archive / talks / Heaven: Out of Order feat. Slavoj Žižek | Chapo Trap Hous…

Heaven: Out of Order feat. Slavoj Žižek | Chapo Trap House | Episode 582 FULL

Interview · Chapo Trap House · 2021-12-08 · 1:31:42 · 12,298 words

capitalismideologypsychoanalysisgeopolitics-wardemocracyrevolution-violencetechnology-ai-cyberspaceeveryday-lifecommunism-socialismecology-climateconsciousness-mindfascism-populismcinema-art-culture

Žižek argues that the pandemic has accelerated a transition from neoliberal capitalism to 'corporate neo-feudalism,' where tech giants extract rent by privatizing the digital commons. He critiques the anti-vax/liberal opposition for failing to challenge the underlying structures of control, instead getting trapped in 'neo-tribal' identity politics. He provocatively advocates for 'non-democratic communism' and obligatory vaccination, contrasting the efficiency of authoritarian mobilization with the failure of liberal 'pseudo-personal freedom.' Žižek analyzes the pandemic as a moment where capitalism organized its own general strike, revealing the necessity of state intervention and pointing toward a form of communism distinct from neoliberalism or neo-feudalism. He argues that the failure of traditional cognitive mappings has led to the rise of conspiracy theories, which function as a secular theology, and connects this radical uncertainty to the looming threat of global war, particularly involving China, Russia, and the US. Žižek analyzes the January 6th Capitol riot and modern populism as 'postmodern conservative' phenomena that preserve the empty form of democracy while undermining its substance, contrasting this with old-style fascism. He proposes a 'conservative communism' that trusts the moral majority and supports tactical engagement with liberal measures (like Biden's policies) while maintaining critical distance, rejecting the leftist wait for authentic change. The discussion shifts to geopolitical risks, arguing that ecological catastrophe necessitates international cooperation over war, and explores the potential for a 'Free Officers' military movement in the US as a last resort against civil war. Finally, he critiques pop culture, praising Dune and classic slapstick while dismissing Nomadland and Squid Game as pseudo-anti-capitalist fantasies of 'honest capitalism.'

every located moment in this recording, click one to read it

video · Chapo Trap House watch on youtube ↗

The ideas in it 21

in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here

Stories he reaches for 2

The Handmaid's Tale

Žižek criticizes The Handmaid's Tale for allowing viewers to enjoy the fantasy of enslavement under the pretext of critical distance, noting the failure of its sequel to find a new formula.

“it allows you to fully enjoy No you get to do a fantasy of how kind of like fun it would be to be enslaved in that manner.”

Occupy Wall Street

Žižek defends Occupy Wall Street against claims it was just upper-middle-class students, arguing it formed the 'fertile ground' for Bernie Sanders and gradual political change, proving that failed attempts create the right moment.

“it formed the fertile ground for for for Bernie Sanders and all those.”

Works invoked 14

The Handmaid's Tale book

Cited as a 'sad failure' that demonstrates a lack of sociopolitical imagination.

Dune film

Žižek likes Dune for its 'fatal sacred war Islamist almost fantasy' and depiction of a new leader.

Heaven in Disorder book

Žižek's own book, which he promotes and uses as the basis for his arguments on postmodern conservatism and populism.

Nomadland film

Žižek critiques Nomadland as 'class identity politics' that romanticizes poverty rather than critiquing it.

The Life of Brian film

Used to retell the 'What have the Romans ever done for us' joke, which Žižek employs to argue for the functional benefits of communism (healthcare, social control) without the label.

Metaverse other

Zuckerberg's project, described as a 'feudal manifesto' and an 'artificial digital space' controlled by him, representing the privatization of the commons.

The Silence of the Lambs film

Referenced as the predecessor to the TV series Clarice.

1945-1946 (Essay by Orwell) essay

An Orwell text from 1937/1945 cited by Žižek to critique liberal intellectuals who talk about change to prevent it.

Arsenic and Old Lace film

Cited as another example of a 'nervous movie' from the 1950s slapstick era.

The Battle at Lake Changjin film

A popular Chinese war movie interpreted by Žižek as signaling a shift in Chinese patriotism and military strategy toward nation-state conflict.

Bringing Up Baby film

Praised for its 'pure historical hysterical nervousness' and formal energy.

