Peterson vs Zizek

Honestly Žižek can win this with quirky humour. Peterson comes over as a massive stick in the ass who is physically incapable of making a joke. If Žižek wants to be vicious, he could totally make fun of him especially his lobster antics, but Žižek usually doesn't do it.

You only have to see how retarded JP fans are streight under that video to understand this is utterly pointless…

Seriously. How/Why do you people engage with this trash? do you find it has a negative affect on your lives?

Peterson: clean your nose.
Zizek: *sniffe* yes, yes, right *sniffe*

Truth is complicated he says while Peterson talks about communism and all of its history as an absolute rigidity, and without any context whatsoever.

I am beginning to think we should just gulag these people en masse.

/thread

Imagine being this unironically stupid

I hope Zizek just goes to town on Peterson's obsession with cultural Marxism. That's all that's really needed tbh and I don't think Zizek would have missed it when looking him up.

Peterson should debate J. Arch Getty or Grover Furr.

Peterson didn't want to debate Richard Wolff.

feels bad

>>>/reddit/

Yeah but Wolff doesn’t debunk the hundred gorillion meme. When confronted with it he usually either changes the subject or points to capitalism’s own gorillions.

Yes, he feels more comfortable "debating" complete jokes like zizek instead. Expect a lot of compromises and zizek beind charitable to 90% of peterson's talking points. Don't care how angry it makes Zig Forums petty-booj, zizek is a fraud.

Yeah, that is why Grover "NOT ONE CRIME" Furr.

…why "we need"…

FUCK.

Nah Zizek won't take it seriously and RL shitpost once he reveal Peterson is full of shit.

live debate is a spectacle, it doesn't allow for the debaters to throughly think their responses and allows for hot takes and knee jerk statements, basically promotes feels > reals. the debate should be written.

Literally what marxist today would try to debate against the muh gazillions meme? wouldn't it spell career death for you in these day and age, painting you as a holodomor denialist or some shit?

gonna be a yikes from me dawg

No, it's the first step to success in your career. It's gonna tell people you ain't taking shit from anyone.

Please kill yourself

Will it be streamed? What channel if so?

This is what I hope happens. Zizek the Living Meme is what snapped me out of my anti-Left fling, and I've a suspicion he might have a similar effect on quite a few of those Peterson's followers who aren't completely indoctrinated. Just seeing a Marxist who doesn't conform to any of their preconcieved notions is gonna do them good.

I do hope he at least reads Peterson more thoroughly before the debate, since his earlier critiques have been a bit sloppy. I think Zizek has just sized him up and seen him for what he is, but I'm afraid he can't be bothered with reading his books. The problem is that if you fuck up the taxonomy of the alt-right faggots even slightly, or get wrong some specific part of the insane lore-world in which they live, even the ones who might be open to influence will close their ears and start screaming persecution.

The absolute best would be if he started defending Stalin just to troll Peterson. He's never done it before, but this would be an ideal opportunity to reveal his true power level, which he is clearly hiding, as you can see from how he defends Robespierre.

Attached: zizekuniform.jpg (337x149, 4.93K)

FYI Zizek quotes extensively history books on the USSR in several of his works. Arch J. Getty comes to mind.

Zizek will psychoanalyze Peterson and dance around his points (e.g. "but what if the opposite is true"). It will be a draw but Peterson's fanboys will say he won. The only way to beat Peterson is to ask him if he believes in God the almighty. Seriously he cannot answer this question.

you can go yikes yourself to death, you burger piece of trash

Attached: 385554_10150493368773455_514183454_10930440_854937674_n.jpg (576x525, 28.5K)

I never heard zman endorse the gazillion meme. He concedes that the USSR was a catasrtophic failure and calls it state or "really existing" socialism. For instance, as I said above, he relies on Arch Getty, who puts the no. of victims of the Stalin purges at around 300.000, a totally legit and conservative estimate, compared to jillions.

Read something like this and tell me you don't feel the solution is just a mass grave.

How suburban and/or petit bourg do you have to be to like this garbage? It's like pure, distilled capitalist realism.

There's a good chance I'll be attending. Should I embrace the meme and wear a Soviet flag as a cape?

Wolff is fine, retard, he has a revisionist Marxist theory but he gets people into leftism

Kys

don't be mean, black cats give you bad luck

wear a stalin shirt

That would be nice but if possible I'd suggest a Pol Pot shirt.

wear a juche gang t shirt

don't waste time and knit yourself the number of people the media says were killed by communism with a red background and yellow numbers

It's going to be a shit show.
Peterson is going to be wanting a fight, and Zizek will just be trying to have a discussion, and they will talk past eachother the whole time.
I'm not into watching train wrecks.
Sounds like a waste of time.

zizek might have a chance if he goes turbo stalinist.

