Many things may become baggage, may become encumbrances if we cling to them blindly and uncriticaliy. Let us take some illustrations. Having made mistakes, you may feel that, come what may, you are saddled with them and so become dispirited; if you have not made mistakes, you may feel that you are free from error and so become conceited. Lack of achievement in work may breed pessimism and depression, while achievement may breed pride and arrogance. A comrade with a short record of struggle may shirk responsibility on this account, while a veteran may become opinionated because of his long record of struggle. Worker and peasant comrades, because of pride in their class origin, may look down upon intellectuals, while intellectuals, because they have a certain amount of knowledge, may look down upon worker and peasant comrades. Any specialized skill may be capitalized on and so may lead to arrogance and contempt of others. Even one's age may become ground for conceit. The young, because they are bright and capable, may look down upon the old; and the old, because they are rich in experience, may look down upon the young. All such things become encumbrances or baggage if there is no critical awareness.
...
Some comrades in the army have become arrogant and high-handed in their behaviour towards the soldiers, the people, the government and the Party, always blaming the comrades doing local work but never themselyes, always seeing their own achievements but never their own shortcomings, and always welcoming flattery but never criticism… the army must endeavour to eradicate these faults.
...
Our enemies are all those in league with imperialism - the warlords, the bureaucrats, the comprador class, the big Landlord class and the teactionary section of the intelligentsia attached to them. The leading force in our revolution is the industrial proletariat. Our closest friends are the entire semi-proletariat and petty bourgeoisie. As for the vacillating middle bourgeoisie, their right-wing may become our enemy and their left-wing may become our friend - but we must be constantly on our guard and not let them create confusion within our ranks.
...
Whoever sides with the revolutionary people is a revolutionary. Whoever sides with
imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat-capitalism is a counter-revolutionary. Whoever sides with the revolutionary people in words only but acts otherwise is a revolutionary in speech. Whoever sides with the revolutionary people in deed as well as in word is a revolutionary in the full sense.
...
We should support whatever the enemy opposes and oppose whatever the enemy supports.
...
Both dogmatism and revisionism run counter to Marxism. Marxism must certainly advance; it must develop along with the development of practice and cannot stand still. It would become lifeless if it remained stagnant and stereotyped. However, the basic principles of Marxism must never be violated, or otherwise mistakes will be made. It is dogmatism to approach Marxism from a metaphysical point of view and to regard it as something rigid. It is revisionism to negate the basic principles of Marxism and to negate its universal truth.

I could do this all night but I have to prepare for a skill sharing meeting with comrades. I invite you to demonstrate how I have negated the basic principles of Marxism by gathering the support of allies, converting passive sympathies into active support and endorsement of the Marxist position through education and action, and advocating for the development of practical skills. Your knowledge of Mao is weak, your revolutionary praxis is self-important and divisive, and your organizational strategy amounts to "overextend yourself, burn out and become useless immediately, for coolness points." Go outside, nerd.

Panopticon posted:

MindMaster posted:

zizek (whom i otherwise like)

*barfs*

would it be too much to ask to make this a bit more explicit? i noticed a lot of people here dont like zizek, but i dont really know what the reason is. ive read criticisms of zizek but usually they amount to characterizations and shallow stuff like this, which never really directly engage what he says beyond stupid guardian articles: http://www.yasminnair.net/content/everything-you-always-wanted-know-about-%C5%BEi%C5%BEek-you-learnt-it-grad-school

i love zizek because he offers the only way out of poststructuralism that i can see, except for some kind of bourdieuan or chomskist empiricist marxism. the way i see it theres the boring "public zizek" of the guardian articles, the repeated jokes from the lectures, hamfisted interventions, and self-admitted bullshit about biotechnology and quantum physics, and then theres the zizek of articles like this, who i found really really helpful in so many ways: http://www.lacan.com/article/?page_id=78

but mostly i just really share his hatred, which i think is ultimately more intuitive than intellectual, for the veneration of small narratives, of little stupid stories and little acts, for fake respect, for the sadomasochistic hedonism of polyamory and the general decay of meaning in the interest of the oppressors. this part of him, at least, is very clear and makes complete sense to me, so id like to hear why exactly others dont like him, since it rarely goes beyond just plain dismissal or vagueness.

help a dumbass out

c_man posted:

heidegger was a legit nazi and is totally cool but zizek is a fat goon with no social skills who ran for public office as a liberal democrat and for that he will never be forgiven

i dunno man, i mean this just doesn't convince me i guess....

Panopticon posted:

obscure catholic author

lol james joyce = obscure catholic author

and the "gibberish" is a monologue by samuel beckett

One can understand James Joyce, with all the obscenities that permeate his writings, as the ultimate Catholic author

he literally says "james joyce", and then discusses the relationship between joyce and beckett, and then has a text by beckett, which he discusses in the article, at the end of the article. its pretty straightforward literary analysis. its not especially a political piece.