Europe is Kaput – Long live Europe!
Talk · zizekpodcast.com ·
2015-11 · 1:53:00 · 15,276 words
with Yanis Varoufakis, Julian Assange
geopolitics-warideologyliberalism-political-correctnessfascism-populismdemocracycapitalismreligion-theologyrace-antisemitismrevolution-violencetechnology-ai-cyberspaceeconomics
A London panel discussion (circa November 2015) featuring Slavoj Žižek, Yanis Varoufakis, and Julian Assange (via video link from the Ecuadorian embassy) in the aftermath of the Paris terror attacks. The conversation ranges across the refugee crisis, European fragmentation, ISIS strategy, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Saudi Arabia's role in the Middle East, WikiLeaks and surveillance capitalism, TTIP/TTP trade agreements, and the prospects for a democratized Europe. Žižek argues against liberal humanitarianism while insisting on Western complicity in the refugee crisis, critiques politically-correct left silencing of Islam critique, and expresses a pessimist's skepticism about democratic reform from within.
every located moment in this recording, click one to read it
The ideas in it 12
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
The rhetorical move by which some leftists condemn terror attacks only with a qualifying 'but' that shifts blame to Western imperialism, which Žižek rejects as a false justification.
Žižek's critical label for the liberal-humanitarian framing of refugees and terror victims that depoliticizes structural causes and converts political problems into moral-emotional appeals.
Žižek adopts Sloterdijk's metaphor of a bubble in which Western citizens experience normalized safety, seeing outside horrors through TV screens as if from another reality, only occasionally punctured by events like Paris.
Žižek borrows the liberal-left critique of the EU's democratic deficit to argue, by analogy with Soviet apologists, that such a deficit is not an accidental flaw but a structural necessity of how the system works.
as “grey zone”
Al-Qaeda/ISIS's strategic term (cited via Assange) for the population of Muslims who blend secular/Western and Islamic identities, eliminating this zone through anti-Muslim crackdowns is explicitly ISIS's goal.
Žižek invokes Benjamin's concept to characterize the Palestinian knife attacks as a form of violence that falls outside the normal moral calculus, going as far as his sympathy extends before pulling back.
Žižek argues that Europe's genuine contribution, communism, feminism, Enlightenment universalism, should be wielded ruthlessly against Europe's own limitations and exported as a tool for others' freedom.
as “holy spirit as first name for communist party”
Žižek equates the Christian Holy Spirit, community of believers after the death of God, with the communist party as a collective political subject formed after the 'death' of transcendent authority.
Varoufakis uses the term to describe how the technological infrastructure of connectivity has been captured by power to concentrate information and deny transparency to citizens.
Varoufakis invokes Marx's term for capitalism's structural problem when automation eliminates wage-earners who would otherwise be consumers, intensifying the contradiction at the heart of capitalist production.
Assange's label for the dominant Silicon Valley ideology that merges tech-solutionism with neoliberalism and positions itself as the world's leading geopolitical vision, with no rival ideology of comparable scale.
Žižek uses the Lacanian objet a to describe Varoufakis as the remainder-object of Syriza, the small part whose removal causes the whole phenomenon to lose its interest and energy.
Stories he reaches for 3
Ruth Kluger, a Jewish woman who survived Auschwitz, was shocked after the war to see another Auschwitz survivor with a camp number on his arm making brutal attacks on Arabs, illustrating that extreme suffering does not produce ethical sensitivity.
“there is nothing liberating in extreme suffering... auschwitz was also in this sense an ethical catastrophe.”
Žižek narrates a chain in which every nation in Europe identifies the 'Balkan' as beginning with their neighbor to the east: Slovenes say Croatia is Balkan, Croats say Serbia is, Serbs say Albania is, until the British conclude that all of Europe is a 'big Balkan' with Brussels as the new Constantinople.
“this is the slovene nationalism. we are mittteleuropa. croatia balkan begins.”
Žižek cites Alain Badiou on the civil war in the Central African Republic between a Christian majority and Muslim minority in the northeast, noting that on closer inspection the conflict is driven by oil discovered in the northeast, with France paradoxically supporting Muslims and China also involved, illustrating economic neocolonialism beneath apparent ethnic-religious conflict.
“they discovered oil in the northeast and france is paradoxical they're more supporting muslims and chinese are... like whenever or congo.”
Works invoked 6
The Matrix film
Varoufakis suggests the post-capitalist future could be 'the Matrix as a documentary'; Žižek eagerly confirms the reference, using it to illustrate that what follows capitalism could be worse.
Mein Kampf book
Žižek uses it in a reductio: understanding Hitler's story from inside would not justify his crimes, illustrating why 'whose story we haven't heard' logic is bankrupt.
The X-Files tv
Žižek declares himself 'a partisan of X-Files': 'the truth is outside', the structural/social truth is in what you do, not in the beautiful internal story you tell yourself.
Dabiq journal
Assange cites ISIS's magazine to show that ISIS explicitly stated its strategy of provoking Western crackdowns on Muslims to eliminate the 'grey zone', using it as evidentiary source.
Assange references the 2004 al-Qaeda strategic document as the origin of ISIS's Western attack strategy, eliminate the grey zone by provoking an anti-Muslim crackdown.
The New Digital Age book
Assange cites Google's book as explicitly claiming intellectual and geopolitical leadership for Silicon Valley, a symptom of high-tech liberalism's ambition to replace traditional governance.
People invoked 20
Ruth Klüger positive
Žižek speaks warmly of the Jewish Holocaust survivor and writer Ruth Kluger, using her memoirs to illustrate the claim that extreme suffering does not produce ethical sensitivity.
Described as Žižek's friend who helped Tamer Nafar get a visa to perform in the US.
Mentioned by Varoufakis as the speculator who became very rich when Britain was forced out of the ERM, a historical example of exchange-rate instability.
Benjamin Walter positive
Žižek invokes Benjamin's concept of 'divine violence' to partially characterize the Palestinian knife attacks, going far in solidarity but stopping short of full endorsement.
François Hollande negative
Assange criticizes Hollande's overreaction to the Paris attacks as playing directly into ISIS's stated strategy of provoking crackdowns on Muslim populations in Europe.
Alain Badiou positive
Žižek credits Badiou for drawing his attention to the Central African Republic conflict as an example of economic neocolonialism beneath apparent religious conflict.
Tony Benn positive
Varoufakis invokes Benn's four questions for any democratic power (what powers do you have, how did you get them, what use do you make of them, how can we get rid of you) as the template for European constitutional reform.
Julian Assange positive
Žižek fully supports WikiLeaks' project, frames Assange as a quasi-Christ figure (with playful affection), and argues WikiLeaks' achievement is making ordinary people's ideological conformism impossible to maintain.
Yanis Varoufakis positive
Žižek expresses genuine admiration and political solidarity with Varoufakis, framing him as the objet a of Syriza, the object-cause of its radical potential, while pushing back on the project of EU democratization as insufficient.
Benjamin Netanyahu negative
Žižek ridicules Netanyahu's claim that a Palestinian Mufti instigated the Holocaust, using it as evidence that Israel is approaching Holocaust denial.
Peter Sloterdijk positive
Žižek credits the conservative philosopher Sloterdijk (called 'Peter Schteijk') for the 'cupola' metaphor of Western isolation from global violence, acknowledging he is 'not always a total idiot'.
Mentioned as an example of the paradox of top-down democratic decision-making: Merkel's invitation of refugees was arguably undemocratic in procedure, yet Žižek suggests a referendum would have produced a racist outcome.
Hillary Clinton negative
Assange highlights Clinton's role in pushing for the Libya intervention against Pentagon advice and her reaction ('we came, we saw, he died') to Gaddafi's killing as revealing a dangerous personality approaching the White House.
Cited as an example of Iraq's secularism under Saddam: a Christian serving as foreign minister of a Muslim-majority state.
Margaret Thatcher positive
Varoufakis credits Thatcher's last Commons speech with correctly stating that controlling interest rates and monetary policy is a fundamentally political matter, a point Varoufakis agrees with despite opposing everything else Thatcher stood for.
Jürgen Habermas negative
Žižek dismisses the Habermasian liberal-left position that the EU is basically fine but needs a democratic deficit corrected, treating it as an ideological mantra that misses the structural necessity of the deficit.
Tamer Nafar positive
Žižek champions the Palestinian singer who writes against honor killings and was attacked by PC leftists at UCLA, presenting him as the model of an organic Arab progressive ally.
Nelson Mandela positive
Žižek invokes Mandela as an exemplar of rejecting European colonial guilt-projection and insisting on African self-determination.
Eric Schmidt negative
Assange describes meeting Schmidt and finding his worldview frightening in its intellectual poverty and ambition for Silicon Valley-driven global governance.
John Maynard Keynes positive
Varoufakis notes Keynes had a role in designing Bretton Woods and that his better ideas were not the ones ultimately used.
What it argues
Paris attacks and Western response as political symptomThe 'cupola' of Western privilege and selective solidarityEuropean left's crisis after Syriza's capitulationSaudi Arabia as lynchpin of imperial complicity in the Middle EastWikiLeaks, surveillance capitalism, and democratic transparencyHumanitarian discourse as mystification of political responsibilityIslam critique, Islamophobia, and the politically-correct left's silence
Dialectical moves 7
“The greatest victim of the Paris attacks is the refugee — the very person who fled the same terror that struck Paris is now portrayed as terror's other face.”
The attacks invert the refugee's position: the person who should be seen as terror's victim becomes terror's symbol.
“Israel is the true Holocaust denier: by weaponizing the Holocaust as a shield for its actions on the West Bank, Israel is the one who truly disrespects and obscenely exploits the Holocaust.”
The reversal exposes the self-defeating logic of Holocaust instrumentalization: the invocation becomes desecration.
“The EU's democratic deficit is not a flaw in an otherwise good system but a structural necessity of the system itself — just as the Soviets' democratic deficit was.”
The analogy collapses reform-from-within logic by showing the deficit is the design, not a bug.
“The anti-immigrant defenders of European culture are the greatest threat to European culture.”
Those claiming to protect European civilization (Enlightenment, emancipation) are in fact its most dangerous enemies.
“Neoliberalism doesn't really exist — state apparatuses are getting stronger and stronger even where neoliberal rhetoric prevails.”
The apparent withdrawal of the state under neoliberalism conceals an intensification of state power.
“WikiLeaks embarrassed not just those in power but us — the ordinary conformists who preferred to politely pretend we didn't know.”
Transparency exposes not only the powerful but the complicit ignorance of those governed.
“Christianity is a great religion because it basically says God is dead — the Holy Spirit being the first name for the communist party.”
Christianity's subversive core is its death of God, which Žižek reframes as the primordial community-of-equals, structurally homologous to communist collectivity.
Claims 16
asserts
A true leftist must condemn the Paris attacks unconditionally, without any qualifying 'but' that dilutes the condemnation with references to Western imperialism.left response to terrorism
rejects
The humanitarianism of the refugee discourse is a mystification that obscures Western political and economic responsibility for the refugee crisis.humanitarian approach to refugees
rejects
Sympathy for refugees should not rest on discovering they are 'people like us'; that criterion implies permission to abandon them if they turn out to be different.liberal humanitarianism
asserts
The Paris attacks are worse for political dynamics than the refugee crisis because they shift the frame entirely from social-economic conflict to an irrational civilizational 'us vs. them'.political consequences of the Paris attacks
asserts
Refugees fleeing ISIS are the greatest victims of the Paris attacks because they are now being scapegoated as the other face of the terror they themselves fled.refugees and the Paris attacks
asserts
Israel's deployment of the Holocaust as a shield against criticism of its actions on the West Bank is itself a form of Holocaust denial.Israel and the Holocaust
asserts
Extreme suffering does not produce ethical sensitivity; surviving Auschwitz does not guarantee the survivor will be more attuned to others' suffering.suffering and ethics
asserts
The EU's democratic deficit is not a correctable flaw but a structural feature necessary to the system's functioning, analogous to Soviet apologists' defense of 'communism with a democratic deficit'.European Union reform
asserts
Saudi Arabia is the key node linking Western imperialism with the Syrian crisis and the broader Middle Eastern conflict, and its absence from refugee discourse is a scandal.Saudi Arabia and Western imperialism
rejects
The left's dismissal of all criticism of Islam as Islamophobia is an ideological catastrophe and a patronizing racism toward Arabs.left treatment of Islam critique
asserts
Europe's genuine emancipatory legacy — communism, feminism, Enlightenment universalism — must be defended precisely against anti-immigrant European nationalists who claim to defend European culture.European cultural legacy
asserts
WikiLeaks' greatest achievement is making ordinary people unable to claim ignorance — it embarrassed not just power but the conformist public who preferred not to know.WikiLeaks and ideology
asserts
What follows capitalism could be something worse than today's capitalism, and the left must struggle for that alternative rather than assume improvement is automatic.post-capitalism
asserts
Syriza's subversive potential lay in its insistence on radical change while remaining inside the European Union; once it split into capitulators and outsiders, it was over.Syriza and European politics
asserts
Democracy sometimes does not work and people can simply be wrong; this is not a license for an enlightened elite but a warning that majority opinion can be racist and wrong.democracy and its limits
rejects
The real war in the Middle East is a Shia-Sunni conflict, not a clash between Islam and Christianity, and this is obscured by Western framing.clash-of-civilizations framing of Middle East
Quotes 14
“all our sympathy to the people of paris because what you experienced for one night that was our permanent life.”Slavoj Žižek · Western cupola and refugee reality
“there should be no but for a true leftist. we should condemn the paris... we should condemn it, but condemn it really.”Slavoj Žižek · unconditional condemnation of terrorism
“i am ashamed when somebody says, but did you see them there people? people like us... what does this mean? that if we discover that they are not people like us, that then sorry you can drown there.”Slavoj Žižek · critique of humanitarian identification
“the truth is outside. the truth in what you socially do in the horrors, the beautiful story you tell to yourself.”Slavoj Žižek · against self-exculpatory narrative
“they are the ones who are truly disrespecting and in an obscene way exploiting holocaust. they are the true holocaust deniers.”Slavoj Žižek · Israel as Holocaust denier
“no, there is nothing liberating in extreme suffering, you know. auschwitz was also in this sense, an ethical catastrophe.”Slavoj Žižek · suffering does not produce ethical sensitivity
“communism was okay, it just had a democratic deficit. both in cases the democratic deficit is a necessary part of how the entire system works.”Slavoj Žižek · EU democratic deficit as structural feature
“when you criticize me, you criticize my own community in english to impress your radical professors. i think in arabics to protect women in my own hood.”Slavoj Žižek · PC left vs. organic Arab feminist struggle
“christianity is a great religion because basically it says god is dead, we have holy spirit, which is for me the first name for the communist party, community of believers.”Slavoj Žižek · Holy Spirit as communist party
“the greatest achievement of wikileaks is to make us ordinary people impossible to ignore this. we cannot act as if we don't know.”Slavoj Žižek · WikiLeaks and ideological complicity
“what if what comes after capitalism as we know it can also be something even worse than today's capitalism?”Slavoj Žižek · pessimism about post-capitalism
“the greatest threat to european culture, which are the anti-immigrant defenders of europe.”Slavoj Žižek · defenders of Europe as Europe's greatest threat
“saudi arabia is not a primitive arab country, it is but at the same time country which is kind of a exposure of international financial capital.”Slavoj Žižek · Saudi Arabia as nexus of theocracy and global capital
“i have no evidence that humanity can become master of its faculties and of its fate. i choose as an axiom to believe that we can.”Yanis Varoufakis · axiomatic optimism
Transcript 129 turns
Moderator
so hello london. good evening. do you want to say hello as well or not? we'll see how good the evening so as you can see, it's my great honor and it's also great fun, but it's also a serious moment in europe that we are here in london. it's my great honor to... the guests were already introduced. but i must say, since the sabi festival was mentioned, slavoy and yanis varouakis actually met for the first time in zagreb two years ago, when the situation in the european union was pretty different than today. and today it's even worse. when they met, yanis varouakis was not yet minister of finance of greece. he's not more anymore. this changed in the meantime as well. at the festival, we also had alexis tsipras, who was not prime minister of greece yet. and slavoi and theis participated at different lectures, roundtables. but tonight, i think it's a historical event. it's for the first time that they share a stage together. so a big applause again. as mentioned, when we were planning this event, we couldn't even imagine that the paris attacks would happen. so this is a reason why we will actually start by posing the question on the paris attacks. it just happened several days ago. now we all know about the tragedy, but we also know about the reactions of the european leaders. franancoçois hollande called it an act of war. angela merkel called for more control, for more surveillance. the belgian and the french minister minister of interiors warned us that there will be more flight controls, more surveillance, and actually everything resembles a 9-11 in europe. but before we go into an analysis of the events and before we try to see what are the consequences of this event, i would like to pose the first question to yanis varfakis, actually. you were supposed to be in paris on a conference on the plan b. on saturday. but it was cancelled precisely because of the attacks in paris. so in a way, you are also involved. you couldn't be at the conference, but we are here tonight. so let's start with the paris attacks. what is your comment on what happened on friday in paris?
so hello london. good evening. do you want to say hello as well or not? we'll see how good the evening so as you can see, it's my great honor and it's also great fun, but it's also a serious moment in europe that we are here in london. it's my great honor to... the guests were already introduced. but i must say, since the sabi festival was mentioned, slavoy and yanis varouakis actually met for the first time in zagreb two years ago, when the situation in the european union was pretty different than today. and today it's even worse. when they met, yanis varouakis was not yet minister of finance of greece. he's not more anymore. this changed in the meantime as well. at the festival, we also had alexis tsipras, who was not prime minister of greece yet. and slavoi and theis participated at different lectures, roundtables. but tonight, i think it's a historical event. it's for the first time that they share a stage together. so a big applause again. as mentioned, when we were planning this event, we couldn't even imagine that the paris attacks would happen. so this is a reason why we will actually start by posing the question on the paris attacks. it just happened several days ago. now we all know about the tragedy, but we also know about the reactions of the european leaders. franancoçois hollande called it an act of war. angela merkel called for more control, for more surveillance. the belgian and the french minister minister of interiors warned us that there will be more flight controls, more surveillance, and actually everything resembles a 9-11 in europe. but before we go into an analysis of the events and before we try to see what are the consequences of this event, i would like to pose the first question to yanis varfakis, actually. you were supposed to be in paris on a conference on the plan b. on saturday. but it was cancelled precisely because of the attacks in paris. so in a way, you are also involved. you couldn't be at the conference, but we are here tonight. so let's start with the paris attacks. what is your comment on what happened on friday in paris?