Is Zizek actually worth reading?

A friend of mine also has a GDR flag, figured it would be good if we both wore them and demanded every incel Peterson fan debate us.

I want a Pol Pot shirt. I’d wear glasses with it too to screw with normalfags

...

Go home Nazi Popper.

so does Zizek, you absolute stupid head

And that was never not said, retard

it was implied by calling him a joke and presenting Wolff as a better option, poopy pants

This debate topic is already stupid.
Marxism isn't really as much a system of economics, as it is deconstruction of the current one.
Unless we're talking about all the systems inspired by Marxism, they're already talking past each other.

should we start creating LobsterBol Gang memes now to lure in some curious edgefags, or should we wait till everyone is surprised by how much Zizek and Peterson agree on things?

things they agree on:
-christian atheism
-?
-?
-political correctness solidifies hatred

Isn't this basically just Calvinism?

The problem with Jordan Peterson is that he actively goes out of his way never to make any prescriptive claims, so he's a philosopher that by has to be strawmanned in order to be interacted with whatsoever.

In most instances, the most reasonable readings of whatever he says is one that terribly gender-essentialist, chauvenist and in a lot of cases play into fascist and anti-semitic tropes, but since he never outright claim anything directly, he can always just retreat back from any position and clutch his pearls if you accuse him of any of those things.

Jordan Peterson is not about philosophy, it's a trick of semantics, and thus by nature, this debate will be pure dogshit.

contrapoints it's a radlib but she was right when she said he tricks people into having to ask what his position is(vague as fuck) only for him to make them look like they completely misunderstand him.

i don't think he's a fascist tho, he seems like the typical center right liberal afraid of both extreme right and extreme left.

This. The best way to "debate" him would be to ask him to explain his positions on select non-political topics. More specifically on the role of women in society and the existence of God. His views on these issues are so far outside the mainstream and bizarre that it would end up hurting his appeal to both suburban children and suburban manchildren. If you give him a chance to attack or bring it back to le SJWs then he wins.

That's quite a take.
If this person is older than 15, he's beyond hope.

Jordan Peterson constantly pays homage to the idea of natural hierachies and essentialism, and talks about ideas as being related, that are only related if you accept the idea of "jewish taint", meaning that two concepts can be related by the fact that they are both related to judaism, whether directly or a few steps removed.

That means that, regardless of whether or not that message is inteded or not, the only internally consistent logic that can be projected upon these arguements, is one that is essentialist and anti-semitic, and thus by nature, whether he's trying to or not, he's going to be interpreted at least some percentage of the time as making fascist arguments, as that is the most reasonable reading of his arguments.

This is what makes him so insiduous and dangerous.

youtube.com/watch?v=MiPcA40p-LU
In this video, he suggests that atheists ought be repressed in society.
I don't think he's chaged that attitude, he simply just can't say that outright anymore. Intentionally or not, he's a bad guy.

What's funny is how often Peterson fans would cry about something like 1984, but in that novel, the whole point of Newspeak was to limit what words could mean.
Thus, to contract and limit the meaning of words is actually precisely the orwellianism they're so paranoid about all the time.

Reminds me of that time he got btfo by an internet atheist in a debate, and all he could was mutter that "atheist actually believed in god" or some inane shit.
youtu.be/FmH7JUeVQb8
youtu.be/FmH7JUeVQb8

Fuck you for making me watch a Jordan Peterson video now my recommendation will get fucked by the likes of him, Sargon of Classical Liberalism, Blair Right, and Armored Centrist.

But can't wait for the Zizek to sniff out Petersons hypocrisy!

Still wish he debated Wolff though :(

Attached: sniff.gif (435x250, 1.04M)

Attached: 51973843a2f1c58fde53880d4bd3a70657be32f08daa1bb698342191eb0dfef1.png (500x514, 41.22K)

w-wow porky you look cute today

Why'd you want Peterson to debate an economist?

Lmao so sick

commissar jamal, get this man

holy shit i wasn't aware he had such a silly voice, it's not annoying or anything but it gives a strange feeling of being constantly in pain

To prove that Peterson doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to socialism, you wouldn't want to see that?

Thumbnail should be a lobster with a plastic penish dildo strapped to its back

This actually got arranged somehow?

