The Chomsky-Zizek Show

Act I.
 In an interview, Chomsky expresses his opinion of Lacan, Derrida, and Zizek as empty posturing. His attack is, in a way, on the culture of French philosophy. Foucault once mentioned that a degree of obscurity and layers of analysis is necessary for the French to respect philosophy (don't remember the citation here). I was also told that the culture of writing philosophy in France is to state one's position but also address several levels of critique, which tends to obscure but that this was the practice of writing (not sure about the extent of this - I, unfortunately, don't read french). But Chomsky takes a jab at that tradition and calls "theory" as posturing and with little empirical testability.
Chomsky to Zizek:
http://www.openculture.com/2013/06/noam_chomsky_slams_zizek_and_lacan_empty_posturing.html

Act II
Zizek is made aware of Chomsky's comment during a conference and states that he has never known an academic so "empirically wrong". This was recorded and transcribed by a PhD student from the University of York (though, I think Zizek says that this was incorrectly transcribed...).
Zizek to Chomsky:
http://www.openculture.com/2013/07/slavoj-zizek-responds-to-noam-chomsky.html

Intermission
Note: There is the issue of translation and hearsay. One person relays what somebody else says. So miscommunication is possible and both may be addressing very different things. 

Some commentary and advertisement from the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/19/noam-chomsky-slavoj-zizek-ding-dong

Act III
Chomsky writes a brief response to Zizek's comments from the transcript above. And still maintains that Zizek has nothing empirical to offer or any corrections. Shit is getting serious...
Chomsky to Zizek
http://www.zcommunications.org/contents/194150

Act IV
Zizek responds to Chomsky. Zizek perks up to attention here and gives an essay with citations and empirical references. Shit just got real... 
Zizek to Chomsky
http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/1365-some-bewildered-clarifications


*Note: so after the miscommunications are cleared and the real jabs have been thrown instead of a shadow boxing through hearsay. The debate is now legitimate and has taken on some academic value. I hope Chomsky responds and takes this further... shit's better than television.


Assessment by PEL; podcast:
 http://www.partiallyexaminedlife.com/2013/07/30/chomsky-vs-zizek/

*Update: another podcast on the debate by 'Diet Soap Podcast', posted by critical-theory.com

*Update: Commentary by Greg Burris, 'What the Chomsky-Zizek debate tells us about Snowden's NSA Revelations'