Yanis Varoufakis
the genuine feeling is one that leads me to silence. the very notion of this brutality is one that, personally speaking, numbs me. thoughts of solidarity, of a shared grief for the pain of our friends and compatriots, i should say, because we are all one people. for the french people are quite overwhelming. i'm very worried about the capacity. of the isis thugs. to create circumstances in europe where we try to fight darkness, not with light but with darkness. we are faced and this i think should concentrate our mind. by people who were determined to kill themselves. in order to close mines and to close borders. and the question for us in europe, everywhere. do we have what it takes? to commit. to the ultimate sacrifices we must make. to keep open minds and open borders.
the genuine feeling is one that leads me to silence. the very notion of this brutality is one that, personally speaking, numbs me. thoughts of solidarity, of a shared grief for the pain of our friends and compatriots, i should say, because we are all one people. for the french people are quite overwhelming. i'm very worried about the capacity. of the isis thugs. to create circumstances in europe where we try to fight darkness, not with light but with darkness. we are faced and this i think should concentrate our mind. by people who were determined to kill themselves. in order to close mines and to close borders. and the question for us in europe, everywhere. do we have what it takes? to commit. to the ultimate sacrifices we must make. to keep open minds and open borders.
Moderator
how do you sloy comment the reactions of the european leaders? do you think they are appropriate or they are a bit too harsh?
how do you sloy comment the reactions of the european leaders? do you think they are appropriate or they are a bit too harsh?
Slavoj Žižek
okay, my reply will be a little bit longer, but first, i hope you allow me to make a very short statement. i hope we'll be able to return to this topic towards the end later. how proud i am to be here with yanis for otherwise i hate him, blah, blah, blah, but basically, for a very precise reason. theriza was a unique experience. why? precisely because it over this simplistic opposition. either you are inside and play just some social democratic like new labour game. we play the game, but a little bit better maybe, or simple step outside, like the greek so-called left platform. for that magic third way, of course not in the sense of new labor. the whole subversive potential of syriza. that's why it was such a trauma. was that? they wanted radical change of european union but staying inside. staying outside, it's not a problem. this is not an act of resistance. i mean, like north korea is definitely outside and so on. you know, and that's why i think... he destiny. embodies this. the tragedy. the moment syriza fell apart into those who capitulated and those who opted for the outside, it was over. you were literally dead what we aians call object a, the object of syriza, you know, maybe a tiny part, but you take that element, the politics for which you stood out, and simply the whole phenomenon somehow loses. its interest. you have the standard duality of crazy pseudo-radical left and the conformist majority. but let me go to paris events. yes. i agree with your. point i would just try to elaborate it a little bit and so on no. e. you know, i think, and i agree here with you, we should avoid that leftist temptation. of a bat. but in the sense of, yes, we sympathize with the victims, but... nonetheless, this was distorted but justified to reply against western imperialism, blah, blah, blah. no, there should be no but for a true leftist. we should condemn the paris no, you will not get the liberal message. we should condemn it, but condemn it really. because what's the true tragedy of event in paris it's double. first! did you notice how the political focus of european life when back down in the last months. the first half it was hiza. whatever were there, the distortions, mistakes, it was clear focus on the deadlock of capitalist system, of class struggle and so on. then in the second half it was refugees. it's obviously. also class struggle exploitation, our responsibility. but nonetheless, unfortunately the focus already shifted from social economic topics to, you know, all this, i hate it, humanitarian topics of, you know, refugees, are we ready to understand them, to open ourselves to them? i hope i'll be able to talk later more about it because i think this entire approach is totally wrong, thishumanization of refugees. i am ashamed when somebody says, but did you see them there people? people like us and so on. what does this mean? that if we discover that they are not people like us, that then sorry you can drown there and so on. i mean it's easy to sympathize with a neighbor who is a fellow man like you. you know but what if a neighbor is not exactly like you then the problem emerges another thing here i cannot avoid a provocation. one of the most stupid pacifist, you talked enough in the last month on tv and so on, i will have my three, four, five minutes. the most stupid saying, here i hate this liberal universal humanism is... an... enemy so.
okay, my reply will be a little bit longer, but first, i hope you allow me to make a very short statement. i hope we'll be able to return to this topic towards the end later. how proud i am to be here with yanis for otherwise i hate him, blah, blah, blah, but basically, for a very precise reason. theriza was a unique experience. why? precisely because it over this simplistic opposition. either you are inside and play just some social democratic like new labour game. we play the game, but a little bit better maybe, or simple step outside, like the greek so-called left platform. for that magic third way, of course not in the sense of new labor. the whole subversive potential of syriza. that's why it was such a trauma. was that? they wanted radical change of european union but staying inside. staying outside, it's not a problem. this is not an act of resistance. i mean, like north korea is definitely outside and so on. you know, and that's why i think... he destiny. embodies this. the tragedy. the moment syriza fell apart into those who capitulated and those who opted for the outside, it was over. you were literally dead what we aians call object a, the object of syriza, you know, maybe a tiny part, but you take that element, the politics for which you stood out, and simply the whole phenomenon somehow loses. its interest. you have the standard duality of crazy pseudo-radical left and the conformist majority. but let me go to paris events. yes. i agree with your. point i would just try to elaborate it a little bit and so on no. e. you know, i think, and i agree here with you, we should avoid that leftist temptation. of a bat. but in the sense of, yes, we sympathize with the victims, but... nonetheless, this was distorted but justified to reply against western imperialism, blah, blah, blah. no, there should be no but for a true leftist. we should condemn the paris no, you will not get the liberal message. we should condemn it, but condemn it really. because what's the true tragedy of event in paris it's double. first! did you notice how the political focus of european life when back down in the last months. the first half it was hiza. whatever were there, the distortions, mistakes, it was clear focus on the deadlock of capitalist system, of class struggle and so on. then in the second half it was refugees. it's obviously. also class struggle exploitation, our responsibility. but nonetheless, unfortunately the focus already shifted from social economic topics to, you know, all this, i hate it, humanitarian topics of, you know, refugees, are we ready to understand them, to open ourselves to them? i hope i'll be able to talk later more about it because i think this entire approach is totally wrong, thishumanization of refugees. i am ashamed when somebody says, but did you see them there people? people like us and so on. what does this mean? that if we discover that they are not people like us, that then sorry you can drown there and so on. i mean it's easy to sympathize with a neighbor who is a fellow man like you. you know but what if a neighbor is not exactly like you then the problem emerges another thing here i cannot avoid a provocation. one of the most stupid pacifist, you talked enough in the last month on tv and so on, i will have my three, four, five minutes. the most stupid saying, here i hate this liberal universal humanism is... an... enemy so.
Yanis Varoufakis
someone
someone
Slavoj Žižek
whose story we didn't yet hear. you know.
whose story we didn't yet hear. you know.
Yanis Varoufakis
ah,k, dé gut.
ah,k, dé gut.
Slavoj Žižek
to know. so it means hitler was only our enemy because we didn't read enough of meinamp and understood no, that's the tragedy of violence today. if you look it from the inside, i can guarantee you that even the worst criminals can always tell a wonder story from the no, here i'm the partisan of x-files. the truth is outside. the truth in what you socially do in the horrors, the beautiful story you tell to yourself. okay, so now, again, after refugees, tragic as it is, the paris event is even a step further from the standpoint of political dynamic. now there is not even this social problem, refugees of imperialism. it's simply us against them, totally demonized irrational force and so on, and with all this disgusting universal solidarity and so on and so on. why is this not enough. to finish, i just want to make one, but i think it's a crucial point. the formal aspect of these attacks. there is a great difference between attacks, catastroph killings in our western metropolises and in third world or other countries. without we have our ordinary lives, like in paris the last week, cafeterias are full, rock concerts, and then boom, something happens. but happens and it's over. and then we have all this humanitarian bull should we sympathize and so on and so on. but you know, here i refer to a conservative philosopher, but he's not always a total idiot, peter schterijk, who said, are you aware that we in the west, we live as if in an isolated cupola. we see the outside but we don't see the wall. we know about horrors going on out there in the west the third war and so on but it for us really another reality we see it through tv screens and so on. only from time to time we get a little bit of like moment. look at me like this you know when i look at you you have very short yes momentary interruption so for me the most what what this paris we should have unconditional solidarity with paris people but not just because they suffered, but because they got a taste, a momentary taste one evening what in many countries outside our cupola from lebanon, to syria, to congo, not to mention all those countries is their daily life. the most beautiful statement that i got from a refugee because and that's the true tragedy, the greatest victim of paris attacks will be refugees. and it's an obscenity. because they who basically escape from the same terror that strike paris, they are now by european anti-immigrant right-wingers portrayed as the other face of terror. so one of them said on slovene tv something so beautiful. he said all our sympathy to the people of paris because what you experienced for one night that was our permanent life.
to know. so it means hitler was only our enemy because we didn't read enough of meinamp and understood no, that's the tragedy of violence today. if you look it from the inside, i can guarantee you that even the worst criminals can always tell a wonder story from the no, here i'm the partisan of x-files. the truth is outside. the truth in what you socially do in the horrors, the beautiful story you tell to yourself. okay, so now, again, after refugees, tragic as it is, the paris event is even a step further from the standpoint of political dynamic. now there is not even this social problem, refugees of imperialism. it's simply us against them, totally demonized irrational force and so on, and with all this disgusting universal solidarity and so on and so on. why is this not enough. to finish, i just want to make one, but i think it's a crucial point. the formal aspect of these attacks. there is a great difference between attacks, catastroph killings in our western metropolises and in third world or other countries. without we have our ordinary lives, like in paris the last week, cafeterias are full, rock concerts, and then boom, something happens. but happens and it's over. and then we have all this humanitarian bull should we sympathize and so on and so on. but you know, here i refer to a conservative philosopher, but he's not always a total idiot, peter schterijk, who said, are you aware that we in the west, we live as if in an isolated cupola. we see the outside but we don't see the wall. we know about horrors going on out there in the west the third war and so on but it for us really another reality we see it through tv screens and so on. only from time to time we get a little bit of like moment. look at me like this you know when i look at you you have very short yes momentary interruption so for me the most what what this paris we should have unconditional solidarity with paris people but not just because they suffered, but because they got a taste, a momentary taste one evening what in many countries outside our cupola from lebanon, to syria, to congo, not to mention all those countries is their daily life. the most beautiful statement that i got from a refugee because and that's the true tragedy, the greatest victim of paris attacks will be refugees. and it's an obscenity. because they who basically escape from the same terror that strike paris, they are now by european anti-immigrant right-wingers portrayed as the other face of terror. so one of them said on slovene tv something so beautiful. he said all our sympathy to the people of paris because what you experienced for one night that was our permanent life.
Yanis Varoufakis
there.
there.
Slavoj Žižek
and that's what we are escaping. from we have, i think that paris murders should be also an instigation for us to become fully aware of incredible amount of all types of violence, religious, military, sexual violence, like in south africa, my black friends are telling me, you know that there every four minutes a woman is raped, every eight hours a woman is killed by her sexual partner and so on and so on. you know. we should learn to watch through the crack of our. cupola that's the temptation that you mentioned, not to close our cupola, not the automatic anti-immigrant reaction of closing of the cupola.
and that's what we are escaping. from we have, i think that paris murders should be also an instigation for us to become fully aware of incredible amount of all types of violence, religious, military, sexual violence, like in south africa, my black friends are telling me, you know that there every four minutes a woman is raped, every eight hours a woman is killed by her sexual partner and so on and so on. you know. we should learn to watch through the crack of our. cupola that's the temptation that you mentioned, not to close our cupola, not the automatic anti-immigrant reaction of closing of the cupola.
Moderator
this is precisely along this line i would like to pose the question to yanis. when i was traveling today by british airways.
this is precisely along this line i would like to pose the question to yanis. when i was traveling today by british airways.
Slavoj Žižek
i
i
Moderator
so.
so.
Slavoj Žižek
should be allowed.
should be allowed.
Moderator
excuse me.
excuse me.
Slavoj Žižek
oh. sorry.
oh. sorry.
Moderator
anyhow, i mean, you know the story because i told you already, but i think it brings us directly into the problem of this cupola. so when i was traveling, it really surprised me by british a from berlin today, at the beginning when we were entering the plane, the pilot asked us for one minute silence for the victims of paris attacks. so my question to, and we have seen that also facebook has a safety button, there is a flag on facebook. there is also a flag on youtube. in berlin you can see various buildings with a french flag, the same in london, the same sydney opera and so on. so my question is the obvious one. what about 19 people who died at the funeral in baghdad the same day? what about lebanon? don't you yanis think that this cupola is a very cynical cupola and how can this be changed? how can the europeans perceive that actually actuallycker said the same whatody you just said, sl, that's the surprise. he said that the refugees are fleeing precisely from isis and that they will be the biggest victims.
anyhow, i mean, you know the story because i told you already, but i think it brings us directly into the problem of this cupola. so when i was traveling, it really surprised me by british a from berlin today, at the beginning when we were entering the plane, the pilot asked us for one minute silence for the victims of paris attacks. so my question to, and we have seen that also facebook has a safety button, there is a flag on facebook. there is also a flag on youtube. in berlin you can see various buildings with a french flag, the same in london, the same sydney opera and so on. so my question is the obvious one. what about 19 people who died at the funeral in baghdad the same day? what about lebanon? don't you yanis think that this cupola is a very cynical cupola and how can this be changed? how can the europeans perceive that actually actuallycker said the same whatody you just said, sl, that's the surprise. he said that the refugees are fleeing precisely from isis and that they will be the biggest victims.
Slavoj Žižek
it the same forces which attacked paris.
it the same forces which attacked paris.
Moderator
and who attacked paris and why did they attack them? because of hollande who gave weapons to the rebels to overthrow assad. so i would go into this direction of apparent paradoxes in this whole story. so we are fighting against terrorism, but we were the ones who actually created them in the first place. but let's start with the cynicism. do you agree it's a cynicism of europe again?
and who attacked paris and why did they attack them? because of hollande who gave weapons to the rebels to overthrow assad. so i would go into this direction of apparent paradoxes in this whole story. so we are fighting against terrorism, but we were the ones who actually created them in the first place. but let's start with the cynicism. do you agree it's a cynicism of europe again?
Slavoj Žižek
but it's humanitarianism.
but it's humanitarianism.
Yanis Varoufakis
call it what you will. the moment when the captain of the british airways flight calls for a one-minute silence is not one that needs to be criticized or subverted along the lines of... the narrative that there is a cynicism involved. at that point i think that what he did, and i assume it was a he. that what he did, it was well meant and it should be. taken as such. but it would be nice if we simply added to this adaj, a demand by passengers that we should have another minute of silence for the victims of beirut and a third minute of silence for.
call it what you will. the moment when the captain of the british airways flight calls for a one-minute silence is not one that needs to be criticized or subverted along the lines of... the narrative that there is a cynicism involved. at that point i think that what he did, and i assume it was a he. that what he did, it was well meant and it should be. taken as such. but it would be nice if we simply added to this adaj, a demand by passengers that we should have another minute of silence for the victims of beirut and a third minute of silence for.
Slavoj Žižek
it would be a long silent.
it would be a long silent.
Yanis Varoufakis
thank. that it should be a silent flight, which would be slist utopia. and there should be another minute of silence, maybe three minutes of silence for the 50 people whose corpses were floating in the aegean sea the other day. and maybe you know, if we... not not challenge the cynicism, but add demands for respect to victims independently. of whether they are part of this cocoon or not. then that is the way to subvert the dominant paradigm, which says that whenever there are 500 deaths, 400 deaths, 300 deaths in syria, they go to page 26 of the new york times. but when there is a single death in the first world, it's huge headlines and running stories in the media for three days.
thank. that it should be a silent flight, which would be slist utopia. and there should be another minute of silence, maybe three minutes of silence for the 50 people whose corpses were floating in the aegean sea the other day. and maybe you know, if we... not not challenge the cynicism, but add demands for respect to victims independently. of whether they are part of this cocoon or not. then that is the way to subvert the dominant paradigm, which says that whenever there are 500 deaths, 400 deaths, 300 deaths in syria, they go to page 26 of the new york times. but when there is a single death in the first world, it's huge headlines and running stories in the media for three days.