Ok.

Zizek loses because he's not a debater.

But also it's incoherent because Peterson has no fucking clue what communism is. Zizek is more rational during the debate, but Peterson dunks on him by using a bunch of fallacies Zizek has no clue how to deal with.

Imma just throw this in here

youtube.com/watch?v=apNQDNKjWCI

lol the comment section can't tell which side the meme is on

That question was literally life on easy mode.

Atleast it cant be as bad as Peterson vs Harris, that was a solipsistic cringe-fest

...

The best outcome would be Peterson taking it very seriously and Zizek not at all

What do they write?

Bronte Sisters:
They are considered fundamental in English literature especially in any course concerning 19th century lit. Their not at all “chick books” by any means, Wuthering Heights is so brutal that even though it was published anonymously it was widely believed the author was a man.

If you like modernist writers like Fitzgerald, Hemingway, DH Lawrence etc. then you’ll like her writing. Probably her most famous work is Mrs.Dalloway which despite the title is definitely not a girly romantic novel. Her essay “A Room of One’s Own” is considered a foundational text in feminist writing but she herself doesn’t seem to be much in the way of the moralistic feminists that we all know today.

A bit off-topic, but Edward Albee’s “Whose Afraid of Virginia Woolf” is also a fantastic play/movie.

Pretty much what's going to happen.
Peterson NEEDS to look tough and strong against the intellectually vastly superior Zizek. Since Zizek is a hegelian and influenced strongly by marxism, he'll have a more structural & deterministic analysis than Peterson stuck in free-will and morality spooks. Zizek doesn't really care that much about the "debate" since he's pretty active in the academia and taken seriously by at least some of his peers, which isn't something Peterson could say about himself.

It won't end up being a debate on communism. Forget that. Zizek will perform an obscure analysis of Peterson's ideology, ask a couple of provocative philosophical questions, and end the debate on good terms with him.
If it comes up Zizek will deflate the meaning of communism. Say that he's a communist because he thinks we need some alternative to the status quo, that the crises we need to resolve are those of the commons, etc. Basically a sales talk to make people less fearful of the communist tradition (and make no mistake, Zizek is part of the communist tradition).
That's all it will be. Don't expect anything more of it. You'll just disappoint yourself.

Peterson knows nothing about Lacan and has a completely different reading of Freud. He won't be able to keep track with Zizek on this.

Whats Zizeks opinion on Carl Yung? Im sure that topic will come up at some point.

His voice kind of irks me. It's like someone trying to tell you off, while at same time trying not to cry

He doesn't like him.
youtube.com/watch?v=Qrz8rYOkaeA

Comrades, I…

Come on famrade.

This thread made me realise how poor of a communist Zizek actually is. In purely intellectual terms, he has the sheer factual knowledge to completely buttfuck Peterson six ways to Sunday, but he won't because he's a timid hack who'd rather meander about life drinking Coke and consuming Hollywood movies (whilst justifying it by saying something like "Engels once said a true communist knows the workings of capitalist culture *sniff*") instead of actually realising the need for mass socialist action in this ailing capitalist dystopia.

No wonder he's the "world's most famous Marxist", since apparently he loves the world just the way it is.

daily.jstor.org/getting-a-grip-on-slavoj-zizek-with-slavoj-zizek/
This will definitely be part of the debate. I hope Peterson gets flustered while being schooled in his own field of expertise. That would be hilarious.

Zizek won't lead the revolution, but he sure as hell will be an influence on the people who do.

We should pre-empt them. Somebody make a meme of Zizek laughing as Peterson is hauled to the gulag.

Attached: 46E3123B-DA9A-47A3-847D-BBA28014D733.jpeg (631x349, 34.6K)

He IS actually a good communist. He just puts out the cultural stuff to entertain the normies. He is actually a diehard communist who has defended Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, etc. and also is well-versed in the Western Marxist tradition.

Important to keep in mind, most of Zizek's criticisms of the USSR or Stalin include some kind of caveat at the end. Sometimes, though not often, I wonder if he's a crypto-stalinist. It's not uncommon for him to say "Don't get me wrong, sniff, Stalin was a terrifying leader, but you know, he says something interesting here…"

How much more do you think he'd be taken seriously if he behaved more normally. Though I think his unusual and characteristic personality and image is useful to the communist movement at large, he makes communism look fun.

this, at least he looks confident of himself by constantly sniffing, picking his nose and smearing it all over his shirt. true confidence

Never seen him pick his nose. He just rubs it.