the big Other

Stop the Crackdown against Russian Anti-Fascists! (open letter)

http://chtodelat.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/stop-the-crackdown-against-russian-anti-fascists-open-letter/

Original in Russian published here: www.colta.ru/docs/7991

The crackdown against anti-fascists in Russia has recently gained momentum. The country’s repressive law enforcement authorities view involvement in the anti-fascist movement as a crime in itself.

Moscow anti-fascists Alexey Sutuga, Alexey Olesinov, Igor Kharchenko andIrina Lipskaya are currently in jail in connection with dubious and unproven accusations of “disorderly conduct.” Anti-fascists Alexandra Dukhanina, Stepan Zimin, Alexey Polikhovich and Vladimir Akimenkov are among those accused of involvement in “mass riots” on Bolotnaya Square on May 6 in Moscow, when riot police brutally dispersed an authorized opposition rally. Clear evidence of their guilt still has not been presented.

In Nizhny Novgorod, law enforcement authorities are attempting to have anti-fascists declared an “extremist group.” Although on October 18 a court sent the case against the fictional organization “Antifa-RASH” (whose alleged IDs “anti-extremist” police detectives planted on activists during a search) back to the police for further investigation, the Nizhny Novgorod political police are unlikely to leave the activists alone. Igor Kharchenko has also been charged under this same article of the Russian criminal code (“involvement in the the activities of an extremist group”). Alexey Olesinov and Alexey Sutuga’s defense attorneys also expect that authorities will attempt to have their clients declared “extremists.”

The attorneys and comrades of the arrested activists believe this is being done to make it easier for police to prosecute anti-fascists and social activists. If guilty verdicts are returned in the Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod cases, a wave of similar “extremist” cases will follow all over Russia. Anti-fascists are today officially stigmatized as “extremists.” What is next? A court ban on anti-fascist views?

We consider it unacceptable that an individual can be persecuted simply for political views and activities dedicated to the fight against racism. We demand a fair and partial investigation in these criminal cases, and prosecution of all law enforcement officers who abuse their authority and flagrantly fabricate criminal cases against civil society activists.

[signed:]
Svetlana Reiter, journalist
Pavel Chikov, civil rights activist
Andrei Loshak, journalist
Oleg Kashin, journalist
Artyom Loskutov, artist
Pavel Pryanikov, gardener, journalist
Shura Burtin, journalist
Arkady Babchenko, war correspondent
Igor Gulin, poet, literary critic
Maria Kiselyova, artist
Ilya Budraitskis, leftist activist
Alexander Chernykh, journalist
Victoria Lomasko, artist
Anna Sarang, sociologist
Tatyana Sushenkova, photographer, artist
Jenny Kupren, journalist, political exile
Sergei Devyatkin, journalist, political exile
Mikhail Maglov, civic activist
Pavel Nikulin, journalist
Alexei Yorsh, artist,
Maria Klimova, journalist
Nikolay Oleynikov, artist
Alexander Tushkin, journalist
Daniil Dugum, journalist, anarchist
Andrei Krasnyi, artist
Dmitry Grin, artist
Alexander Litinsky, journalist
Isabelle Makgoeva, leftist activist
Yuliana Lizer, journalist, documentary filmmaker
Dmitry Vilensky, artist
Ilya Shepelin, artist
Tasya Krugovykh, photographer, filmmaker
Vyacheslav Danilov, political scientist
Tatyana Volkova, art critic
Yegor Skovoroda, journalist
Georgy Rafailov, leftist activist
Dmitry Tkachov, editor, journalist
Alexander Delfinov (Smirnov), poet, journalist
Nadezhda Prusenkova, journalist
Anton Nikolaev, artist
Yulia Bashinova, journalist
Denis Mustafin, artist
Matvei Krylov, artist
Olesya Gerasimenko, journalist
Grigory Tumanov, journalist

How to fix the USA

Slavoj Žižek talks new book, Occupy Wall Street at SIPA

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2012/10/24/slavoj-Žižek-talks-new-book-occupy-wall-street-sipa

[…]

Žižek rose to prominence in his native Yugoslavia, where he said he was “a mid-level dissident, enough to be jobless but not enough to be arrested.” His popular anti-capitalist cultural philosophy attracted an overflowing crowd, some who had come from outside the University just to see him speak.
Žižek was at Columbia to talk about his new book, “2011: The Year of Dreaming Dangerously,” but he touched on a wide array of other topics. Moderator Stathis Gourgouris, professor of classics at Columbia, started this panel on “one of the most provocative thinkers of our time” by noting that “moderating Žižek is an impossible event.” Gourgouris, along with Lydia Liu of East Asian Languages and Bruce Robbins of English, admitted that they found it difficult to put up arguments against Žižek or stop him once he got going.