Slavoj Žižek
can i make this time really short remark? and totally agreeing with you, then i'm worried. we will just be friendly with each other. i want to hear blood. okay, but there will be blood. there will be blood, okay. we promise you blood. no, i totally agree with your line. i think that... the worst thing and the true ethical temptation is this one. i will take first a pro-palestinian statement i saw recently in my own capital, ljubljana, writing on the wall which says, if i were to be a palestinian from gaza, i would also have denied holocaust. i think this is wrong because it exactly reproduces the zionist thinking of we suffered so much in an undescribable way in holocaust that we can now basically do whatever we want and so on and so on. we should absolutely our answer to the brutalities of israel on the west bank and so on. should be... not only there should be a balance, like, okay, you suffer, but you shouldn't make others suffer, but no, what israelis are doing there, mentioning the unimaginable horror of holocaust as some kind of background which should make them. safe from criticism of what they are doing now on the west bank. they are the ones who are truly disrespecting and in an obscene way exploiting holocaust. they are the true holocaust deniers. and i'm not kidding here. israel is now literally approaching a holocaust denial. you know the last statement by netanyahu? that it was really that hussaini guy, the boss of palestinians in the 30s who in 41 suggestedler to hitler to do it and so on and so on. incidentally, and that's what i like about my jewish friends, they immediately exploded in wonderful further liberating humor. they said, making fun of netanyahu, that now some archaeological dis discovery showed that when pontius pilatus was condemning christ, there was a kind of a mohammed figure whispering him into the aisle to crucify. but seriously, what i really want to say here is that now more than ever, we should insist on the unity of str that's what maybe we can return later to it. my ultimate horror is this cultural divide, the false one, in the sense of you support palestinians so you shouldn't emphasize too much holocaust or the dr and so on. it should be, it's not only that all of them, but we should take this as part of the same struggle. it is by fighting for palestinians and on the west bank that we critics of israel show the greatest possible respect to the holocaust. my last point and then i shut up for some time. ruth kluger. a wonderful old jewish lady whom i even met when she was teaching, i think, at ucla there. and this is the saddest lesson of terror. she wrote her memoirs as a young girl she was in auschwitz and something traumatic happened to her. after her stay in auschwitz, she survived, she went later to israel, i think it was like this, and she was shocked to see there another auschwitz survivor with numberstadtut. making brutal attacks on arabs, barbarians, and so on. and then she wrote, i had the saddest ethical insight. no, there is nothing liberating in extreme suffering, you know. auschwitz was also in this sense, an ethical catastrophe. it's not that if you survive auschwitz as a victim, you will be absolutely sensitive to all suffering. no, you will also suffer the consequences. that's the saddest lesson of terror. we should drop this humanist idea. he really suffered so he will know suffering of others. unfortunately, no. okay. here
can i make this time really short remark? and totally agreeing with you, then i'm worried. we will just be friendly with each other. i want to hear blood. okay, but there will be blood. there will be blood, okay. we promise you blood. no, i totally agree with your line. i think that... the worst thing and the true ethical temptation is this one. i will take first a pro-palestinian statement i saw recently in my own capital, ljubljana, writing on the wall which says, if i were to be a palestinian from gaza, i would also have denied holocaust. i think this is wrong because it exactly reproduces the zionist thinking of we suffered so much in an undescribable way in holocaust that we can now basically do whatever we want and so on and so on. we should absolutely our answer to the brutalities of israel on the west bank and so on. should be... not only there should be a balance, like, okay, you suffer, but you shouldn't make others suffer, but no, what israelis are doing there, mentioning the unimaginable horror of holocaust as some kind of background which should make them. safe from criticism of what they are doing now on the west bank. they are the ones who are truly disrespecting and in an obscene way exploiting holocaust. they are the true holocaust deniers. and i'm not kidding here. israel is now literally approaching a holocaust denial. you know the last statement by netanyahu? that it was really that hussaini guy, the boss of palestinians in the 30s who in 41 suggestedler to hitler to do it and so on and so on. incidentally, and that's what i like about my jewish friends, they immediately exploded in wonderful further liberating humor. they said, making fun of netanyahu, that now some archaeological dis discovery showed that when pontius pilatus was condemning christ, there was a kind of a mohammed figure whispering him into the aisle to crucify. but seriously, what i really want to say here is that now more than ever, we should insist on the unity of str that's what maybe we can return later to it. my ultimate horror is this cultural divide, the false one, in the sense of you support palestinians so you shouldn't emphasize too much holocaust or the dr and so on. it should be, it's not only that all of them, but we should take this as part of the same struggle. it is by fighting for palestinians and on the west bank that we critics of israel show the greatest possible respect to the holocaust. my last point and then i shut up for some time. ruth kluger. a wonderful old jewish lady whom i even met when she was teaching, i think, at ucla there. and this is the saddest lesson of terror. she wrote her memoirs as a young girl she was in auschwitz and something traumatic happened to her. after her stay in auschwitz, she survived, she went later to israel, i think it was like this, and she was shocked to see there another auschwitz survivor with numberstadtut. making brutal attacks on arabs, barbarians, and so on. and then she wrote, i had the saddest ethical insight. no, there is nothing liberating in extreme suffering, you know. auschwitz was also in this sense, an ethical catastrophe. it's not that if you survive auschwitz as a victim, you will be absolutely sensitive to all suffering. no, you will also suffer the consequences. that's the saddest lesson of terror. we should drop this humanist idea. he really suffered so he will know suffering of others. unfortunately, no. okay. here
Moderator
would like i'd like to return from israel to europe, although it's connected, as we have seen, and pose a question to yanis, of course, but slavo, you can also answer later. when yanis answers.
would like i'd like to return from israel to europe, although it's connected, as we have seen, and pose a question to yanis, of course, but slavo, you can also answer later. when yanis answers.
Slavoj Žižek
i wonder for your faith after this talk.
i wonder for your faith after this talk.
Moderator
yeah, but it's always like that and i always survive. i'm like the cartoon movie character, you know, i always survive somehow. actually, you mentioned it already. don't you think, yanis, and then what could be the answer of the european left? because we heard what. but i will say it now if you give me a second. that actually this situation with paris, but also the situation with the refugees, and we have seen it in the balkan countries, we have seen it especially in hungary during orban's government with building a wall among our countries and so on. and especially now with paris that it will actually serve as a gift for the radical right, for le pen in france, for the ukip in britain, and for all the new right-wing parties in europe, which will now actually use it again against those very people who were victims of the refugee crisis at the very beginning. so my question is jan, how can the european left, not a party but a movement, and we heard that you are building up a pan-european movement, how can it resist this and want the right to be actually the biggest winner of this story?
yeah, but it's always like that and i always survive. i'm like the cartoon movie character, you know, i always survive somehow. actually, you mentioned it already. don't you think, yanis, and then what could be the answer of the european left? because we heard what. but i will say it now if you give me a second. that actually this situation with paris, but also the situation with the refugees, and we have seen it in the balkan countries, we have seen it especially in hungary during orban's government with building a wall among our countries and so on. and especially now with paris that it will actually serve as a gift for the radical right, for le pen in france, for the ukip in britain, and for all the new right-wing parties in europe, which will now actually use it again against those very people who were victims of the refugee crisis at the very beginning. so my question is jan, how can the european left, not a party but a movement, and we heard that you are building up a pan-european movement, how can it resist this and want the right to be actually the biggest winner of this story?
Yanis Varoufakis
well, the very sight of the french flag being projected on the london eye in berlin. in spite of the fact that slavo is extremely critical of all this cynical, liberal industry of generating forced solidarity, nevertheless, there is value to it. because it reminds us. that fences and borders. in the name of creating security, breed insecurity. and i challenge any one of you. to travel to the usexican border. to travel and walk under the shadows of the fence separating palestinians from palestinians and palestinians from israelis in palestine. i... invoke you to go to belfast and walk around the so-called. uh... peace wall. go to any such harsh division. the arguments for having created those fences are always the same. to create security. and the outcome is always the opposite. these fences and these walls. breathe insecurity. they create tensions. and they perpetually divide not only the two communities that they were built to separate. but the very communities that were separated from each other and this division continues to and mitigate it the divisions divide and multiply all the time and in the end they even globalize. so let me give you an example of what we've done in europe and in greece, my country, the previous government in its infinite wisdom decided to deal with the problem of refugees. that we're crossing from turkey to greece by building another huge fence. between the two countries. what effect did that have it simply increased the profits of the people smugglers and it increased the death rate of those that made the crossing. it increased the appeal of the ultra-right in greece because the ultra-right always feeds on fences and borders. and the insecurity that these fences and borders create. give rise to further shifts towards misanthropy that make the borders even more important, at least seemingly important. now... in europe. do you imagine? that we would be having the problems we're having in dealing with the refugee crisis. if we had not over the last ten years. been subjected to this process of fragmentation. the last ten years in the european union have been a period of divergence in the interest and in the name of further integration and an ever closer europe. the result is that the constituent parts of europe have been being pulled further apart. it's as if centrifugal forces are pulling us apart as a result of a very badly designed monetary economic union which is creating a crisis that is turning one proud nation against the other. when the refugee crisis hit this summer. a few weeks before, a democratic government was crushed in greece. because the powers that be in europe refused to exit their constant denial about this fragmentation. so i submit to you. that the process of fragmentation. at the economic level. goes hand in hand with the erection of fences. and the insecurity caused by the deflationary crisis in europe as a result of a badly designed monetary union. reinforces the political dynamic towards erecting barriers between our countries, between the european union and the rest of the world at the very same time the very concept of a european foreign policy. if you put these words together european foreign and policy you end up with the greatest joke in town there's no such thing. and yet, europeans are participating in all the events in the middle east and elsewhere which are causing the refugees to come to our borders and the borders that are dividing and multiplying as a result of the incredibly inane policies that we are creating. so the problem is europe or the absence of europe. europe is becoming increasingly a figment of our imagination. europe is failing to behave as an entity that has a policy for problems that can only be treated at the level of europe. the problem with refugees cannot be dealt with by greece. it cannot be dealt by croatia, by germany, by austria, by britain for that matter. but how are we going to deal with this problem? in a united europe which is really disuniting and fragmenting. and decoupling and deconstructing as a result of the fact that we seem to have smart missiles and smart bombs but particularly inane political elites.
well, the very sight of the french flag being projected on the london eye in berlin. in spite of the fact that slavo is extremely critical of all this cynical, liberal industry of generating forced solidarity, nevertheless, there is value to it. because it reminds us. that fences and borders. in the name of creating security, breed insecurity. and i challenge any one of you. to travel to the usexican border. to travel and walk under the shadows of the fence separating palestinians from palestinians and palestinians from israelis in palestine. i... invoke you to go to belfast and walk around the so-called. uh... peace wall. go to any such harsh division. the arguments for having created those fences are always the same. to create security. and the outcome is always the opposite. these fences and these walls. breathe insecurity. they create tensions. and they perpetually divide not only the two communities that they were built to separate. but the very communities that were separated from each other and this division continues to and mitigate it the divisions divide and multiply all the time and in the end they even globalize. so let me give you an example of what we've done in europe and in greece, my country, the previous government in its infinite wisdom decided to deal with the problem of refugees. that we're crossing from turkey to greece by building another huge fence. between the two countries. what effect did that have it simply increased the profits of the people smugglers and it increased the death rate of those that made the crossing. it increased the appeal of the ultra-right in greece because the ultra-right always feeds on fences and borders. and the insecurity that these fences and borders create. give rise to further shifts towards misanthropy that make the borders even more important, at least seemingly important. now... in europe. do you imagine? that we would be having the problems we're having in dealing with the refugee crisis. if we had not over the last ten years. been subjected to this process of fragmentation. the last ten years in the european union have been a period of divergence in the interest and in the name of further integration and an ever closer europe. the result is that the constituent parts of europe have been being pulled further apart. it's as if centrifugal forces are pulling us apart as a result of a very badly designed monetary economic union which is creating a crisis that is turning one proud nation against the other. when the refugee crisis hit this summer. a few weeks before, a democratic government was crushed in greece. because the powers that be in europe refused to exit their constant denial about this fragmentation. so i submit to you. that the process of fragmentation. at the economic level. goes hand in hand with the erection of fences. and the insecurity caused by the deflationary crisis in europe as a result of a badly designed monetary union. reinforces the political dynamic towards erecting barriers between our countries, between the european union and the rest of the world at the very same time the very concept of a european foreign policy. if you put these words together european foreign and policy you end up with the greatest joke in town there's no such thing. and yet, europeans are participating in all the events in the middle east and elsewhere which are causing the refugees to come to our borders and the borders that are dividing and multiplying as a result of the incredibly inane policies that we are creating. so the problem is europe or the absence of europe. europe is becoming increasingly a figment of our imagination. europe is failing to behave as an entity that has a policy for problems that can only be treated at the level of europe. the problem with refugees cannot be dealt with by greece. it cannot be dealt by croatia, by germany, by austria, by britain for that matter. but how are we going to deal with this problem? in a united europe which is really disuniting and fragmenting. and decoupling and deconstructing as a result of the fact that we seem to have smart missiles and smart bombs but particularly inane political elites.
Slavoj Žižek
yeah.
yeah.
Moderator
okay, another question for... no, no, no, no now we wait for one minute because...
okay, another question for... no, no, no, no now we wait for one minute because...
Slavoj Žižek
croat uchat.
croat uchat.
Moderator
terror. it's a compliment when it comes from you. i just realized.
terror. it's a compliment when it comes from you. i just realized.
Yanis Varoufakis
that here in front of you have three representatives from the balkans. i raised my case.
that here in front of you have three representatives from the balkans. i raised my case.
Slavoj Žižek
i protest, slovenia, every slovene racist will tell you slovenia is central europe, not balkan. but it my is europe. yeah. you know what. and here you will agree with me how you know, i'm sorry if i repeat my old joke, but it's so true about the divisions of europe that you said. you know, this is the slovene nationalism. we are mittteleuropa. croatia balkan begins. croats will tell you, no, we are still europe. serb orthodoxy is balkan. serb will tell you, no, we are christianity europe. albanians are really.
i protest, slovenia, every slovene racist will tell you slovenia is central europe, not balkan. but it my is europe. yeah. you know what. and here you will agree with me how you know, i'm sorry if i repeat my old joke, but it's so true about the divisions of europe that you said. you know, this is the slovene nationalism. we are mittteleuropa. croatia balkan begins. croats will tell you, no, we are still europe. serb orthodoxy is balkan. serb will tell you, no, we are christianity europe. albanians are really.
Moderator
so actually only yanis is from the balkans..
so actually only yanis is from the balkans..
Slavoj Žižek
but then you go the other way. austrians will tell you, no, slavs are balkans, we are civilization. germans will tell you, no, austria-hungarian empire already barbarian. french will tell you there is something dark barbarian about germany. and finally, i prefer the british position. all europe is big balkan with brussels, new constantinople and we are the only and...
but then you go the other way. austrians will tell you, no, slavs are balkans, we are civilization. germans will tell you, no, austria-hungarian empire already barbarian. french will tell you there is something dark barbarian about germany. and finally, i prefer the british position. all europe is big balkan with brussels, new constantinople and we are the only and...
Yanis Varoufakis
unfortunately let me this me add to this. the eurozone started a different process. this is a standard dynamic in the balkans that goes all the way up to russia. regarding western europe, the moment the eurozone crisis begun, greece was the first domino to fall. we went bankrupt first and then the irish started saying that they're not greece. and then immediately after that, portugal started saying that it's not ireland. spain started saying it's not portugal, france that it is not italy, italy didn't get even get a chance to say it's not spain. and that also reminds me of a vulgar but not completely untrue history of the eurozone. it i like stories tell it. do you know why okay here we go this is a joke it's not analytically strictly speaking true but there is
unfortunately let me this me add to this. the eurozone started a different process. this is a standard dynamic in the balkans that goes all the way up to russia. regarding western europe, the moment the eurozone crisis begun, greece was the first domino to fall. we went bankrupt first and then the irish started saying that they're not greece. and then immediately after that, portugal started saying that it's not ireland. spain started saying it's not portugal, france that it is not italy, italy didn't get even get a chance to say it's not spain. and that also reminds me of a vulgar but not completely untrue history of the eurozone. it i like stories tell it. do you know why okay here we go this is a joke it's not analytically strictly speaking true but there is
Slavoj Žižek
dasung sorry.
dasung sorry.
Yanis Varoufakis
now here is why the euro was created. it was created because the french feared the germans. the spanish wanted to be like the french, the portuguese didn't want to be like the spanish, the irish wanted to get out of the british empire. the dutch had already become german. the belgians were split and they wanted to be both part of france and part of germany. and finally, the germans feared the germans.
now here is why the euro was created. it was created because the french feared the germans. the spanish wanted to be like the french, the portuguese didn't want to be like the spanish, the irish wanted to get out of the british empire. the dutch had already become german. the belgians were split and they wanted to be both part of france and part of germany. and finally, the germans feared the germans.
Slavoj Žižek
i thought you would say this because my answer is, and that's how i see, and i'm not just making fun here, i'm quite serious here now. the truth of your position for me was, no, we greece and nobody wants to be the greek that we greeks are not greeks, we are the only true europeans. and you were that when you were finance minister. well let me.
i thought you would say this because my answer is, and that's how i see, and i'm not just making fun here, i'm quite serious here now. the truth of your position for me was, no, we greece and nobody wants to be the greek that we greeks are not greeks, we are the only true europeans. and you were that when you were finance minister. well let me.
Yanis Varoufakis
put it differently. because i cut my teeth as a young person in this country. i'm a monty python follower. so. what does this mean? i don't believe you you remember the scene, the standard scene. i'm not the messiah. oh, you are the messiah. no, i'm not the messiah. you don't need the messiah, you don't need to follow anyone. you are own individuals and somebody said, i'm not. there is no such thing as the germans. there is no such thing as the greeks. now, most greeks. would probably disagree with everything i'm saying. or agree but for reasons that i disagree with. there are greeks that i loathe so much more than any german i've ever hated. that any sentence which begins with the greeks think that is analytically fallacious. and completely misguiding. because you have five greeks you get ten opinions. it is impossible to start a sentence with the greeks think that. i'm sure the same thing applies here. so there's no such thing as the greeks and the germans and so on and forth. there is a lot more divergence within my country. country there is between us greeks and the germans. and this is, you know, it's not that the greeks are the real europeans. the real europeans are the ones who understand that identity is one thing. nationalism is something completely separate. that to be a true patriot, you have a true patriot supports his people or her people. and criticizes their government until they deserve not to be criticized.
put it differently. because i cut my teeth as a young person in this country. i'm a monty python follower. so. what does this mean? i don't believe you you remember the scene, the standard scene. i'm not the messiah. oh, you are the messiah. no, i'm not the messiah. you don't need the messiah, you don't need to follow anyone. you are own individuals and somebody said, i'm not. there is no such thing as the germans. there is no such thing as the greeks. now, most greeks. would probably disagree with everything i'm saying. or agree but for reasons that i disagree with. there are greeks that i loathe so much more than any german i've ever hated. that any sentence which begins with the greeks think that is analytically fallacious. and completely misguiding. because you have five greeks you get ten opinions. it is impossible to start a sentence with the greeks think that. i'm sure the same thing applies here. so there's no such thing as the greeks and the germans and so on and forth. there is a lot more divergence within my country. country there is between us greeks and the germans. and this is, you know, it's not that the greeks are the real europeans. the real europeans are the ones who understand that identity is one thing. nationalism is something completely separate. that to be a true patriot, you have a true patriot supports his people or her people. and criticizes their government until they deserve not to be criticized.
