To continue with a theme....More ill-thought out and badly timed lookalikes
.....or maybe David Brent
Update: Anthony Paul Smith came here thinking this was the room for an argument (see comments). Perhaps some recent comments by Walter Benn Michaels may answer the call (let it not be said that they sheath'd their swords for lack of argument!):
The problem with Lindsay Waters is that he never says anything and what he does say is meaningless. His position is without philosophical content . . . is almost pure ressentiment. But if you want to see ressentiment in its pure, Platonic form, unpolluted by any touch of intellectual content, you should check out this new book, Theory's Empire. You can talk endlessly about the difference between theory with a big-T and theory with a little-t but it won't get you anywhere. Eventually you'll convince yourself you're thinking about arguments when you're really thinking about attitudes. Sure, you can talk about how the two are related but as long as you confuse the two you'll never get anywhere. It's like that thing (turns to Sean), what is that thing, the thing, The Valve? Yes? Endless talk about big-T versus little-t but no real intellectual substance to the conservation.