Building on the arguments in his book, which sold out at the door, Žižek cited many philosophers from the Core Curriculum, including Marx, Rousseau and his “big love,” Hegel. Paraphrasing one of Hegel’s central ideas in reference to the crises of 2011, Žižek said, “Before the Fall, paradise was stupid animality. Only retroactively can we generate the specter of what we have fallen from.” “2012: The Year of Dreaming Dangerously” is Žižek’s take on the revolutions and upheavals of 2011, which he said he views as key turning points in the questioning of capitalism.

Before these revolutions, he argued, capitalism was a dogma, de-politicized because it was such an unquestionable part of our society. “Here, there are more people who believe that Armageddon is coming than that capitalism should be adjusted,” Žižek said. But the global economic collapse began to rip a hole in the fabric of these dogmas, Žižek said.

“Bankers were always greedy. Capitalism as it is today cannot be regulated,” he said. “It simply gave them the tools to realize that greed.” This financial crisis, Žižek argued, led to Occupy Wall Street, the Arab Spring, and the upheavals in Europe. In this new multi-centric world, countries like China, which subscribe to ‘communist,’ non-traditional models of capitalism, are swiftly gaining the upper hand, he added. The world should start to question just what it means to go beyond the constraints of capitalism.

During the question and answer period, Žižek was confronted by a Maoist who wanted a debate. Instead of dismissing him, Žižek called out his arguments and set a date for the contest to thunderous applause and laughter.

[…]

Famous Marxist turns heads and challenges assumptions

http://cpreview.org/2012/10/political-minutes-slavoj-zizek/

by Ella Louise Every-Wortman

If you’re not familiar with Slavoj Zizek, the prophetic philosopher and cultural theorist from Slovenia, the first thing you should know about him is that he has opinion on just about everything.  When listening to him speak, you are guaranteed to fully comprehend less than 50 percent of everything he says, be thoroughly annoyed by his fidgeting, and yet still, ultimately, manage to be absolutely blown away.   Tuesday night’s panel featuring Slavoj Zizek alongside Columbia’s own Stathis Gourgouris, Lydia Liu, and Bruce Robbins was no exception.

In his introduction Stathis Gourgouris, Professor of Comparative Literature, commented that Zizek produces thought and writings at a “super human speed and scale.” Although the official topic of the panel was discussion of Zizek’s newest book The Year of Dreaming Dangerously, in which Zizek argues that the“events of 2011 augur a new political reality,” Zizek structured his presentation around five “short interventions.” Demonstrating an incredible propensity for analysis of our current unique existence as a globalized world, Zizek left the audience with several troubling thoughts, claiming ultimately “our times are a time of un-doing” requiring us to reimagine the political sphere as it is and as it could be.  Zizek predicts “a divorce on the horizon between capitalism and democracy” and argues that, as our political landscape begins to change, we must think more radically and ask more radical questions if we are to emerge from our current state of political upheaval.  Despite the heavy nature of the discussion, Zizek managed to keep a light tone throughout, even ending his presentation with the declaration, “Now I exposed myself like Jesus Christ”.

Although he takes a radical, Marxist approach, Zizek’s conjectures still contained grains of truth that could be appreciated by everyone regardless of political background. Furthermore, in representing ideas of extreme radicalism, Zizek forces us all to bring into question our own political ideals and, most importantly, to defend them.  This idea was made evident by the panel portion that followed Zizek’s initial presentation.  In this section of the evening Robbins, Liu, and Gourgouris each offered critiques of Zizek’s arguments, which were followed by a final rebuttal by Zizek.

Engaging, entertaining, and witty, Zizek was undeniably the star of the panel.  Initially, I doubted the sense in even bringing in additional panelist\s, but hearing Zizek’s response to the critiques of Gourgouris, Liu, and Robbins completely changed my opinion.  Zizek was completely invigorated by the opportunity to debate.  He thoughtfully rebuked criticisms with well-crafted answers that tended to contain a few more curse words than his prepared portion, much to the audiences’ delight.  During the question and answer portion, Zizek even promised a particularly discontented attendee the opportunity to debate him on the merits of communism when he returns to New York in April.  I personally am looking forward to the event but fear slightly for this man – if there was one lesson to be learned from Tuesday night’s panel it is that, if you debate Zizek, you will lose. The impassioned manner in which Zizek debates reminds us that this is what politics is supposed to be: real debate, real radicalism, and real ideas.