Slavoj Žižek
and criticizes his own people when they are.
and criticizes his own people when they are.
Yanis Varoufakis
of course, of course. but and then at the same time, one subverts one's understanding of what my people are. are the germans... less my people than the greek bankers and the greek media owners that have been poisoning greek democracy? i don't think so.
of course, of course. but and then at the same time, one subverts one's understanding of what my people are. are the germans... less my people than the greek bankers and the greek media owners that have been poisoning greek democracy? i don't think so.
Moderator
i'd like to return to the before the applause. after the applause. no.
i'd like to return to the before the applause. after the applause. no.
Slavoj Žižek
i say how i agree with him when i said the greeks i didn't mean i totally agree with you these greek people or whatever and then you know when you ask what are? the greek people, you know, what is the greekness of the greek people you usually get some stupid proverbs and wisdoms and i hope we all agree if there is something which for me embodies total bullshitting catastrophe are pro. you know you know what are proverbs? whatever you say it can be justified by a proverb. let's say you were to remain a finance minister and would make a risky measure. let's say you were to succeed. there would be proverbs. yeah, only those who risk profit and so on. let's say you were to fail. there would be immediately proverbs to justify it. like we in slovenia, we have a vulgar proverb you cannot urinate against the wind and so on and so on. so when i said greece, i didn't mean any greek internal national i mean for what the greek government and kyiza stood at that point in european politics. political dynamics. if we still, which can be very doubtful, i agree. think, and we agree here, although we are more and more skeptical, that there is something potentially emancipatory in i hate this notion but i will use it in european legacy. you greek government syriza stood for it. can i now just briefly say something? will be he saying something.
i say how i agree with him when i said the greeks i didn't mean i totally agree with you these greek people or whatever and then you know when you ask what are? the greek people, you know, what is the greekness of the greek people you usually get some stupid proverbs and wisdoms and i hope we all agree if there is something which for me embodies total bullshitting catastrophe are pro. you know you know what are proverbs? whatever you say it can be justified by a proverb. let's say you were to remain a finance minister and would make a risky measure. let's say you were to succeed. there would be proverbs. yeah, only those who risk profit and so on. let's say you were to fail. there would be immediately proverbs to justify it. like we in slovenia, we have a vulgar proverb you cannot urinate against the wind and so on and so on. so when i said greece, i didn't mean any greek internal national i mean for what the greek government and kyiza stood at that point in european politics. political dynamics. if we still, which can be very doubtful, i agree. think, and we agree here, although we are more and more skeptical, that there is something potentially emancipatory in i hate this notion but i will use it in european legacy. you greek government syriza stood for it. can i now just briefly say something? will be he saying something.
Moderator
and he always does.
and he always does.
Slavoj Žižek
yeah, yeah, no. we all know, so that you will not think that we are just kidding here, of course concerning refugees, we all agree absolutely unconditionally that we europeans, and that's what bothers me with this humanitarian approach.
yeah, yeah, no. we all know, so that you will not think that we are just kidding here, of course concerning refugees, we all agree absolutely unconditionally that we europeans, and that's what bothers me with this humanitarian approach.
Yanis Varoufakis
black
black
Slavoj Žižek
suffering them we will help them. no, at the zero level i agree. my god, you see the people drowning, suffering, there is no debate. you help them. but there is something mystifying in this approach because the problem is not humanitarian. the problem is that not just we europeans, but let's call it western powers we are at a multitude of levels directly responsible for this refugee crisis. look, first economically. we should begin to tell the story. my friend alain badou drew my attention to it. look, now they have a civil war in central african republic, christian majority against muslim minority in the northeast. now, as european racists, we will say, yes, of course, another of these fundamentalist ethnic conflict. a if you look in detail you find it that the problem is that they discovered oil in the northeast and france is paradoxical they're more supporting muslims and chinese are you know like whenever or congo what ethnic horror congo is at the same time a non-existing failed state and the state most included harmoniously into western economy, all these local warlords and so on. libya, take the example of libya. take the okay, at first there is this economic exploitation, not to mention this catastrophe of global market with regard to agriculture how countries lose their self-sufficiency and so on and so on. so we have economic neocolonialism where even the chinese are by far not innocent incidentally. then politically, are we we aware, and now i'm addressing you of course ironically as good christians rhetorically. the ultimate irony of american occupation of iraq is that. it was done among others by two justifications first. even some american feminists supported it like the position of women there is horrible. if we liberate iraq, it little be better and be a christian nation invaded a predominantly muslim nation. the irony a. do you know that there were almost, i think 2 million christians in iraq under saddam? because that's the beautiful irony. saddam's iraq and assad's syria were, correct me if i'm wrong, i think the only two middle east predominantly muslim countries which were formerly secular. which is why, do you remember tariq aziz, saddam's foreign minister, he was a christian. you know what was the result of american occupation of iraq? these local militias, islamists took over, christians were terrorized. now a large majority of christians left iraq. b in spite of all his horrors, no sympathy for saddam. he played a certain secular game. women had important positions and so on and so on. so we are so deeply responsible for this flow of refugees. take libya again or syria. it's so ridiculous this debate should we intervene or not even if we we't. we already did intervene. i mean, it's clear that it's a battlefield of russia supporting one side, turkey and saudi arabia, another side and so on. but what's my point here where maybe my position is a little bit problematic? i'm now you will have your time to strike back yes. okay. why
suffering them we will help them. no, at the zero level i agree. my god, you see the people drowning, suffering, there is no debate. you help them. but there is something mystifying in this approach because the problem is not humanitarian. the problem is that not just we europeans, but let's call it western powers we are at a multitude of levels directly responsible for this refugee crisis. look, first economically. we should begin to tell the story. my friend alain badou drew my attention to it. look, now they have a civil war in central african republic, christian majority against muslim minority in the northeast. now, as european racists, we will say, yes, of course, another of these fundamentalist ethnic conflict. a if you look in detail you find it that the problem is that they discovered oil in the northeast and france is paradoxical they're more supporting muslims and chinese are you know like whenever or congo what ethnic horror congo is at the same time a non-existing failed state and the state most included harmoniously into western economy, all these local warlords and so on. libya, take the example of libya. take the okay, at first there is this economic exploitation, not to mention this catastrophe of global market with regard to agriculture how countries lose their self-sufficiency and so on and so on. so we have economic neocolonialism where even the chinese are by far not innocent incidentally. then politically, are we we aware, and now i'm addressing you of course ironically as good christians rhetorically. the ultimate irony of american occupation of iraq is that. it was done among others by two justifications first. even some american feminists supported it like the position of women there is horrible. if we liberate iraq, it little be better and be a christian nation invaded a predominantly muslim nation. the irony a. do you know that there were almost, i think 2 million christians in iraq under saddam? because that's the beautiful irony. saddam's iraq and assad's syria were, correct me if i'm wrong, i think the only two middle east predominantly muslim countries which were formerly secular. which is why, do you remember tariq aziz, saddam's foreign minister, he was a christian. you know what was the result of american occupation of iraq? these local militias, islamists took over, christians were terrorized. now a large majority of christians left iraq. b in spite of all his horrors, no sympathy for saddam. he played a certain secular game. women had important positions and so on and so on. so we are so deeply responsible for this flow of refugees. take libya again or syria. it's so ridiculous this debate should we intervene or not even if we we't. we already did intervene. i mean, it's clear that it's a battlefield of russia supporting one side, turkey and saudi arabia, another side and so on. but what's my point here where maybe my position is a little bit problematic? i'm now you will have your time to strike back yes. okay. why
Yanis Varoufakis
would would i want to strike back when i agree with you? but you are evil it's just
would would i want to strike back when i agree with you? but you are evil it's just
Slavoj Žižek
we have
we have
Yanis Varoufakis
find find something to disagree on, slav.
find find something to disagree on, slav.
Slavoj Žižek
it will come, it will come. no, what i will okay, then i will go directly to a point where i... generally agree with you. but maybe particularly not. yeah yes. i, of course! now i will put it in as provocative terms as possible so that you can reply. you know, your project is, among other things, democratize europe, make it more transparent and so on and so on. of course, who wouldn't? i totally agree. i would just add a couple of points, maybe you would simply agree with them. first. you know and you don't think in this liberal way. i agree, but you know that this is one of the mantra of people like habermas and so on, these liberal left europeans. european union is basically okay. it's just it has a democratic deficit. you know, this reminds me from when i was young of certain leftist sympathizers of soviet union where they said communism was okay, it just had a democratic deficit. both in cases the democratic deficit is a necessary part of how the entire system works. so my point would just be that to you do what you propose many other things will have to be changed because now i will give you the really evil example. me's respond to this.
it will come, it will come. no, what i will okay, then i will go directly to a point where i... generally agree with you. but maybe particularly not. yeah yes. i, of course! now i will put it in as provocative terms as possible so that you can reply. you know, your project is, among other things, democratize europe, make it more transparent and so on and so on. of course, who wouldn't? i totally agree. i would just add a couple of points, maybe you would simply agree with them. first. you know and you don't think in this liberal way. i agree, but you know that this is one of the mantra of people like habermas and so on, these liberal left europeans. european union is basically okay. it's just it has a democratic deficit. you know, this reminds me from when i was young of certain leftist sympathizers of soviet union where they said communism was okay, it just had a democratic deficit. both in cases the democratic deficit is a necessary part of how the entire system works. so my point would just be that to you do what you propose many other things will have to be changed because now i will give you the really evil example. me's respond to this.
Moderator
let short.'s stop at your first point because i would really like to hear the point. let's stop at your point by point. stop at the first point.
let short.'s stop at your first point because i would really like to hear the point. let's stop at your point by point. stop at the first point.
Slavoj Žižek
totally interrupted and i will stop. okay, please.
totally interrupted and i will stop. okay, please.
Yanis Varoufakis
poor slavoy.
poor slavoy.
Slavoj Žižek
i feel like a refugee here on.
i feel like a refugee here on.
Yanis Varoufakis
i will take you in, don't worry.
i will take you in, don't worry.
Slavoj Žižek
you'll give me your home and your wife. wait, wait,. ha. we got.
you'll give me your home and your wife. wait, wait,. ha. we got.
Yanis Varoufakis
i'm a socialist, but i don't share my wife, okay?
i'm a socialist, but i don't share my wife, okay?
Slavoj Žižek
i have different rules. i share wife but i don't share food..
i have different rules. i share wife but i don't share food..
Yanis Varoufakis
serial. there.
serial. there.
Moderator
sorry! i don't share food either, you see? oh we have some solidarity okay you do that later. let's be okay let's talk about the point about the.
sorry! i don't share food either, you see? oh we have some solidarity okay you do that later. let's be okay let's talk about the point about the.
Yanis Varoufakis
that is a very important point about the european union. we are in london, we are in the heart of a country that is embroiled in this very important debate leading to the referendum. and i think that it's important to make this point and to actually have this little exchange on the possibility or the capacity. or lack thereof of the european union to be reformed. cameron wants to negotiate reforms to the european union before he comes to you and recommends to you that you vote yes for staying in the european union. so this is the big question. can the european union be reformed and in particular can it from our left-wing perspective, can it become democratized in such a way that it becomes part of the solution and not part of the problem?
that is a very important point about the european union. we are in london, we are in the heart of a country that is embroiled in this very important debate leading to the referendum. and i think that it's important to make this point and to actually have this little exchange on the possibility or the capacity. or lack thereof of the european union to be reformed. cameron wants to negotiate reforms to the european union before he comes to you and recommends to you that you vote yes for staying in the european union. so this is the big question. can the european union be reformed and in particular can it from our left-wing perspective, can it become democratized in such a way that it becomes part of the solution and not part of the problem?
Slavoj Žižek
.
.
Yanis Varoufakis
at the moment, we agree entirely it's part of the problem. let me take it a bit further. i like your analogy with the soviet union and the old communists would defend it saying, well, but we have a small problem and you saying that, no, that was not a small problem. it was part of the design. exactly as in the case of the european union but i want to be a bit more specific. the british state. the american state. how were these states brought into being? it was the result of centuries, of decades of... class conflict. conflict between different vested interests initially and that's what produced the magna carta in this country it was the barons against the king then you had the merchants that came in with their own separate interests fighting the other two sides then you had the proletariat uh you had different uh parts of capital with its own vested interests like financial capital, the banking sector versus industrial capital manufacturing. and the state emerged as part of an evolutionary process. for regulating these conflicts. with sovereignty, with democratic processes, which became important because they were more efficient at regulating these conflicts. now compare and contrast. that kind of system of governance state with the european union. how was the european union created? it was created in the late 1940s, designed and effected in the early 1950s, 1950 onwards, as a cartel of heavy industry. the first name of the european union was the european community of coal and steel. so. the manufacturers, the heavy industries. of coal and steel in belgium. in holland. in germany. in uh eastern france and in northern italy. became one cartel. and it happened under the stewardship of the united states of america and the new dealers who were running the show at the time. and it was a very important part of that global post-war design. which was a very interesting design and i'm not criticizing i'm simply stating it as a fact. now the problem is that you know, every cartel. has its administration like opec, the organization of petroleum exporting countries has its own administration. that cartel had its administration and it was located. in brussels. so brussels began not as the government of a state but it began as the administration. minding the interests of the cartel, the purpose of which was to regulate competition, to prevent effectively competition between those industrialists and that cartel then became expanded. the mafia family controlling. so they co-opted the french farmers it's called the common agricultural policy. then they co-opted the bankers, then they expanded geographically. but it still remained. the technocracy in brussels with deep contempt. for democracy. democracy was simply for them a process of elections that would validate their power to make decisions independently of the demos. or the di, the plural of dimus. now. it is very important, at least from the perspective of those of us who are unfortunate enough to be living under the euro. to understand why the euro emerged. a cartel requires price stability. so opec is all about regulating the price of oil. the cartel of coal, steel, and all the other commodities that began to participate in that had to keep prices constant. that's the whole point of the raison d'etre of a cartel. now, to keep prices constant when you have different countries, the exchange rates between those countries have to be maintained. but it was okay for the first 20 years because the americans maintained those exchange rates at constant levels on behalf of the whole of the western world. it was called the bretton woods system that was inaugurated in 1944. it was designed, it was inaugurated a bit later. john mannard keynes had played a role in designing it. his ideas were better than the ones that were used in the end, but that's another story. this system collapsed in 1971. and the deutsch mark value vis-à-vis the italian l, the french mark, started fluctuating. so the cartel that was the european common market was under pressure. and it was very close to collapse. they had to stabilize the exchange rates, so they started the process of fixing them. it didn't work. britain escaped one of those attempts to fix the exchange rates when norman lamont got you out of the eurozone. of the maastricht treaty. you remember it was the instance that made george soros a very rich man. in the early 1990s. and then when that didn't work, they tried something much more drastic and radical, a common currency. but when thatcher was completely right in her last appearance in the house of commons as prime minister, that day after she had been dismissed by the vegetables in 10 downing street. that's what she used to call them, right? so in that appearance in the house of commons she made the point that who controls interest rates and monetary policy.. is a political matter. monetary policy is about the politics of a country and the eurozone is about the politics of europe. i think this is more or less verbatim what thatcher said. as a left wingeringer who spent his youth picketing against every policy. mrs. thatcher had introduced. there a... an elegant joy to be had from eulogizing that particular intervention by margaret thatcher. she was completely right. what happens therefore is this. if you try to graft a common currency on top of the administration of a cartel. you end up with a horrible story. you end up with firstly a highly inefficient monetary system, one that creates ponzi growth. and an unsustainable boom at the beginning, that was the. between 2000 and 2008 and then the bust. which puts all the burden of the catastrophe on the weakest of shoulders in greece, in spain, in ireland and in those countries amongst the weakest of citizens. and the whole thing becomes a wound that festers and it is impossible to heal as long as the administration in brussels and in frankfurt because we built the central bank there. continues to be in denial of the architecture architectural design faults of this thing. so. so far what i've been doing is i've been arguing against my thesis. because my thesis, as slavo said, is that it's a little bit like hotel california, the last verse. you can check out of the european union, you will get a chance to do it in the referendum, but you cannot really leave europe. you cannot leave the european union. your trade will be with the european union. the european union will be designing the international standards. the labor standards that you are going to have here by tic governments if you follow the advice of david cameron are always going to be slightly worse than the ones in europe, not that the ones in europe are any good. the environmental standards are going to be raised to the bottom which will intensify climate change, will intensify the damage that we are doing to the planet. so... my conclusion is this. the european union as it is. is detrimental to the interests of europeans. but... it's the demise. and fragmentation from decisions by the brits, the greeks, the portuguese to get out of this, the fragmentation of this edifice that we have created is going to bring about. a recessionary germany, holland, baltics, poland. slovakia. czech republic. and the stagflationary latin union, including greece, i don't know where greece will be in this terrible scheme of things. imagine what will happen when the working poor in germany become unemployed poor. imagine what will happen. when the total gdp, gross domestic product of the eurozone starts sliding as a result of the fragmentation of the european union, britain is going to be dragged down with a europe that is fading, a europe that is descending very quickly into a post-mod 1930s. so either we democratize the european union or we are going to be facing. the horrors of a new great depression. without the prospects of a new deal like the one that. an aristocrat like franklin roosevelt had the power and the political authority to effect in the united states. before.
