Yes that's a double entendre, not a great one, and it's how Badiou accuses Nancy of siding with "imperialism." I gotta admit I'm with Nancy and Harman (and Gratton HT for the post) on this one. I'd rather be a hypocrite than a cynic.
And Badiou's dismissal of Libyan revolutionaries is--well, breathtaking.
5 comments:
I agree with this fully. I've always known that Badiou can sometimes be quite the vulgar marxist, but this really hit a new low for me. His piece read like a conspiracy theory from infowars.
I think it is important to stay critically aware of how these type of "humanitarian" interventions can be used as fronts for imperialist deployment. However I would much rather take that gamble than watch protesters get airstriked by their government (the question of whether these are protesters are actually "real" or not is just to much).
That's the most depressing thing I've read in a while.
Sigh. d
yeah, this is emblematic of a strange black and white world for Badiou---which, of course, is mirrored in much of his work. And is emblematic of the beautiful soul syndrome, which needs to believe (and what a faith!) in order to remain pure. Look, our contemporary hegemons are not exactly hiding their designs--they are proud of it, in fact. But I guess it makes it easier to take: you can be against the no-fly zone and bombings and be absolved of worries over the Western tools on the ground.
yeah, this is emblematic of a strange black and white world for Badiou---which, of course, is mirrored in much of his work. And is emblematic of the beautiful soul syndrome, which needs to believe (and what a faith!) in order to remain pure. Look, our contemporary hegemons are not exactly hiding their designs--they are proud of it, in fact. But I guess it makes it easier to take: you can be against the no-fly zone and bombings and be absolved of worries over the Western tools on the ground.
Post a Comment