Living in The End Times

Last book read:  Living in the End Times - Zizek


Slavoj Zizek is the new Heidegger. And not necessarily in a good way. In this work, Zizek uses Hegelian dialectical philosophy, Lacanian psychology, and Marxian economics to deconstruct late capitalism. I think? perhaps more precisely he deconstructs the underlying ideology of the global economy that has been normalized as capitalism. It would seem that analysis of Kung Fu Panda and I am Legend, along with Rammstein to present  hidden ideologies is genius. But, it soon becomes clear that this work suffers from a lack of clarity and organization. There are brilliant points, but often the discussion will shift from geopolitics to deep psychological trauma (or worse the frequent references to bodily functions [1]) without coherent transitions. This work would be much improved with divisions into many more chapters, each one explicitly providing a systematic progression to his final conclusion. Better yet, it should have been broken into several books, each dealing with a different area. Zizek wrote How To Read Lacan, now someone should write How to Read Zizek. I'm afraid that he takes Continental philosophy to such an extreme that it begins to break, and the structure of analytical philosophy becomes sorely missed. On the other hand, it may be true that Zizek is "the most dangerous philosopher in the West."  He seems ready to break down all of the current global constructs in true revolutionary fashion, although he does not offer (apart from a few specific examples) what kind of "system" should replace capitalism.  There is just so many fragmented ideas here that I wouldn't know where to begin a coherent discussion, so for now I'm going to take a break and go read some Heidegger.

[1]  Zizek criticizes modern American morality and its acceptance of vulgarity while he praises Chavez's banning of US television.  However, he is guilty of the exact same thing that he blames artists like Serrano of doing.  The book is filled with references to bodily functions, which he uses to make extreme rhetorical points in a provocative manner.  In most cases these are completely unnecessary and I can only imagine that he employs the shock value of it to fulfill the role of a  "rock star" philosopher (doing "excremental philosophy").