at the moment, we agree entirely it's part of the problem. let me take it a bit further. i like your analogy with the soviet union and the old communists would defend it saying, well, but we have a small problem and you saying that, no, that was not a small problem. it was part of the design. exactly as in the case of the european union but i want to be a bit more specific. the british state. the american state. how were these states brought into being? it was the result of centuries, of decades of... class conflict. conflict between different vested interests initially and that's what produced the magna carta in this country it was the barons against the king then you had the merchants that came in with their own separate interests fighting the other two sides then you had the proletariat uh you had different uh parts of capital with its own vested interests like financial capital, the banking sector versus industrial capital manufacturing. and the state emerged as part of an evolutionary process. for regulating these conflicts. with sovereignty, with democratic processes, which became important because they were more efficient at regulating these conflicts. now compare and contrast. that kind of system of governance state with the european union. how was the european union created? it was created in the late 1940s, designed and effected in the early 1950s, 1950 onwards, as a cartel of heavy industry. the first name of the european union was the european community of coal and steel. so. the manufacturers, the heavy industries. of coal and steel in belgium. in holland. in germany. in uh eastern france and in northern italy. became one cartel. and it happened under the stewardship of the united states of america and the new dealers who were running the show at the time. and it was a very important part of that global post-war design. which was a very interesting design and i'm not criticizing i'm simply stating it as a fact. now the problem is that you know, every cartel. has its administration like opec, the organization of petroleum exporting countries has its own administration. that cartel had its administration and it was located. in brussels. so brussels began not as the government of a state but it began as the administration. minding the interests of the cartel, the purpose of which was to regulate competition, to prevent effectively competition between those industrialists and that cartel then became expanded. the mafia family controlling. so they co-opted the french farmers it's called the common agricultural policy. then they co-opted the bankers, then they expanded geographically. but it still remained. the technocracy in brussels with deep contempt. for democracy. democracy was simply for them a process of elections that would validate their power to make decisions independently of the demos. or the di, the plural of dimus. now. it is very important, at least from the perspective of those of us who are unfortunate enough to be living under the euro. to understand why the euro emerged. a cartel requires price stability. so opec is all about regulating the price of oil. the cartel of coal, steel, and all the other commodities that began to participate in that had to keep prices constant. that's the whole point of the raison d'etre of a cartel. now, to keep prices constant when you have different countries, the exchange rates between those countries have to be maintained. but it was okay for the first 20 years because the americans maintained those exchange rates at constant levels on behalf of the whole of the western world. it was called the bretton woods system that was inaugurated in 1944. it was designed, it was inaugurated a bit later. john mannard keynes had played a role in designing it. his ideas were better than the ones that were used in the end, but that's another story. this system collapsed in 1971. and the deutsch mark value vis-à-vis the italian l, the french mark, started fluctuating. so the cartel that was the european common market was under pressure. and it was very close to collapse. they had to stabilize the exchange rates, so they started the process of fixing them. it didn't work. britain escaped one of those attempts to fix the exchange rates when norman lamont got you out of the eurozone. of the maastricht treaty. you remember it was the instance that made george soros a very rich man. in the early 1990s. and then when that didn't work, they tried something much more drastic and radical, a common currency. but when thatcher was completely right in her last appearance in the house of commons as prime minister, that day after she had been dismissed by the vegetables in 10 downing street. that's what she used to call them, right? so in that appearance in the house of commons she made the point that who controls interest rates and monetary policy.. is a political matter. monetary policy is about the politics of a country and the eurozone is about the politics of europe. i think this is more or less verbatim what thatcher said. as a left wingeringer who spent his youth picketing against every policy. mrs. thatcher had introduced. there a... an elegant joy to be had from eulogizing that particular intervention by margaret thatcher. she was completely right. what happens therefore is this. if you try to graft a common currency on top of the administration of a cartel. you end up with a horrible story. you end up with firstly a highly inefficient monetary system, one that creates ponzi growth. and an unsustainable boom at the beginning, that was the. between 2000 and 2008 and then the bust. which puts all the burden of the catastrophe on the weakest of shoulders in greece, in spain, in ireland and in those countries amongst the weakest of citizens. and the whole thing becomes a wound that festers and it is impossible to heal as long as the administration in brussels and in frankfurt because we built the central bank there. continues to be in denial of the architecture architectural design faults of this thing. so. so far what i've been doing is i've been arguing against my thesis. because my thesis, as slavo said, is that it's a little bit like hotel california, the last verse. you can check out of the european union, you will get a chance to do it in the referendum, but you cannot really leave europe. you cannot leave the european union. your trade will be with the european union. the european union will be designing the international standards. the labor standards that you are going to have here by tic governments if you follow the advice of david cameron are always going to be slightly worse than the ones in europe, not that the ones in europe are any good. the environmental standards are going to be raised to the bottom which will intensify climate change, will intensify the damage that we are doing to the planet. so... my conclusion is this. the european union as it is. is detrimental to the interests of europeans. but... it's the demise. and fragmentation from decisions by the brits, the greeks, the portuguese to get out of this, the fragmentation of this edifice that we have created is going to bring about. a recessionary germany, holland, baltics, poland. slovakia. czech republic. and the stagflationary latin union, including greece, i don't know where greece will be in this terrible scheme of things. imagine what will happen when the working poor in germany become unemployed poor. imagine what will happen. when the total gdp, gross domestic product of the eurozone starts sliding as a result of the fragmentation of the european union, britain is going to be dragged down with a europe that is fading, a europe that is descending very quickly into a post-mod 1930s. so either we democratize the european union or we are going to be facing. the horrors of a new great depression. without the prospects of a new deal like the one that. an aristocrat like franklin roosevelt had the power and the political authority to effect in the united states. before.
Moderator
before intervenes, uh could you specify because could you tell us, that would probably be a question and we will have an opportunity for an q&a, so if you have answers, you can slowly start to prepare them. what would it, i mean, you've been part of the eurogroup, you've been criticizing it pretty openly, and i would even go so far to say that dis varufak is a whistleblower as well. the same as julian assange, edward snowden and so on, in the sense that he revealed what is actually happening at this so-called institution called eurogroup. so you have seen this. can you tell us actually from your experience, but very shortly or very long, so slavi doesn't have an opportunity to talk, to tell us what would it concretely mean, what would it concretely mean to democratize europe?
before intervenes, uh could you specify because could you tell us, that would probably be a question and we will have an opportunity for an q&a, so if you have answers, you can slowly start to prepare them. what would it, i mean, you've been part of the eurogroup, you've been criticizing it pretty openly, and i would even go so far to say that dis varufak is a whistleblower as well. the same as julian assange, edward snowden and so on, in the sense that he revealed what is actually happening at this so-called institution called eurogroup. so you have seen this. can you tell us actually from your experience, but very shortly or very long, so slavi doesn't have an opportunity to talk, to tell us what would it concretely mean, what would it concretely mean to democratize europe?
Yanis Varoufakis
i will try to be
i will try to be
Moderator
sink. firstly,
sink. firstly,
Yanis Varoufakis
having experienced the eurogroup and the secrecy, it's like a secret society and the fact that there are no rules governing the behavior of its participants is another. gevous issue here. what i would like to do in the first week that we have any authority to make any changes is how about live streaming all the meetings of the european union council and the eurogroup.
having experienced the eurogroup and the secrecy, it's like a secret society and the fact that there are no rules governing the behavior of its participants is another. gevous issue here. what i would like to do in the first week that we have any authority to make any changes is how about live streaming all the meetings of the european union council and the eurogroup.
Moderator
y.
y.
Yanis Varoufakis
i have no doubt, having witnessed them. that the outcome of these meetings would be very different. if the citizens of europe could hear and watch their leaders in action. and this is something that doesn't take a new treaty, a new constitution, institutional change uh and let them tell us why they would resist the idea of allowing those who voted them to be there to represent them. to take a peek at that which they propose on behalf of their electors. that's the first thing. the second thing that's very short.
i have no doubt, having witnessed them. that the outcome of these meetings would be very different. if the citizens of europe could hear and watch their leaders in action. and this is something that doesn't take a new treaty, a new constitution, institutional change uh and let them tell us why they would resist the idea of allowing those who voted them to be there to represent them. to take a peek at that which they propose on behalf of their electors. that's the first thing. the second thing that's very short.
Moderator
transparency is the first point.
transparency is the first point.
Yanis Varoufakis
transparency. but you know what? it's such a crucial point. because there is no easier way than creating an autocracy. than by keeping people who have a periodic right to vote in the dark. and the powers that be know that, i think that it's time that the rest of us realized. the second thing that we should do. look, we have institutions in europe. they're very badly designed. the european central bank was designed as if it was designed in order to cause a crisis to prevent it. the european stability mechanism. i personally prefer to refer to it as the european instability mechanism. the banking union that we've created is in reality a banking disunion we have terrible institutions but nevertheless we can redeploy them. without changing any of the rules, without changing the treaties, within a very few number of weeks, maybe two, three months, we can redeploy them in order to stabilize, not make any huge improvements, but stabilize the situation when it comes to the crisis of public debt, of underinvestment, of the banking system, and to do something in order to alleviate poverty. imagine for one second if poor families throughout europe or the eurozone at least. were to receive a check from the european central bank signed by mario draghi. that would allow them not to cash it for money, but to go to the supermarket and buy food so that they could put food on the table that night so that their kids wouldn't go hungry in greece, in slovenia, in eastern germany for that matter. that would have an amazing unifying. effect i can tell you even the whole debate about refugees would change if these checks happen. now you may say, but this is such a left-wing utopia. it's not. it's what happens in the united states. they're called foot stamps. and they get distributed. and you know what? in the united states, the official level of poverty at the moment is about thirteen 14 percent people who are below the level of poverty. without the food stamps, it would have been 26%. you have no idea what a unifying effect those food stamps have throughout the united states of america. it is connected to the capacity of even poor americans to be able to say we the people and to actually mean it, something we in europe cannot do. the third thing that i would like to do is to set a target for let's say two years from now to have a constitutional assembly. where going to we will start tabularize i forget the european parliament, it's not the real parliament. it's a very interesting job creation scheme for uh people. who don't have the capacity to legislate. an assembly of citizens who get elected in order to discuss. during six months twelve months one. great. question. how do we want europe to be governed? and here i will invoke tony benn. the most important thing about democratizing any regime, whether it's in britain, in europe, in slovenia, whatever, is to be able to ask those who make important decisions over you three or four important questions. what powers do you have? how did you get them? what use do you make of them and how can we get rid of you? this is what the constitutional assembly should be able to answer and let's also agree that whatever that constitutional assembly decides should be affected, implemented in europe in the next ten years. and i would like the british people to be part of that attempt rather than to think that you can retreat, you can actually add propellers to your beautiful island and sail away into a non-existent global economy that will replace the european union for you.
transparency. but you know what? it's such a crucial point. because there is no easier way than creating an autocracy. than by keeping people who have a periodic right to vote in the dark. and the powers that be know that, i think that it's time that the rest of us realized. the second thing that we should do. look, we have institutions in europe. they're very badly designed. the european central bank was designed as if it was designed in order to cause a crisis to prevent it. the european stability mechanism. i personally prefer to refer to it as the european instability mechanism. the banking union that we've created is in reality a banking disunion we have terrible institutions but nevertheless we can redeploy them. without changing any of the rules, without changing the treaties, within a very few number of weeks, maybe two, three months, we can redeploy them in order to stabilize, not make any huge improvements, but stabilize the situation when it comes to the crisis of public debt, of underinvestment, of the banking system, and to do something in order to alleviate poverty. imagine for one second if poor families throughout europe or the eurozone at least. were to receive a check from the european central bank signed by mario draghi. that would allow them not to cash it for money, but to go to the supermarket and buy food so that they could put food on the table that night so that their kids wouldn't go hungry in greece, in slovenia, in eastern germany for that matter. that would have an amazing unifying. effect i can tell you even the whole debate about refugees would change if these checks happen. now you may say, but this is such a left-wing utopia. it's not. it's what happens in the united states. they're called foot stamps. and they get distributed. and you know what? in the united states, the official level of poverty at the moment is about thirteen 14 percent people who are below the level of poverty. without the food stamps, it would have been 26%. you have no idea what a unifying effect those food stamps have throughout the united states of america. it is connected to the capacity of even poor americans to be able to say we the people and to actually mean it, something we in europe cannot do. the third thing that i would like to do is to set a target for let's say two years from now to have a constitutional assembly. where going to we will start tabularize i forget the european parliament, it's not the real parliament. it's a very interesting job creation scheme for uh people. who don't have the capacity to legislate. an assembly of citizens who get elected in order to discuss. during six months twelve months one. great. question. how do we want europe to be governed? and here i will invoke tony benn. the most important thing about democratizing any regime, whether it's in britain, in europe, in slovenia, whatever, is to be able to ask those who make important decisions over you three or four important questions. what powers do you have? how did you get them? what use do you make of them and how can we get rid of you? this is what the constitutional assembly should be able to answer and let's also agree that whatever that constitutional assembly decides should be affected, implemented in europe in the next ten years. and i would like the british people to be part of that attempt rather than to think that you can retreat, you can actually add propellers to your beautiful island and sail away into a non-existent global economy that will replace the european union for you.
Moderator
so we started with the refugee crisis and slavoy jokingly referred to himself as a refugee but now we will involve into our discussion a real refugee who is living several meters from south bank. and i would add, you can put people in prison today, but thanks god we have technology. so i would like to ask you for a big applause for julian assange, who will join us now. hello, julien. i i don't see anything to do with me there, but i see you all.
so we started with the refugee crisis and slavoy jokingly referred to himself as a refugee but now we will involve into our discussion a real refugee who is living several meters from south bank. and i would add, you can put people in prison today, but thanks god we have technology. so i would like to ask you for a big applause for julian assange, who will join us now. hello, julien. i i don't see anything to do with me there, but i see you all.
Julian Assange
very nice.
very nice.
Moderator
actually, there is much to do with you slavo said that... the european powers are directly responsible for the refugee crisis. and recently in the last weeks and days, especially also after the paris attacks, you have wikileaks claiming that the us and the european powers are also responsible for the paris attacks. so could you please, you are sitting on tons of information. could you reveal us some information which directly prove that the western powers are on the one hand responsible for the refugee crisis and on the other hand also responsible for the paris attacks.
actually, there is much to do with you slavo said that... the european powers are directly responsible for the refugee crisis. and recently in the last weeks and days, especially also after the paris attacks, you have wikileaks claiming that the us and the european powers are also responsible for the paris attacks. so could you please, you are sitting on tons of information. could you reveal us some information which directly prove that the western powers are on the one hand responsible for the refugee crisis and on the other hand also responsible for the paris attacks.
Julian Assange
i mean, it's a... sad situation. my... one of my children and my partner live in paris. it's a very difficult thing for me to... um. to be isolated from them.
i mean, it's a... sad situation. my... one of my children and my partner live in paris. it's a very difficult thing for me to... um. to be isolated from them.
Moderator
in a situation like this.
in a situation like this.
Julian Assange
so i do i understand the... the european offset. but just like as was mentioned before, i've also... i. been around long enough in understanding geopolitics and the interiors of these organizations to see what happened in paris has been happening almost every day. in syria, iraq and libya. for the past five years. so... if we go back. there's sort of two ways of looking at this. one is wikileaks documents. of the us embassy as far back as 2006. show that the us had a serious campaign. to overthrow the government of syria.
so i do i understand the... the european offset. but just like as was mentioned before, i've also... i. been around long enough in understanding geopolitics and the interiors of these organizations to see what happened in paris has been happening almost every day. in syria, iraq and libya. for the past five years. so... if we go back. there's sort of two ways of looking at this. one is wikileaks documents. of the us embassy as far back as 2006. show that the us had a serious campaign. to overthrow the government of syria.
Audience Member 2
now that might not surprise some people.
now that might not surprise some people.
Julian Assange
cool. that they are opposed to the government of syria. because of israel is sitting on syrian land in the golden heights. turkey has interests from the north. there's a russian military base at tartus, which a lot of old cold warriors like brinsky feel as unfinished business from the cold war, the last russian naval base. can they finally get that?
cool. that they are opposed to the government of syria. because of israel is sitting on syrian land in the golden heights. turkey has interests from the north. there's a russian military base at tartus, which a lot of old cold warriors like brinsky feel as unfinished business from the cold war, the last russian naval base. can they finally get that?
Moderator
and you can see
and you can see
Julian Assange
russian position in relation to crimea. and it's naval base there. that it's willing to throw in a lot to preserve what it considers one of its last remaining strategic assets outside of russia.
russian position in relation to crimea. and it's naval base there. that it's willing to throw in a lot to preserve what it considers one of its last remaining strategic assets outside of russia.
Moderator
but the details of that. um... thank. i mean, there are
but the details of that. um... thank. i mean, there are
Julian Assange
the us. pushed not simply to get rid of the asset regime. but to in
the us. pushed not simply to get rid of the asset regime. but to in
Moderator
yes.
yes.
Julian Assange
the paranoia of the assad regime. the word is used directly to make the assad regime frightened that it was going to be subject to a coup.
the paranoia of the assad regime. the word is used directly to make the assad regime frightened that it was going to be subject to a coup.
Moderator
military could not be trusted.
military could not be trusted.
