Erik Redburn wrote: CB:

Cueball

rabble-rouser-for-life

Member: 5790

Joined: Dec 23 2003

July 30, 2009 - 2:57am

Erik Redburn wrote:

CB: "Look, the point here is that we are looking at the larger scale aspects of "systems", and trying to determine their net effect in terms of real democracy and freedom from corruption."

First things first, stop telling others what "the point is here", thats only a matter of your opinion and one in which is not always clear in your case given your constant shifting of the grounds.

Oh yes, I can, since Sanizedah is responding to my point "here", which is extrapolated from Zizek's point, which is 3 paragraphs of short disection of competing narratives about the present situation in Iran, and then another 10 looking at the larger scale aspects of "systems".

Quote:

CB:

"So when I say something like that, its a "ploy to divert attention" but when Zizek says something like that its fair criticism. Hah! Now there is this bit about "foreign manipulation"."

Huh? Something like what? And didn't i just tell you that my quoting this wasn't necessarily in support of weverything he said but only to showe some difference of opinion on the subject on the militant left? Why yes, yes I did.

Now, it should have been obvious that I was looking to disengage on that post, in fact I said so quite plainly, but since you seem to want to raise more isues with me I'll promise you I get back to you soon and we can have it out as you so obviously want to do, but first I'd rather engage with others. And in answer to you other I will say that yes you Are supporting dictatorial regimes,as you have done quite persistently over the years, but what your AIm is for doing so may not be a love of dictorial regime itself no but that is in effect what you are doing. I hope that helps a bit.

And you have no evidence that I support dictatorial regiemes anywhere. This is something you inffer, as objectively true based on your own deductions, and has nothing to do with anything I said. I repeatedly ask you for quotes where I "support dictatorial regiemes", and you provide none, suggesting that you can determine such by inference because I am engaging in a "ploy to divert" attention.

Such reasoning about the objective meaning of a persons words as deduced from their failure to properly denounce is a kind of logic much better suited to the courts of Vyshinsky, as opposed to a person who purportedly supports "democracy", fair play and justice. The fact that one can be a "class enemy" and not even know it, "in effect", is even more in line with such corrupt thinking.

The question is, why is not Zizek's reflection on meaning of the revolt in Iran, in terms of its comparison to "democracy" in the west also a "ploy to divert attention" and even your posting it also such a "ploy". He asks "is there a link between Ahmadinejad and Berlusconi? Isn't it preposterous even to compare Ahmadinejad with a democratically elected Western leader? Unfortunately, it isn't: the two are part of the same global process".