It was a very accurate representation of Zizek, because it was more oriented toward sounding clever than advancing understanding. Your argument is just not philologically sound, because his intended meaning (whatever cute literary criticism you can offer about freudian slips) still was not about sexual attractiveness but brand value. He wasn’t saying people want to fuck Tulsi Gabbard, he wasn’t saying people want to fuck America, and he’s using the same parlance here.
you’re so tied up on statements having exclusive meaning, it is not a ‘slip’, he intentionally links popularity to sexual desire. And yes, he absolutely means people want to fuck Gabbard, himself and his supporters as proxies for ‘America’.
you aren’t going to appreciate how sexually charged fascist anxieties are if you analyze their language in such a stiff definitional way. He could have chosen different language to arrive at your sterile meanings.
It was a very accurate representation of Zizek, because it was more oriented toward sounding clever than advancing understanding. Your argument is just not philologically sound, because his intended meaning (whatever cute literary criticism you can offer about freudian slips) still was not about sexual attractiveness but brand value. He wasn’t saying people want to fuck Tulsi Gabbard, he wasn’t saying people want to fuck America, and he’s using the same parlance here.
you’re so tied up on statements having exclusive meaning, it is not a ‘slip’, he intentionally links popularity to sexual desire. And yes, he absolutely means people want to fuck Gabbard, himself and his supporters as proxies for ‘America’.
you aren’t going to appreciate how sexually charged fascist anxieties are if you analyze their language in such a stiff definitional way. He could have chosen different language to arrive at your sterile meanings.