Julian Assange
that's patternway was designed. it's explicitly stated. to cause the assad government to, quote, overact. unquote. and there's many other things like that, trying to prevent foreign investment in syria to damage its economy, refusing to cooperate. as late as 2010. with syrian calls to help it crack down on terrorists crossing over the border between and iraq. so there's a litany of... in some ways, what you expect. us grand area geostrategy to try and destabilize syria. um don't being pulled in just perhaps in an interesting manner. to the orbit of its regional allies which have grown relatively stronger. as time has gone by. there is not a dominant pax americana in the middle east anymore. there is allies of the united states who work very closely with it. with european countries like the united kingdom. but they chafe at the leash that has been put on them and want to go their own way and they also pull their master. along with it. so that's what's happened in syria, of course, you also have a government that uh... it's a dictatorship. with a... a fairly terrible record, but... not for the region. for the region, one of the few remaining secular governments that the us has been knocking off. one by one. possibly. because secularism was a a quest of the left which was supported by the soviet union. so these remaining secular governments. unfinished business to cold war warriors. i want to look a little bit at something else, which is a spiritual dimension to what is going on. i don't think everything can be explained just by geopolitics. uh... and to illustrate that, i want to talk about
that's patternway was designed. it's explicitly stated. to cause the assad government to, quote, overact. unquote. and there's many other things like that, trying to prevent foreign investment in syria to damage its economy, refusing to cooperate. as late as 2010. with syrian calls to help it crack down on terrorists crossing over the border between and iraq. so there's a litany of... in some ways, what you expect. us grand area geostrategy to try and destabilize syria. um don't being pulled in just perhaps in an interesting manner. to the orbit of its regional allies which have grown relatively stronger. as time has gone by. there is not a dominant pax americana in the middle east anymore. there is allies of the united states who work very closely with it. with european countries like the united kingdom. but they chafe at the leash that has been put on them and want to go their own way and they also pull their master. along with it. so that's what's happened in syria, of course, you also have a government that uh... it's a dictatorship. with a... a fairly terrible record, but... not for the region. for the region, one of the few remaining secular governments that the us has been knocking off. one by one. possibly. because secularism was a a quest of the left which was supported by the soviet union. so these remaining secular governments. unfinished business to cold war warriors. i want to look a little bit at something else, which is a spiritual dimension to what is going on. i don't think everything can be explained just by geopolitics. uh... and to illustrate that, i want to talk about
Audience Member 2
maybe ya.
maybe ya.
Julian Assange
and what was hill. that's something that's not widely spoken about. it's very interesting that the republicans have not taken this up.
and what was hill. that's something that's not widely spoken about. it's very interesting that the republicans have not taken this up.
Audience Member 2
libya was hillary's war.
libya was hillary's war.
Julian Assange
hillary of course. hard for libya. she also pushed hard to keep hosni rambararak. the she pushed hard. bolivia. and above. recommendations made by pentagon general. pentagon generals have subsequently come out through a variety of testimony and leaks saying we pushed against this. there was no proper plan. but what happened in libya, we didn't want another iraq. which we're already having. and here is hilary's response. to the moment that she was told. that gaddafi. was killed.
hillary of course. hard for libya. she also pushed hard to keep hosni rambararak. the she pushed hard. bolivia. and above. recommendations made by pentagon general. pentagon generals have subsequently come out through a variety of testimony and leaks saying we pushed against this. there was no proper plan. but what happened in libya, we didn't want another iraq. which we're already having. and here is hilary's response. to the moment that she was told. that gaddafi. was killed.
Audience Member 2
do that have anything to do with your visit? i sure. so, i mean, that is the land of unconfirmed. we came, we saw, we died. i have anything to do with your delivery? i sure did. so i mean sorry about.
do that have anything to do with your visit? i sure. so, i mean, that is the land of unconfirmed. we came, we saw, we died. i have anything to do with your delivery? i sure did. so i mean sorry about.
Moderator
neither slav could make a better joke, i think. neither him could imagine something more bizarre, i think.
neither slav could make a better joke, i think. neither him could imagine something more bizarre, i think.
Julian Assange
hmm. or. that is hillary's response to a head of state being sodomized and killed. how does that affect the psychology of the population in terms of what is? what is the new norm. endorsed by the superpower that just helped overthrow this government. that is the new. that is something embedded within. hillary clinton. that personality that you just saw, that personality is going to be in the white house. 80% chance. if not more. the bookmakers have it at about 85% chance in a year's time. it's going to couple with what we have been seeing. with isis. now, if you've read dubkick, which is isis's magazine, uh. isis was clear at the time of the charlie hebbo attacks what its strategy. is in the west. it's something that's evolved from 2004. a document by one of al-qaeda's theoreticians. that older document is called the management of savagery. but it is to. cause a crackdown in the west on muslims. in order to eliminate the gray zone. that's al-qaeda's phrase.
hmm. or. that is hillary's response to a head of state being sodomized and killed. how does that affect the psychology of the population in terms of what is? what is the new norm. endorsed by the superpower that just helped overthrow this government. that is the new. that is something embedded within. hillary clinton. that personality that you just saw, that personality is going to be in the white house. 80% chance. if not more. the bookmakers have it at about 85% chance in a year's time. it's going to couple with what we have been seeing. with isis. now, if you've read dubkick, which is isis's magazine, uh. isis was clear at the time of the charlie hebbo attacks what its strategy. is in the west. it's something that's evolved from 2004. a document by one of al-qaeda's theoreticians. that older document is called the management of savagery. but it is to. cause a crackdown in the west on muslims. in order to eliminate the gray zone. that's al-qaeda's phrase.
Audience Member 2
two
two
Julian Assange
eliminate this grey zone of muslims that cross over between being strict muslims. and pussy f in. uh... european notions of enlightenment or christian notions. and that's... working splendidly right now. that's exactly what is going to happen. you can see that with all statements. all on rather than... trying to preserve. the robustness. of the french population, the robustness of the french carrier in response to such an attack. he's telling people to go to hospitals. he's whipping out. the sense of communal fear, closing borders, overreacting. in such a way that it is guaranteed. to cause. long term. crackdown. on the muslim population. of course, it's also been used to introduce a whole raft. of mass surveillance legislation justify, of course, the british surveillance bill that's right before parliament now. i think we are in a... a very awful time. i do not see. okay, interaction. with islam. in europe. going anywhere good. um i see. uh... extremism on both sides of the equation being generated by this interaction style. the basic underlying technological transformation. which has caused the breakdown in the borders between states, the communications breakdown, and therefore the organizational breakdown in the communications between states, is causing an interdigitization, an interforation. of what were national borders. and that seems like a dream in some respects. but in other respects, it means that the clashing intellectual and spiritual values of different groups start to interact with each other. uh... there's no exit game. there's no exit strategy. for isis that has been presented to it. there's no exit strategy for those radicalized muslims. there is no... alternative ideological dream. for those people in europe. there might have once been a communist or marxist ideological dream that created although there were difficult dictatorships, nonetheless secular dictatorships. from the bath party. those dreams are gone. i don't see. anything. that can occupy the mental space. for young people who long for that dream. that would be a great project of the european left, of a potential renewed european left. i still find it hard to imagine. i think what the only hope is something along the lines of a new christianity. not christianity, but the same kind of reformist. notion of swapping out hate for some aspects of love. that you're having christianity. now. it's not going to be christianity because... islam post-dates christianity. islam is competitive with christianity. islam removed. most of christianity from the regions in the middle east that occupies, not all of it, most of it. there needs to be a reformed. if you like. a christian version of islam. where the balance of costs and benefits in the struggle that is occurring there moves to a benefit in relation to cooperation.
eliminate this grey zone of muslims that cross over between being strict muslims. and pussy f in. uh... european notions of enlightenment or christian notions. and that's... working splendidly right now. that's exactly what is going to happen. you can see that with all statements. all on rather than... trying to preserve. the robustness. of the french population, the robustness of the french carrier in response to such an attack. he's telling people to go to hospitals. he's whipping out. the sense of communal fear, closing borders, overreacting. in such a way that it is guaranteed. to cause. long term. crackdown. on the muslim population. of course, it's also been used to introduce a whole raft. of mass surveillance legislation justify, of course, the british surveillance bill that's right before parliament now. i think we are in a... a very awful time. i do not see. okay, interaction. with islam. in europe. going anywhere good. um i see. uh... extremism on both sides of the equation being generated by this interaction style. the basic underlying technological transformation. which has caused the breakdown in the borders between states, the communications breakdown, and therefore the organizational breakdown in the communications between states, is causing an interdigitization, an interforation. of what were national borders. and that seems like a dream in some respects. but in other respects, it means that the clashing intellectual and spiritual values of different groups start to interact with each other. uh... there's no exit game. there's no exit strategy. for isis that has been presented to it. there's no exit strategy for those radicalized muslims. there is no... alternative ideological dream. for those people in europe. there might have once been a communist or marxist ideological dream that created although there were difficult dictatorships, nonetheless secular dictatorships. from the bath party. those dreams are gone. i don't see. anything. that can occupy the mental space. for young people who long for that dream. that would be a great project of the european left, of a potential renewed european left. i still find it hard to imagine. i think what the only hope is something along the lines of a new christianity. not christianity, but the same kind of reformist. notion of swapping out hate for some aspects of love. that you're having christianity. now. it's not going to be christianity because... islam post-dates christianity. islam is competitive with christianity. islam removed. most of christianity from the regions in the middle east that occupies, not all of it, most of it. there needs to be a reformed. if you like. a christian version of islam. where the balance of costs and benefits in the struggle that is occurring there moves to a benefit in relation to cooperation.
Moderator
julian, before i give the floor to slavo and to yanis to make a comment or also to ask you a question, one thing and one worrying trend which connects the us and the european union is of course the ttip agreement. and one of the big achievements of wikileaks in the past weeks is that actually only through wikileaks we now know some parts of this secret until now agreement. can you just shortly, so we can also include slavo andis in the discussion, tell us why do you think ttip is dangerous and how will it change and affect our lives in europe?
julian, before i give the floor to slavo and to yanis to make a comment or also to ask you a question, one thing and one worrying trend which connects the us and the european union is of course the ttip agreement. and one of the big achievements of wikileaks in the past weeks is that actually only through wikileaks we now know some parts of this secret until now agreement. can you just shortly, so we can also include slavo andis in the discussion, tell us why do you think ttip is dangerous and how will it change and affect our lives in europe?
Julian Assange
ttip and the triang it is part of a new global. economic and legal partition of the world. uh... is, i think the most ambitious concrete plan. since the creation of the european union. since possibly the creation of the who, although it goes much further. um... okay, so you've got ttip, teaser. and teach it. these are respectively tpp, the us. pacific australia uh... binding together. tpp, us and eu. tisa 52 countries and it affects about 80% of the economy has to do with services. this creates a new global enclosure. we... two-thirds of global gdp are inside the triangle. 1.6 billion people are inside the triangle. and the rest outside. what is outside, essentially. all the non-western countries that are not allies in some way of the united states. so china, russia, south africa, india. in fact, most of the world, nearly all of africa, is outside this triangle. now, how has that come to be? how is such a titanic reordering. of the world's legal and economic system. come to be. whenever you have something really big happen, you know that there are multiple forces coming to be, just like when johannes was speaking about the construction. of the european union. ah you had very big forces of coal and steel coming together. you also had something else, you had the cold war. and a geostrategic reason for integrating the european union. and then you had appeal to liberal enlightenment values. with this, you have large multinationals who have always wanted to get special deals, to increase their monopoly power in medicines, for example, or in relation to copyrights. they've wanted to increase those powers always, and they're always pushing and lobbying for it. but finally, they were able to play the china card strategically. and that got the security and strategic forces involved in the united states and in europe. and in southeast asia. onto the same page. and so it's happening. now... hillary clinton calls ttip. two years ago. an economic nato. appealing to that. a strategic vision of merging together the united states and europe. fucking europe away from the eurusian integration that is happening. oh the ace. the defense secretary ashton carter. earlier this year. called tpp. as important for the rebalancing to asia. by that they mean the what was previously called the asia pivot, which is a euphemism for uh... encirclement of china. more important for the rebalancing to asia. than another aircraft carrier. put explicitly in these heavy geopolitical terms. in order not simply to educate people within the security sector. he wasn't simply speaking at some think tank going to discuss how we're going to do it, but rather to get backing. for it passing through congress, at which it successfully has done. so that i see. you know, i have different views about how the world comes to be, how different things come to be. i often think that strategists and people who portend themselves to be leaders are always looking what's going to happen. and leap in front of the train and say, that way. go on train, that way. as if they're beckoning it forward. but actually they're playing a certain game where things are moving in a particular direction anyway. and they want to establish their leadership credentials by just being there in front. but here we have a unique situation where there's not so much an organic mass just going off in its own direction. for example, with the change in prices of basic commodities. rather, we have a very organized, detailed plan, which we have released. nearly all of thizen now. uh... more of very many chapters of ttip and tonight we're actually releasing all of tpp into a searchable form. that that organized plan is in some ways. seems to be a vestige of something older and more classical. which was these giant geostrategic theories with detailed plans that bind different countries together in different ways. but as it's the largest one, and it will change it will lock in, permanently lock in. uh... a more radical form. of neoliberalism into europe. into southeast asia, into the united states. i think it really must be engaged in a similar way to which it was constructed. must must be intellectually engaged with and not just left to the gar of... the weather and how market prices change and how people move.
ttip and the triang it is part of a new global. economic and legal partition of the world. uh... is, i think the most ambitious concrete plan. since the creation of the european union. since possibly the creation of the who, although it goes much further. um... okay, so you've got ttip, teaser. and teach it. these are respectively tpp, the us. pacific australia uh... binding together. tpp, us and eu. tisa 52 countries and it affects about 80% of the economy has to do with services. this creates a new global enclosure. we... two-thirds of global gdp are inside the triangle. 1.6 billion people are inside the triangle. and the rest outside. what is outside, essentially. all the non-western countries that are not allies in some way of the united states. so china, russia, south africa, india. in fact, most of the world, nearly all of africa, is outside this triangle. now, how has that come to be? how is such a titanic reordering. of the world's legal and economic system. come to be. whenever you have something really big happen, you know that there are multiple forces coming to be, just like when johannes was speaking about the construction. of the european union. ah you had very big forces of coal and steel coming together. you also had something else, you had the cold war. and a geostrategic reason for integrating the european union. and then you had appeal to liberal enlightenment values. with this, you have large multinationals who have always wanted to get special deals, to increase their monopoly power in medicines, for example, or in relation to copyrights. they've wanted to increase those powers always, and they're always pushing and lobbying for it. but finally, they were able to play the china card strategically. and that got the security and strategic forces involved in the united states and in europe. and in southeast asia. onto the same page. and so it's happening. now... hillary clinton calls ttip. two years ago. an economic nato. appealing to that. a strategic vision of merging together the united states and europe. fucking europe away from the eurusian integration that is happening. oh the ace. the defense secretary ashton carter. earlier this year. called tpp. as important for the rebalancing to asia. by that they mean the what was previously called the asia pivot, which is a euphemism for uh... encirclement of china. more important for the rebalancing to asia. than another aircraft carrier. put explicitly in these heavy geopolitical terms. in order not simply to educate people within the security sector. he wasn't simply speaking at some think tank going to discuss how we're going to do it, but rather to get backing. for it passing through congress, at which it successfully has done. so that i see. you know, i have different views about how the world comes to be, how different things come to be. i often think that strategists and people who portend themselves to be leaders are always looking what's going to happen. and leap in front of the train and say, that way. go on train, that way. as if they're beckoning it forward. but actually they're playing a certain game where things are moving in a particular direction anyway. and they want to establish their leadership credentials by just being there in front. but here we have a unique situation where there's not so much an organic mass just going off in its own direction. for example, with the change in prices of basic commodities. rather, we have a very organized, detailed plan, which we have released. nearly all of thizen now. uh... more of very many chapters of ttip and tonight we're actually releasing all of tpp into a searchable form. that that organized plan is in some ways. seems to be a vestige of something older and more classical. which was these giant geostrategic theories with detailed plans that bind different countries together in different ways. but as it's the largest one, and it will change it will lock in, permanently lock in. uh... a more radical form. of neoliberalism into europe. into southeast asia, into the united states. i think it really must be engaged in a similar way to which it was constructed. must must be intellectually engaged with and not just left to the gar of... the weather and how market prices change and how people move.
Moderator
you also mentioned, you made a hint about the european left. so i think this is the chance that yanis and slav can also intervene. so where is the european left? and what is the european left doing? is it opposing ttip, these trends which julian mentions? and is the european left the answer to this problem?
you also mentioned, you made a hint about the european left. so i think this is the chance that yanis and slav can also intervene. so where is the european left? and what is the european left doing? is it opposing ttip, these trends which julian mentions? and is the european left the answer to this problem?
