Buddhism has existed in Russia for hundreds of years and the Republic of Kalmykia (situated in the Volga area) not far from the Caspian Sea,
Proletariat Blogging in the Heart of (UK) Predatory Capitalism! Exploring the Interface between Matter and Perception, Chinese Buddhism, Daoism, Hakka Ethnography, and All Aspects of Radical Politics, History, Psychology and Philosophy – 全世界无产者联合起来!
Buddhism has existed in Russia for hundreds of years and the Republic of Kalmykia (situated in the Volga area) not far from the Caspian Sea,
As the bourgeois process of cultural dominance and oppression is ongoing, the propaganda it produces is designed for one purpose only, and that is the maintenance of its own power and prestige within society. The bourgeois paradigm is presumed to be the only way of viewing and knowing the world that is accepted as ‘true’, ‘worthwhile’, ‘credible’ and ‘useful’, and yet from a logical, reasonable and scientific perspective, the philosophical underpinnings of bourgeois society is premised upon the creation and perpetuation of faulty knowledge.
Indeed, the climate of disunity that Trotsky created for international communism led directly to the 1956 Khrushchev denunciation of Stalin – and the subsequent Sino-Soviet Split.
Simply being invited to stand in the same general area of a middleclass gathering, cannot be assumed as be the same as an ‘equal’ inclusiveness. Besides, as Marx continuously pointed-out, it is the middleclass who should change their naturally exploitative ways, so as to accommodate working class mores.
Under the influence of this distorted – and non-working class perspective – Marx is wrong, Lenin is mistaken, Stalin is evil, and China is not a Communist country. So desperate has the political Left become in the contemporary West, that one faction of it actually considers the totalitarian ideological leanings of Kim Jong Un’s North Korea (DPRK) as somehow ‘dialectically’ relevant to the British working classes who have had a thoroughly different trajectory of historical development to that of their Korean comrades.
The racist aspect lies with the fact that Zizek either knows about – but chooses to ignore – indigenous Asian culture, or that he is not interested in any interpretive narrative that lies outside of the scope of a Eurocentric thought. In short, Zizek is a postmodern bourgeois thinker, masquerading as a post-Marxist thinker. How did the dialectical forces of history create this Zizek figure?