing up big issues for debate. Can you break out of the framework of capitalism? Is there a relevant Marxist vision and strategy that speaks to the enormity of the problems humanity confronts and that yields liberatory solutions? In short, is a radically different, and better, world possible?This is the backdrop for my polemic against the political philosophy of Slavoj Zizek. This is a debate that takes in the lessons of the revolutions of the 20th century, the significance of Bob Avakian's new synthesis of communism, and the nature of the world capitalist system. I am arguing that Zizek's stance, despite his radical reputation, is actually harmful to the cause of revolution.","PeriodicalId":296400,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Žižek Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129404130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：