Slavoj Žižek
well, if i am now allowed my five minutes, first i must say i am but he was very polite. i deeply agree with what julian said. the key point here is the role of the european left. and now i'm again... i will be really a dark pessimist, which by nature i am, because i would love to be true what you, yis, said. your project of democratizing europe. but i am a skeptic. but first a remark on what already julian was claiming, middle east. it's so wrong to say we europe here threat from the middle east just war. no, there is a terrible conflict going on among arab countries. are we aware that almost the war that is going there, it's not the war between islam and christianity, but between shia and sunni. point two, absolutely crucial, how imperialism, western is absolutely involved in that war. take the state which is a kind of a... her's the political equivalent to all those monster animals with three heads and five testicles, whatever. saudi arabia, which is on one hand practically de facto a slave society, the most corrupt society, theocratic society, but at the same time a society which is in the most direct way included into western banking institutions. youis must know this better than me. but i think that saudi arabia, through its investments, is owning practically 10% of the united states already. i'm saying that this is the true problem. there you look for link with imperialism. did you notice how in all this refugee crisis, we don't talk about a very strange fact, which only the right-wingers mention, but in a totally wrong racist way. sorry, but just beneath the crisis area. are there. we have five six extremely wealthy. states which are even mostly sunni muslims. we have saudi arabia, kuwait, qatar, emirates. where are they in this? okay, you will say they are out of the conflict. they are not. the role of saudi arabia in syria is absolutely crucial. without saudi arabia and turkey, the syrian crisis would not have happened and so on and so on. so you see, this is the key abomination. saudi arabia is a state. this crazy combination of the utter imagination inruption masked as religious fundamentalism but for the ruling class which is the king and all his 5,000 children, nephews, whatever you have everything. i was there, i know. you have ukrainian prostitutes, you have alcohol drugs as much as you want and so on. but that's what we should bear in mind. saudi arabia is not a primitive arab country, it is but at the same time country which is kind of a exposure of international financial capital. that would be my first point. second pessimist point and then i come back to your julian your dream. you know i would like this to be true. let me now explode in my nastiest pessimist mind. when you say each ecb meeting public let me play devil's advocate. i'm an ecb guy. wonderful. we will just have a secret meeting the day before. you know what i mean? with you change just that, all the changes that you enumerated, i think, can be something more has to happen. all when you said democratizing europe, let me tell you one of the saddest things that happened to me, i don't think i mentioned it today here. recently in the debate with die deutsche zeitung some readers asked me questions when i gave an interview for this german daily newspaper and the the question which found the greatest echo among germans was, i speak about democracy, but isn't merkel here a dictatorial terrorist? merkel invited foreigners to germany. it's a big event for germany half a million million people. did she ask voters? where is her democratic legitization here and so on and so on? now i doubt that if there were to be a referendum, i'm hear more pessimist than you, which side would have won? and so you see what i mean in the present constellation of media, ideological pressure and so on and so on, i unfortunately think anti-immigrants. anti-immigrant racist would have triumphed in this. so see this is what i'm trying to get at. yes, and sorry. democracy i know what i'm saying now. democracy sometimes doesn't. work. people can be wrong. yes, sometimes they don't know what they want and they want what they don't know and they are simply wrong. and i'm not saying here as i was accused also in a habermassian way enlightened political elite will educate them. no, i totally agree with you. you know people say there is a secret european political elite. it's inefficient. it doesn't work. just the last point before i turn, it's very important. i'm coming back to you, julian. this idea of the common dream and so on. yes, that's the key point. utopian as it is, i don't see any solution without this. because what makes me really depressed with many of left radical left in europe is how they draw this line of distinction we in europe here we fight for. women's rights, abortion, gay marriages, but please believe me, i'm asking dozens of my radical leftist friends, what about muslims and this rights? and i always get the same answer, you know, in the present constellation of struggle, resader not mention this and so on, it's not opportune. but you have groups in arab countries, i met them who fight for this. i will tell you one name, please remember it. tamer nafa, a palestinian. hinger. whew! he was arrested already by israel. attacks and so on. israeli occupation, west bank. at the same time, he writes wonderful songs against honor killings among the arabs. these are our allies there. you know what happened to this guy? he visited recently with difficulty, my friend udi aloni got him a visa. he visited ucla campus in california, made a concert there where he sang that song against honor killings. at the end he was brutally attacked by stupid politically correct leftists, claiming them, but why do you mention dish honor killings? this is all the result of israeli occupation. you are basically serving zionist interests and so on. and i will quote him. tamar gave a wonderful answer to these upper middle class white kids who want to play radicals. when you criticize me, you criticize my own community in english to impress your radical professors. i think in arabics to protect women in my own hood and so on. this should be i cannot accept this idea that on the one hand we have this islamist oppressed, even if they throw bombs, they somehow resist capitalism. no, up to a large point i sympathize with them. i even think that the palestinian knives attack now are a kind of benjaminian divine violence. i go very far here. but you won't go anymore. sorry really. julia you please he was talking i am but what i'm saying is this that wait, i would like really to hear ranni's response to that. but can i just finish? can i just finish the line? my line is are we clear here that for me, this that you find among some radical leftists, this silent dismissal of every critique of islam as a form of islamophobia. it's an ide-political catastrophe. it's not only giving weapons to anti-immigrants, it's always a racist patronizing attitude towards the arabs. there is a big problem. yes, we have this disgusting christian fundamentalists here, but everything depends on this, that we connect our progressive european str struggles with their struggles. that for example, that we find a common language between our feminist and struggles, their struggle for economic justice and the last thing immediately one half a minute only to provoke you really, i think there is something deeply false we agree here he is the enemy. against this, you know, eternal self-accusation of you know, europe, whatever happens in, it's as if the old idea of white men's burden, it's our role to rule the world, is now reinterpreted by some stupid politically correct leftists as a white man's burden in the sense that there is a slaughter in rwanda, oh, it must be neocolonialism effect and so on and so on. i have a black friend from rwanda who told me, stop being racist in the beginning of ending your racism is please don't patronize us admit us that we also can be evil of our own. you know, and last thing, all my african friends accept this. that was the greatness of mandela and so on. stop with this european shit. we did many horrible things, europeans. but we have still the core of our great emancipatory legacy. my god, communism, feminism, these are european notions. and we should use them ruthlessly against our own limitations and as a chance for others to acquire freedom. so let's stop with this. we are guilty, whatever we are guilty. we should also be proud of some parts of our culture and defend them against the greatest threat to european culture, which are the anti-immigrant defenders of europe. we in europe have the most potent ideological arm to fight this. and i would agree with you, julian, about what you said, christianity and so on, although for me it would be a kind of a, you know, christianity is a great religion because basically it says god is dead, we have holy spirit, which is for me the first name for the communist party, community of believers. i end now, okay?
well, if i am now allowed my five minutes, first i must say i am but he was very polite. i deeply agree with what julian said. the key point here is the role of the european left. and now i'm again... i will be really a dark pessimist, which by nature i am, because i would love to be true what you, yis, said. your project of democratizing europe. but i am a skeptic. but first a remark on what already julian was claiming, middle east. it's so wrong to say we europe here threat from the middle east just war. no, there is a terrible conflict going on among arab countries. are we aware that almost the war that is going there, it's not the war between islam and christianity, but between shia and sunni. point two, absolutely crucial, how imperialism, western is absolutely involved in that war. take the state which is a kind of a... her's the political equivalent to all those monster animals with three heads and five testicles, whatever. saudi arabia, which is on one hand practically de facto a slave society, the most corrupt society, theocratic society, but at the same time a society which is in the most direct way included into western banking institutions. youis must know this better than me. but i think that saudi arabia, through its investments, is owning practically 10% of the united states already. i'm saying that this is the true problem. there you look for link with imperialism. did you notice how in all this refugee crisis, we don't talk about a very strange fact, which only the right-wingers mention, but in a totally wrong racist way. sorry, but just beneath the crisis area. are there. we have five six extremely wealthy. states which are even mostly sunni muslims. we have saudi arabia, kuwait, qatar, emirates. where are they in this? okay, you will say they are out of the conflict. they are not. the role of saudi arabia in syria is absolutely crucial. without saudi arabia and turkey, the syrian crisis would not have happened and so on and so on. so you see, this is the key abomination. saudi arabia is a state. this crazy combination of the utter imagination inruption masked as religious fundamentalism but for the ruling class which is the king and all his 5,000 children, nephews, whatever you have everything. i was there, i know. you have ukrainian prostitutes, you have alcohol drugs as much as you want and so on. but that's what we should bear in mind. saudi arabia is not a primitive arab country, it is but at the same time country which is kind of a exposure of international financial capital. that would be my first point. second pessimist point and then i come back to your julian your dream. you know i would like this to be true. let me now explode in my nastiest pessimist mind. when you say each ecb meeting public let me play devil's advocate. i'm an ecb guy. wonderful. we will just have a secret meeting the day before. you know what i mean? with you change just that, all the changes that you enumerated, i think, can be something more has to happen. all when you said democratizing europe, let me tell you one of the saddest things that happened to me, i don't think i mentioned it today here. recently in the debate with die deutsche zeitung some readers asked me questions when i gave an interview for this german daily newspaper and the the question which found the greatest echo among germans was, i speak about democracy, but isn't merkel here a dictatorial terrorist? merkel invited foreigners to germany. it's a big event for germany half a million million people. did she ask voters? where is her democratic legitization here and so on and so on? now i doubt that if there were to be a referendum, i'm hear more pessimist than you, which side would have won? and so you see what i mean in the present constellation of media, ideological pressure and so on and so on, i unfortunately think anti-immigrants. anti-immigrant racist would have triumphed in this. so see this is what i'm trying to get at. yes, and sorry. democracy i know what i'm saying now. democracy sometimes doesn't. work. people can be wrong. yes, sometimes they don't know what they want and they want what they don't know and they are simply wrong. and i'm not saying here as i was accused also in a habermassian way enlightened political elite will educate them. no, i totally agree with you. you know people say there is a secret european political elite. it's inefficient. it doesn't work. just the last point before i turn, it's very important. i'm coming back to you, julian. this idea of the common dream and so on. yes, that's the key point. utopian as it is, i don't see any solution without this. because what makes me really depressed with many of left radical left in europe is how they draw this line of distinction we in europe here we fight for. women's rights, abortion, gay marriages, but please believe me, i'm asking dozens of my radical leftist friends, what about muslims and this rights? and i always get the same answer, you know, in the present constellation of struggle, resader not mention this and so on, it's not opportune. but you have groups in arab countries, i met them who fight for this. i will tell you one name, please remember it. tamer nafa, a palestinian. hinger. whew! he was arrested already by israel. attacks and so on. israeli occupation, west bank. at the same time, he writes wonderful songs against honor killings among the arabs. these are our allies there. you know what happened to this guy? he visited recently with difficulty, my friend udi aloni got him a visa. he visited ucla campus in california, made a concert there where he sang that song against honor killings. at the end he was brutally attacked by stupid politically correct leftists, claiming them, but why do you mention dish honor killings? this is all the result of israeli occupation. you are basically serving zionist interests and so on. and i will quote him. tamar gave a wonderful answer to these upper middle class white kids who want to play radicals. when you criticize me, you criticize my own community in english to impress your radical professors. i think in arabics to protect women in my own hood and so on. this should be i cannot accept this idea that on the one hand we have this islamist oppressed, even if they throw bombs, they somehow resist capitalism. no, up to a large point i sympathize with them. i even think that the palestinian knives attack now are a kind of benjaminian divine violence. i go very far here. but you won't go anymore. sorry really. julia you please he was talking i am but what i'm saying is this that wait, i would like really to hear ranni's response to that. but can i just finish? can i just finish the line? my line is are we clear here that for me, this that you find among some radical leftists, this silent dismissal of every critique of islam as a form of islamophobia. it's an ide-political catastrophe. it's not only giving weapons to anti-immigrants, it's always a racist patronizing attitude towards the arabs. there is a big problem. yes, we have this disgusting christian fundamentalists here, but everything depends on this, that we connect our progressive european str struggles with their struggles. that for example, that we find a common language between our feminist and struggles, their struggle for economic justice and the last thing immediately one half a minute only to provoke you really, i think there is something deeply false we agree here he is the enemy. against this, you know, eternal self-accusation of you know, europe, whatever happens in, it's as if the old idea of white men's burden, it's our role to rule the world, is now reinterpreted by some stupid politically correct leftists as a white man's burden in the sense that there is a slaughter in rwanda, oh, it must be neocolonialism effect and so on and so on. i have a black friend from rwanda who told me, stop being racist in the beginning of ending your racism is please don't patronize us admit us that we also can be evil of our own. you know, and last thing, all my african friends accept this. that was the greatness of mandela and so on. stop with this european shit. we did many horrible things, europeans. but we have still the core of our great emancipatory legacy. my god, communism, feminism, these are european notions. and we should use them ruthlessly against our own limitations and as a chance for others to acquire freedom. so let's stop with this. we are guilty, whatever we are guilty. we should also be proud of some parts of our culture and defend them against the greatest threat to european culture, which are the anti-immigrant defenders of europe. we in europe have the most potent ideological arm to fight this. and i would agree with you, julian, about what you said, christianity and so on, although for me it would be a kind of a, you know, christianity is a great religion because basically it says god is dead, we have holy spirit, which is for me the first name for the communist party, community of believers. i end now, okay?
Moderator
he sl just gave you a good schlagwort, what would they call in deutschland, the communist party. but before your response, let's just make the dramaturgy of the proceeding of this event. so first we will hear your... your response to slav but also your comment.
he sl just gave you a good schlagwort, what would they call in deutschland, the communist party. but before your response, let's just make the dramaturgy of the proceeding of this event. so first we will hear your... your response to slav but also your comment.
Slavoj Žižek
to what.
to what.
Moderator
from julian. then we will ask julian for also very short comment and then we will open the floor for the audience because we will have some democracy in europe as well.
from julian. then we will ask julian for also very short comment and then we will open the floor for the audience because we will have some democracy in europe as well.
Slavoj Žižek
i thought julian is out, does she have the right to reply? . right slab away. it.
i thought julian is out, does she have the right to reply? . right slab away. it.
Moderator
isn't it enough that he's in an embassy closed for three years so you would even...
isn't it enough that he's in an embassy closed for three years so you would even...
Slavoj Žižek
but can i make a lovingly evil mistake? you know that you look a little bit like christ who survived crucifixion there? no wonder you have this. you know christ who got older and somehow crawled out of the cave and... he's trying not to smile. sorry. he will be forced to smile when we take power. okay.
but can i make a lovingly evil mistake? you know that you look a little bit like christ who survived crucifixion there? no wonder you have this. you know christ who got older and somehow crawled out of the cave and... he's trying not to smile. sorry. he will be forced to smile when we take power. okay.
Yanis Varoufakis
yanis. you will allow me to... start on a completely different point. but it connects with julian's very essence and also the substance of what he was saying. and then i'll come to you slowly. i promise. the great paradox. over the last 20, 30 years. at least one of the great paradoxes is the fact that we celebrate constantly. the information technological advances that allow us. instant communication and complete transparency. and it is indeed true that we have the technological means. to be connected in a way that we could not, well, i could not have imagined when i was growing up in greece during the carn. and at the very same time, while our capacity to be informed and to have a clear view of what's going on around the world is increasing in leaps and bounds exponentially, the actual information that we have about what's going on in our world is actually decreasing negatively exponentially. this disconnect. between the steady technological improvement in our capacity to know and what we actually know about our world is i think one of the paradoxes which is. dynamite in the foundations of our western societies. and which is responsible to a very large extent about the democratic deficit, not just in the european union but elsewhere. and what i think that i would like to pay tribute to julian. for having turned big brother on his head. because those capacities for technologically getting connected to the truth. have been usurped by the powers that be in what has become a form of surveillance capitalism. where the benefits of the technology are being put to use by those who want to deny the rest of us. transparency and a view of what is going on. so... you heard a number of stories and actually it's what julian refers to as scientific journalism, which is, in other words, commentary based on actual documents. documents that have been leaked or have been presented or discovered or retrieved somehow which tells you what it was that hillary clinton said, what assad said, what putin said and you don't have to rely on secondary and tertiary interpretation by some journalist who works for some conglomerate whose interests are highly intertwined with the vested interests that are part of the problem. hearing the stories that come out of wikileaks or actually reading them. independently of whether you like julian or you agree with his interpretation of what he is receiving. but actually having first-hand information, access. to these documents. reveals a world that is completely alien to anyone who relies on the media in order to understand. those who rely on third hand, fourth hand, regurgitated information through the vested interests of the oligarchy. in order to be informed about the world they are condemned to be caught up in moments of terror when suddenly the facade that they confuse for reality. explodes when an isis bomb or an al-qaeda bomb goes off. and they have absolutely no clue. and then what happens is they revert back to the same media who misinformed them in the first place for information about what had happened. the the i want to pay to julian is that he he gave us reason to be optimistic. because in an orwellian way, technology tends to concentrate power by concentrating the capacity to know in the hands of those who do not want to put it into the service of the public. but what wikileaks tried to do. and i think this is the source of optimism. is it use the very same techniques, the very same technologies in order to say to those who collect information in order to monopolize it, that you know what? that information will escape. and you are not safe. in the monopoly of that information. that is the reason why he's in there. that is the reason why he's being persecuted because information when it is concentrated in the way it's concentrated in the ecb, in the eurogroup, in the debates about our future and the ttip ttp, they sound like silly acronyms, but they are about the future. they're nothing to do with free trade agreements. everybody wants free trade. who wants? and slave trade. everybody wants free trade, but it's not about free trade. it's got nothing to do about barriers to the movement of goods and services. it is all about specifying who owns the right to the idea. that will give rise to good. who is the patent? who has the capacity to tell a certain industry, a certain pharmaceutical company that in order to produce this uh you have to charge eighty ninety pounds per pill to those who absolutely need it. it's got to do with the labour standards, whether we are going to be engaged in a global race to the bottom. where the enslavement of people in faraway places becomes instrumental and functional to our capacity to purchase cheap clothes and cheap gadgets on the high street. it has to do with environmental standards. whether our societies, our. people, our polity has the right even to say for instance that this pesticide or this genome is not to be used in our land because we consider it to be dangerous for the soil and for the water that we drink. these are the decisions that will shape the future and they are being made without you knowing about it in exactly the same way that the ecb is making these decisions. now if they want to break the law and have meetings prior to the official meetings, let them break the law. then we'll have to chase them. there is no law, there is no legal system, no constitution that is foolproof against vested interests and against abuse. but the fact that we don't have a law, that we don't have regulations in europe and the only regulations are the ones that preserve the monopoly of information for those who use it to keep us in the dark and to keep us disenfranchised and to keep us inimical to one another and inimical to the other, to the foreigners, to the palestinians, to the nigerians, to the syyrians. to the muslims, to the christians, to whoever. this is the main game in town and by town i mean the global village in which we live. and let me just finish by saying, just adding one last vignette to this, which we may discuss later in the conversation if anybody is interested. capitalism is not wrong because it is creating inequality and injustice. my trouble, my qualm with capitalism is that it's a very inefficient way of utilizing human and non-human resources. it wastes human capacities, whole generations, it creates conflicts and antagonisms in order to preserve vested interests. and injustice and inequality are byproducts of this failure of rationality and efficiency. the left has failed. in its critique of capital. we turned our humanism into the gulag. we turned our good intentions into a misanthropic power structure that abused the people that we were supposedly interested in helping. this is why from 1991 onwards the left is on retreat. but capitalism will be overthrown. even without the left. the technologies that capitalism produces will overthrow capitalism. the 3d printer. the capacity of designers to to collaborate without going through a corporation, a corporate structure. that will undermine the purpose of corporations. they will deplete the value generation process. at the very same time that output of gadget is maximized. in the united states, apple has started building factories for the first time shifting production from china back to the united states, except that no americans will be employed in them because they will be fully robotized. the question is, who is going to buy the apple macintosh machines and the ipods? the robots will not. so there is going to be a crisis of realization, as marx used to say, that is going to be intensified by the technological process progress, the same technological progress which now concentrates information so that we do not see. the determinants of our history, of our present and of our future and which. people like julian, by creating mechanisms by which we can turn the technologies against those who want to deny us this information, are creating a chance. a ray of light of hope. that we can democratize the economic, social and political dimensions of our existence. and i shall finish by one word which is not going to detract from slavoy's pessimism. because... i choose to be optimistic. i have no evidence. that humanity can become master of its faculties and of its fate. i choose as an axiom to believe that we can. simply because the moment you start on the basis of this axiomatic optimism, there is a possibility. that the probability of democracy increases. hope feeds hope. there is no evidence that this hope is justified, but there is plenty of evidence that without hope we will succumb to the fear of fear and the terrorists in whatever form they take are going to triumph against humanism.
