I appreciate the time you took with this, there are some interesting points you’ve made, and some places I disagree with.

I do have a question though, referring to this part:

> This is in contrast to Butler, who argues that there is a “true” being/self (the subject which the narratives/discourses do not represent fully) under the narratives put onto it.

Can you elaborate or point me to a reading here? My understanding of Butler’s work is of their application of speech act theory onto gender. I don’t recall this idea of “true” self being something Butler has discussed, but that could just be my ignorance.

> I find it telling that the author just decides Žižek has 'lost the plot' on the grounds of a single essay he wrote because it doesn't agree with her politics.

I didn't get that from her article. Specifically she found it to be "boring, unoriginal, dishonest, and lazy." The argument that Žižek is making seems lost in the piece, or at least not well laid out. This may be his style in general, and maybe there is some hidden insight somewhere. But it seems mostly akin to McWhorter's work that he sights. Unoriginal at best, harmful at worst.

Appreciate it, I’ll have a watch

edit: just finished, was really good. I think the author of what I posted and Julian de Medeiros are on the same page.

I thought this was a good response to Žižek's recent commentary. I was pretty disappointed with his lack of a well developed argument.