"They fetishize, to the point of being pathetic, the idea that they are oppressed, that there is some larger conspiracy set against them". Is that so? The entire paragraph prior to this statement you spend spiritualizing the suffering of transgender people, blacks, and jews for no apparent reason other than to bolster your argument. Allow me to quote from Zizek's subsequent article, Why Politics is Immanently Theological:
"what characterizes an authentic emancipatory thought is not a vision of conflict-free harmonious future but the properly dialectical notion of antagonism which is totally incompatible with the Rightist topic of the need for an enemy to assert our self-identity."
Zizek has repeatedly made explicit, including in the article from which you target him, that he does not pin the world's political woes on the typical rightist targets, but rather that there are those who sit in relative peace and comfort who take supposedly "uncritical" positions in defense of these targets merely as a easy position from which to attack their political enemies without actually engaging with their positions, as you have done with Zizek. Your lazy dismissal of him and Lacan are a silent admission of defeat on your part.
"They fetishize, to the point of being pathetic, the idea that they are oppressed, that there is some larger conspiracy set against them". Is that so? The entire paragraph prior to this statement you spend spiritualizing the suffering of transgender people, blacks, and jews for no apparent reason other than to bolster your argument. Allow me to quote from Zizek's subsequent article, Why Politics is Immanently Theological:
"what characterizes an authentic emancipatory thought is not a vision of conflict-free harmonious future but the properly dialectical notion of antagonism which is totally incompatible with the Rightist topic of the need for an enemy to assert our self-identity."
Zizek has repeatedly made explicit, including in the article from which you target him, that he does not pin the world's political woes on the typical rightist targets, but rather that there are those who sit in relative peace and comfort who take supposedly "uncritical" positions in defense of these targets merely as a easy position from which to attack their political enemies without actually engaging with their positions, as you have done with Zizek. Your lazy dismissal of him and Lacan are a silent admission of defeat on your part.