The Ambiguous Legacy of ‘68

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments (1)

  Page 1 of 1 pages

  Wow, Zizek is willing to make explicit the Communism (in the historic sense of a totalitarian system of social, political and cultural control) that is implicit in his argument. He seems to think that bandying about the sort of abstract buzzword-infested bloviation that passes for analysis in the groves of academe while ignoring the details of history is sufficient to develop some original thought. But, really, his analysis of the legacy of ‘68 reflects the same failed categories that informed the New Left of ‘68.

  And although he complains that the French suburban riots were devoid of vision, what vision is he offering? Really, he is just attempting the same guilt-tripping of the bourgeoisie that created ‘68. He ignores the amelioration of poverty that has taken place at an unprecedented rate since the ‘70s. He casts the adaptability of capitalism as somehow a fault or weakness. He wants to ignore the failures of exactly the sort of thinking he promulgates to solve any of the problems he identifies, and the tendencies of “commons” thinking to result in the centralization of power, the radical loss of freedom, and the destruction of the environment.

  I held out hope for this article, given the quality of the publication, but it devolved into self-indulgent nonsense.

  Posted by Eric L. on Jun 21, 2008 at 10:02 PM

  Page 1 of 1 pages

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also by Slavoj Zizek

• Why Cynics Are Wrong
  The sublime shock of Obama's victory
• Through the Glasses Darkly
  What if the between-the-lines Republican message (don't be afraid, there will be no real change) is the true illusion?
• The Audacity of Rhetoric
  
• The Ambiguous Legacy of ‘68
  Forty years ago, what was revolutionized -- the world or capitalism?
• China’s Valley of Tears
  Is authoritarian capitalism the future?
• The Disturbing Sounds of the Turkish March
  The true problem with "militaristic humanism" resides not in "militaristic," but in "humanism," in the way a military intervention is presented as humanitarian aid