Duane Rousselle has posted a critique of those who live under the delusion of being Deleuzians. The same objections can be applied Laruelleans, and to many other followers of Big Masters, including Lacanians.
Rousselle’s text is a useful critique of many contemporary Deleuzians, just as Badiou’s critiques of Deleuzian ideology have been useful. These critiques do not actually touch Deleuze’s own works, and even less his collaborative works with Guattari, as Deleuze is the first to say « Deleuze does not exist ».
See the first paragraph of A THOUSAND PLATEAUS where Deleuze and Guattari say:
« To reach, not the point where one no longer says I, but the point where it is no longer of any importance whether one says I. We are no longer ourselves ».
But if Deleuze does not exist then neither does Lacan, and Rousselle cannot criticise the Deleuzians while supposing that his critiques repose on a secure « Lacanian » foundation.
Laruelle, riffing on Deleuze and Guattari, declared « Laruelle does not exist ». His followers naively quote this, without realising that in saying this Laruelle disavows every favorable preface, every translation, every recommendation, every endorsement he has ever made.