yanis. you will allow me to... start on a completely different point. but it connects with julian's very essence and also the substance of what he was saying. and then i'll come to you slowly. i promise. the great paradox. over the last 20, 30 years. at least one of the great paradoxes is the fact that we celebrate constantly. the information technological advances that allow us. instant communication and complete transparency. and it is indeed true that we have the technological means. to be connected in a way that we could not, well, i could not have imagined when i was growing up in greece during the carn. and at the very same time, while our capacity to be informed and to have a clear view of what's going on around the world is increasing in leaps and bounds exponentially, the actual information that we have about what's going on in our world is actually decreasing negatively exponentially. this disconnect. between the steady technological improvement in our capacity to know and what we actually know about our world is i think one of the paradoxes which is. dynamite in the foundations of our western societies. and which is responsible to a very large extent about the democratic deficit, not just in the european union but elsewhere. and what i think that i would like to pay tribute to julian. for having turned big brother on his head. because those capacities for technologically getting connected to the truth. have been usurped by the powers that be in what has become a form of surveillance capitalism. where the benefits of the technology are being put to use by those who want to deny the rest of us. transparency and a view of what is going on. so... you heard a number of stories and actually it's what julian refers to as scientific journalism, which is, in other words, commentary based on actual documents. documents that have been leaked or have been presented or discovered or retrieved somehow which tells you what it was that hillary clinton said, what assad said, what putin said and you don't have to rely on secondary and tertiary interpretation by some journalist who works for some conglomerate whose interests are highly intertwined with the vested interests that are part of the problem. hearing the stories that come out of wikileaks or actually reading them. independently of whether you like julian or you agree with his interpretation of what he is receiving. but actually having first-hand information, access. to these documents. reveals a world that is completely alien to anyone who relies on the media in order to understand. those who rely on third hand, fourth hand, regurgitated information through the vested interests of the oligarchy. in order to be informed about the world they are condemned to be caught up in moments of terror when suddenly the facade that they confuse for reality. explodes when an isis bomb or an al-qaeda bomb goes off. and they have absolutely no clue. and then what happens is they revert back to the same media who misinformed them in the first place for information about what had happened. the the i want to pay to julian is that he he gave us reason to be optimistic. because in an orwellian way, technology tends to concentrate power by concentrating the capacity to know in the hands of those who do not want to put it into the service of the public. but what wikileaks tried to do. and i think this is the source of optimism. is it use the very same techniques, the very same technologies in order to say to those who collect information in order to monopolize it, that you know what? that information will escape. and you are not safe. in the monopoly of that information. that is the reason why he's in there. that is the reason why he's being persecuted because information when it is concentrated in the way it's concentrated in the ecb, in the eurogroup, in the debates about our future and the ttip ttp, they sound like silly acronyms, but they are about the future. they're nothing to do with free trade agreements. everybody wants free trade. who wants? and slave trade. everybody wants free trade, but it's not about free trade. it's got nothing to do about barriers to the movement of goods and services. it is all about specifying who owns the right to the idea. that will give rise to good. who is the patent? who has the capacity to tell a certain industry, a certain pharmaceutical company that in order to produce this uh you have to charge eighty ninety pounds per pill to those who absolutely need it. it's got to do with the labour standards, whether we are going to be engaged in a global race to the bottom. where the enslavement of people in faraway places becomes instrumental and functional to our capacity to purchase cheap clothes and cheap gadgets on the high street. it has to do with environmental standards. whether our societies, our. people, our polity has the right even to say for instance that this pesticide or this genome is not to be used in our land because we consider it to be dangerous for the soil and for the water that we drink. these are the decisions that will shape the future and they are being made without you knowing about it in exactly the same way that the ecb is making these decisions. now if they want to break the law and have meetings prior to the official meetings, let them break the law. then we'll have to chase them. there is no law, there is no legal system, no constitution that is foolproof against vested interests and against abuse. but the fact that we don't have a law, that we don't have regulations in europe and the only regulations are the ones that preserve the monopoly of information for those who use it to keep us in the dark and to keep us disenfranchised and to keep us inimical to one another and inimical to the other, to the foreigners, to the palestinians, to the nigerians, to the syyrians. to the muslims, to the christians, to whoever. this is the main game in town and by town i mean the global village in which we live. and let me just finish by saying, just adding one last vignette to this, which we may discuss later in the conversation if anybody is interested. capitalism is not wrong because it is creating inequality and injustice. my trouble, my qualm with capitalism is that it's a very inefficient way of utilizing human and non-human resources. it wastes human capacities, whole generations, it creates conflicts and antagonisms in order to preserve vested interests. and injustice and inequality are byproducts of this failure of rationality and efficiency. the left has failed. in its critique of capital. we turned our humanism into the gulag. we turned our good intentions into a misanthropic power structure that abused the people that we were supposedly interested in helping. this is why from 1991 onwards the left is on retreat. but capitalism will be overthrown. even without the left. the technologies that capitalism produces will overthrow capitalism. the 3d printer. the capacity of designers to to collaborate without going through a corporation, a corporate structure. that will undermine the purpose of corporations. they will deplete the value generation process. at the very same time that output of gadget is maximized. in the united states, apple has started building factories for the first time shifting production from china back to the united states, except that no americans will be employed in them because they will be fully robotized. the question is, who is going to buy the apple macintosh machines and the ipods? the robots will not. so there is going to be a crisis of realization, as marx used to say, that is going to be intensified by the technological process progress, the same technological progress which now concentrates information so that we do not see. the determinants of our history, of our present and of our future and which. people like julian, by creating mechanisms by which we can turn the technologies against those who want to deny us this information, are creating a chance. a ray of light of hope. that we can democratize the economic, social and political dimensions of our existence. and i shall finish by one word which is not going to detract from slavoy's pessimism. because... i choose to be optimistic. i have no evidence. that humanity can become master of its faculties and of its fate. i choose as an axiom to believe that we can. simply because the moment you start on the basis of this axiomatic optimism, there is a possibility. that the probability of democracy increases. hope feeds hope. there is no evidence that this hope is justified, but there is plenty of evidence that without hope we will succumb to the fear of fear and the terrorists in whatever form they take are going to triumph against humanism.
Audience Member 1
das,. that.
das,. that.
Moderator
no, so sorry, slavo, you can... you can kill me later, but we are over time and we really want to involve you as well in our discussion. so this is my last question and a very short answer by julian. what janis just said is actually his hope that technology will succeed to overthrow capitalism. do you agree? because when we had the opportunity to speak last time, you said explicitly that your biggest fear is that if don't do something or if the left doesn't realize that technology is so important as you have shown now that in two or three years silicon valley will completely take over.
no, so sorry, slavo, you can... you can kill me later, but we are over time and we really want to involve you as well in our discussion. so this is my last question and a very short answer by julian. what janis just said is actually his hope that technology will succeed to overthrow capitalism. do you agree? because when we had the opportunity to speak last time, you said explicitly that your biggest fear is that if don't do something or if the left doesn't realize that technology is so important as you have shown now that in two or three years silicon valley will completely take over.
Julian Assange
yeah, well, it's a little hard to respond to yanis because we agree on so much. okay, i'll try try and move past it. i like being an intellectual pessimist. um... and i agree at the end, you just simply have to proceed anyway but i think it's necessary to be an intellectual pessimist to... two to cut through. actually i would even say but somehow the analytical part of the mind. is better engaged in response. to a... uh, to a mood. of pessimism. it might be a mood of pessimism. touched with anger. but... i think nonetheless, intellectually people are better. better engaged in trying to really understand something. and then once you really understand it. then you can try then you become const. you. develop a sort of a constructive instinct, which is about building things. okay. the i spent a lot of time understanding silicon valley. because i was involved in the embryonic internet, i been hacking pentagon generals's emails since i was 17. and i've met a lot of these big players like eric schmidt. quite quite frightened these chairman of google. quite frightening the. uh... the worldview view of people like that. i think as individuals, probably. emotionally fine, but the intellectual worldview and the poverty in that worldview. but it is something that has circulated around silicon valley and it is now the most aggressive ideology on earth. this is high-tech liberalism. and high-tech liberalism. is dominating the competition. for ideas. i wouldn't even say there's any competition at all, frankly. there's maybe uh... some frontiers of islam. uh. and now engaged in a rapid ideological development. and over here we have high-tech liberalism. and i don't see actually anything. are in terms of scale happening between the two. so high-tech liberalism. is this? philosophy of silicon valley that has merged with capitalism and it is all about where the future is proceeding. now google produced a book, the new digital age. about two years ago. that. explicitly. all right. try to claim. that intellectual leadership. not just in relation to economics, but in relation to... geopolitics. that google would be. washington's geopolitical visionary. and the geopolitics of the world. are now being coupled, at least the united states, at this vision of silicon valley. the vision of silicon valley basically put is that silicon valley companies can manage everything better through their scale and competency. and they are replacing various elements of even local government now, these silicon valley companies. and when i hear back from people in india or china. uh. smart young people.
yeah, well, it's a little hard to respond to yanis because we agree on so much. okay, i'll try try and move past it. i like being an intellectual pessimist. um... and i agree at the end, you just simply have to proceed anyway but i think it's necessary to be an intellectual pessimist to... two to cut through. actually i would even say but somehow the analytical part of the mind. is better engaged in response. to a... uh, to a mood. of pessimism. it might be a mood of pessimism. touched with anger. but... i think nonetheless, intellectually people are better. better engaged in trying to really understand something. and then once you really understand it. then you can try then you become const. you. develop a sort of a constructive instinct, which is about building things. okay. the i spent a lot of time understanding silicon valley. because i was involved in the embryonic internet, i been hacking pentagon generals's emails since i was 17. and i've met a lot of these big players like eric schmidt. quite quite frightened these chairman of google. quite frightening the. uh... the worldview view of people like that. i think as individuals, probably. emotionally fine, but the intellectual worldview and the poverty in that worldview. but it is something that has circulated around silicon valley and it is now the most aggressive ideology on earth. this is high-tech liberalism. and high-tech liberalism. is dominating the competition. for ideas. i wouldn't even say there's any competition at all, frankly. there's maybe uh... some frontiers of islam. uh. and now engaged in a rapid ideological development. and over here we have high-tech liberalism. and i don't see actually anything. are in terms of scale happening between the two. so high-tech liberalism. is this? philosophy of silicon valley that has merged with capitalism and it is all about where the future is proceeding. now google produced a book, the new digital age. about two years ago. that. explicitly. all right. try to claim. that intellectual leadership. not just in relation to economics, but in relation to... geopolitics. that google would be. washington's geopolitical visionary. and the geopolitics of the world. are now being coupled, at least the united states, at this vision of silicon valley. the vision of silicon valley basically put is that silicon valley companies can manage everything better through their scale and competency. and they are replacing various elements of even local government now, these silicon valley companies. and when i hear back from people in india or china. uh. smart young people.
Slavoj Žižek
you. what you want to do. with your life.
you. what you want to do. with your life.
Julian Assange
and their answer is, well, if they're an average person. they want to go work for facebook. if they would be more radical. then they want to start their own facebook. but in... both countries, india and china. the surrounding ideological context. is an adoption of silicon valley. there's no chart, we're going to do it the chinese way. and what they mean by doing it the chinese way? is simply doing it in china and having it staffed by chinamen. that's the chinese way. there is no... uh... ideological alternative to what's going on. and that new ideology is progressing at such a rapid rate. that i think if there's not... decent alternatives put on the table, both about how silicon valley came to be. as a critique to the false myth that silicon valley has been putting up. and ideological alternatives about where we're going. then we simply completely abandon the ideological domain to this high-tech neoliberalism. and islam, which is the other radical islam, the only other expanding ideology.
and their answer is, well, if they're an average person. they want to go work for facebook. if they would be more radical. then they want to start their own facebook. but in... both countries, india and china. the surrounding ideological context. is an adoption of silicon valley. there's no chart, we're going to do it the chinese way. and what they mean by doing it the chinese way? is simply doing it in china and having it staffed by chinamen. that's the chinese way. there is no... uh... ideological alternative to what's going on. and that new ideology is progressing at such a rapid rate. that i think if there's not... decent alternatives put on the table, both about how silicon valley came to be. as a critique to the false myth that silicon valley has been putting up. and ideological alternatives about where we're going. then we simply completely abandon the ideological domain to this high-tech neoliberalism. and islam, which is the other radical islam, the only other expanding ideology.
Moderator
thank you very much, julian.
thank you very much, julian.
Slavoj Žižek
okay, but... in the debate hola santa sm.
okay, but... in the debate hola santa sm.
Moderator
okay, my big gesture of solidarity tonight, i give you one minute and then we give no minutes.
okay, my big gesture of solidarity tonight, i give you one minute and then we give no minutes.
Slavoj Žižek
so.
so.
Moderator
i.
i.
Slavoj Žižek
really extremely short. first, as julian you know very well, it's also very important to emphasize this that. phrases like neoliberalism are deeply deceiving. neoliberalism doesn't really exist in china, in united states. state apparatuses are getting stronger and stronger. so you make a very good example of china. yes, yes, neoliberalism silicon valley with the big brother of the communist party. and in united states it's similar and so on. second point, wikileaks. that's why i totally support you, julian. as i already wrote it years ago, listen, what's so important about wikileaks, and this will a very pessimist insight, is that
really extremely short. first, as julian you know very well, it's also very important to emphasize this that. phrases like neoliberalism are deeply deceiving. neoliberalism doesn't really exist in china, in united states. state apparatuses are getting stronger and stronger. so you make a very good example of china. yes, yes, neoliberalism silicon valley with the big brother of the communist party. and in united states it's similar and so on. second point, wikileaks. that's why i totally support you, julian. as i already wrote it years ago, listen, what's so important about wikileaks, and this will a very pessimist insight, is that
Audience Member 1
we didn't.
we didn't.
Slavoj Žižek
up to a large extent. we didn't really, we learned details, but basically we all suspected this. but here comes my pessimism. it's not only that we embarrassed those in power. we embarrassed ourselves. much of us, and that's the power of existing ideology. we you know what's the attitude of many everyday conformists? okay, there is we are controlled, but it's probably catch criminals, let's politely pretend it and let those in power do the dirty work. the greatest achievement of wikileaks is to make us ordinary people impossible to ignore this. we cannot act as if we don't know. the very last thing capital what you said. you know, i agree with you. i only have this option, which is not a pessimist, but just to to struggle that, but what if what comes after capitalism as we know it can also be something even worse than today's capitalism?
up to a large extent. we didn't really, we learned details, but basically we all suspected this. but here comes my pessimism. it's not only that we embarrassed those in power. we embarrassed ourselves. much of us, and that's the power of existing ideology. we you know what's the attitude of many everyday conformists? okay, there is we are controlled, but it's probably catch criminals, let's politely pretend it and let those in power do the dirty work. the greatest achievement of wikileaks is to make us ordinary people impossible to ignore this. we cannot act as if we don't know. the very last thing capital what you said. you know, i agree with you. i only have this option, which is not a pessimist, but just to to struggle that, but what if what comes after capitalism as we know it can also be something even worse than today's capitalism?
Yanis Varoufakis
no, we agree entirely. entirely. my point was that capitalism will overthrow itself. but what will come after that could very easily be the matrix as a documentary.
no, we agree entirely. entirely. my point was that capitalism will overthrow itself. but what will come after that could very easily be the matrix as a documentary.
Slavoj Žižek
you mean the movie, the matrix?
you mean the movie, the matrix?
Moderator
unfortunately, we came to an end, although we will continue of course now, not here, but everywhere. i would like to use the opportunity to thank the team from south bank for providing the opportunity to have this evening.
unfortunately, we came to an end, although we will continue of course now, not here, but everywhere. i would like to use the opportunity to thank the team from south bank for providing the opportunity to have this evening.
Slavoj Žižek
i. yeah,.
i. yeah,.
Moderator
and then also i also like to thank julian for being with us tonight and for sharing the precious information. and as herzog and kinski said, my lieb find the unique and original slav. okay, so.
and then also i also like to thank julian for being with us tonight and for sharing the precious information. and as herzog and kinski said, my lieb find the unique and original slav. okay, so.
Slavoj Žižek
and what you will say now, the ordinary non-unique yanni sur. and i promise you, next time, even if it will take 10 years, julian will be here with us.
and what you will say now, the ordinary non-unique yanni sur. and i promise you, next time, even if it will take 10 years, julian will be here with us.