Woah, those are some weighty claims, which I naturally just can't let lie...What are you specifically referring to when you say he's a pAedophile apologist (aren't you from Canada?)? Admittedly I haven't read his entire works, so I wouldn't know if there was somewhere we he explicitly voiced such views. Or are you inferring just from his shall we say, benign attitude to the mentally ill. Actually, I did watch a Louis Theroux documentary about paedophila which voiced an ambivalence of the detainment of paedophiles which was quite reminiscent of Foucault's main line of reasoning in Discipline & Punish. Anyway, paedophilia tends to repulse me, but I'm trying to be less knee-jerk in my judgement of it. Pro-Israel I won't cover, though I admit it is disappointing. And that's an extremely interesting claim about his conceptualization of history..! I have a few ideas myself, but historiography is something I'm very interested in, so I'd like to hear more detail about what you think he's doing there, if you have the time. Yes, these theorists do tend to be useful, no matter how blind-sided, exclusionary and generally douchey they are (case in point: Freud).
Debord is the shit. It's kind of a teenage love affair which I still haven't gotten over, and probably never will. Althusser I started reading like 2 pages then stopped, but I'm told IDEOLOGICAL STATE APPARATUSES are essential. Anyway, Marxist (inspired) theory is something which I've never had the leisure to as thoroughly delve into as I'd like, sadly.
I'm not too bad. I'm super busy though and a bit stressed (which begs the question: why have I started to post on KHI again?). I hope you're keeping well too?