Are Zizek and Trump not so different?

Are Zizek and Trump not so different?

theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/28/slavoj-zizek-donald-trump-is-really-a-centrist-liberal

All of this begs the question: could it be that Žižek is really not so different to Trump? Both thrive on their quotability, knowing full well how easily so much of what they say can provoke outrage when read out of context; and both of them are, in their own very different ways, what the press loves to call “big personalities”.

“Trump is a paradox: he is really a centrist liberal, and maybe even in his economic policies closer to the Democrats, and he desperately tries to mask this. So the function of all of these dirty jokes and stupidities is to cover up that he is really a pretty ordinary, centrist politician.

This thread doesn't belong on Veeky Forums!

Loving this riveting literature discussion.

Posters - 3
1 person
1 person
1 person. Stop samefagging, you idiot.

I don't know what you are talking about, I see 4 posters. Either you are retarded or just using some low quality bait. either way good job i replied

There were three before my reply. Either way, you were samefagging.

...

That still doesn't explain your samefagging.

go back to /pol/

No thanks. You should go back to Plebbit, first.

>he doesn't know about multiple tabs

Zizek is obviously right, except for the typical retarded accusations of racism and sexism that he only makes because his brainwashed sjw friends tell him to

>begs the question
REEEEEEEE

...

>Zizek is obviously right
How so? He criticizes the right in his works.

I wish he went deeper to explain exactly why trump is a centrist liberal instead of giving some vague clues.

Calling him a centrist liberal is kind of meaningless when the core of his platform is a radical nationalist economic policy and isolationist foreign policy.

very moderate on economic issues. supportive of the welfare state. never talks about cutting government spending. supports a strong military but isn't a crazy interventionist. he has a reasonable immigration policy: not supporting an endless flood of immigrants from an under-developed country to become a substantial fraction of america's population. to do so he plans to increase border security and deport people who are here illegal and whom the law already says should be deported.

nothing radical here. his immigration policy is standard centrist law and order stuff and his economic policy is decidedly to the left of most republicans.

If you're a fucking moron, no.

he's a rhino, we know this

read zizek

"blah blah blah ideology blah blah blah Lacan blah blah anal fistfucking in macedonia blah blah"
-Slavoj Zizek, famous philosopher

Wait, so which one is it? It seems to me that he likes to seem radical when in fact he is quite moderate.

he doesn't try to seem "radical", just very different from orthodox republicans, which he is. orthodox republicans are radical on economics and foreign policy in a way the base actually doesn't really care about.

the republican party has been able to push radically pro-rich economics and insane foreign policy schemes because they had the working class vote largely locked up by implicitly being the party for white people. trump is running with the standard nationalist messages that signal the republican party as the party for white people, but without using that as a cover for insane policy. trump is just a nationalist populist with centrist policy, rather than a right-wing radical pretending to be a nationalist populist which is the standard republican strategy.

why this bothers people is that running as a nationalist populist, he might take it seriously. the republican party always talks a big game on immigration to boost their nationalist branding, but when in power does nothing about it. in fact the business interests the republican party is in thrall to support greater immigration. trump, however, takes the policy implications of being a populist nationalist seriously.