Carnation Revolution other

Referenced as a historical event where officers acted honestly and stepped back, serving as a model for potential US military intervention.

Clarice tv

Žižek watched the first episode but did not stick with it, though he liked its 'leftist twist' regarding a medical company.

Squid Game tv

Žižek argues Squid Game is not anti-capitalist but expresses a desire for 'honest capitalism' and fair games.

People invoked 37

Bruce Lee positive

Cited as having a 'real anti-capitalist twist' in Eastern Asian media, contrasting with Western perceptions.

Ken Loach positive

Film director expelled from the Labour Party alongside Corbyn, cited as an example of 'surplus revenge' by the Blairite faction.

Prince Charles negative

Cited as an example of the 'idiots' at the Glasgow climate conference who talk about change without making precise obligations.

Saint-Just or Robespierre positive

Jacobin leaders, one of whom is quoted by Žižek regarding the revolutionary leader as a captain without a compass.

Salvador Allende / Pinochet

Mentioned in the context of Chile, where top army might be enlightened but mid-officers can be neo-fascist, contrasting with the Portuguese model.

Yasser Arafat / Nasser positive

Referenced alongside the Carnation Revolution as examples of 'Free Officers' movements that acted honestly and stepped back honorably.

Narendra Modi positive

Indian Prime Minister, whom Žižek opposes personally but cites as an example of effective pandemic management through local self-mobilization.

Alenka Zupančič positive

Friend and philosopher, whose development of conspiracy theories as 'theology' Žižek endorses.

Xi Jinping positive

Žižek notes that the new Chinese leadership takes the ecological threat seriously, acknowledging China's dependence on global trade.

Monty Python positive

Used to illustrate the distinction between a label ('communism'/'Romans') and its functional benefits (healthcare/sanitation).

Boris Johnson negative

Former UK Prime Minister, cited as an example of a leader trying to postpone harsh measures, contrasting with the demand from below for lockdowns.

Margaret Atwood negative

Criticized for the failure of The Handmaid's Tale sequel, which demonstrates a lack of sociopolitical imagination.

Francis Fukuyama negative

Cited as representing the 'liberal cognitive mapping' (end of history) which Žižek argues no longer works.

Jodi Dean positive

An American theorist who, like Varoufakis, claims we are passing from neoliberal capitalism to 'corporate neo-feudalism.'

Donald Trump negative

Former US President, noted for his obsession with China which continued under Biden.

Álvaro García Linera positive

Friend and ex-Vice President of Bolivia, described as a great theorist whose formulation 'capitalism organized its own general strike' Žižek adopts.

Giorgio Agamben negative

Cited as an anti-vaxxer whose argument that the pandemic was 'invented' to enhance control is 'catastrophically wrong' because it ignores the pre-existing high level of control in developed countries.

George Orwell positive

Cited for a 1937 text criticizing liberal intellectuals who talk about change to ensure nothing changes.

Boris Yeltsin

Former Russian President, referenced in the context of the broken promise regarding NATO expansion and Russian borders.

Adolf Hitler negative

Used as a historical foil to explain how conspiracy theories (and fascism) provide a simple, albeit evil, narrative to resolve confusion.

Bob Avakian negative

Cited as an example of a 'small communist' whose strategy of waiting for the right moment is rejected by Žižek.

Bernie Sanders positive

Cited as someone who knew how to play the game of being the 'true moral majority' and benefiting from the fertile ground of Occupy Wall Street.

Mark Zuckerberg negative

Described as 'much worse than Bill Gates'; his Metaverse presentation is seen as a 'feudal manifesto' offering a controlled, artificial digital space.

Jackie Chan negative

Cited as someone who 'sold out,' contrasting with the progressive background of Bruce Lee.

Yanis Varoufakis positive

Described as a 'good friend' and economist; Žižek agrees with his assessment that we are moving to 'corporate neo-feudalism,' though he thinks Varoufakis may go 'a little bit too far.'

Colin Robinson

Identified as a friend from OR Books, the publisher of Žižek's book.

Bill Gates negative

Viewed as a 'feudal lord' and 'wise man' who is not a medical specialist but advises on pharmaceutical organization; Žižek is 'shocked' by his acceptance in big media.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez positive

Žižek agrees with AOC's tactical support for Biden's spending measures, contrasting her with 'leftist radicals' who wait for authentic change.

Jarosław Kaczyński negative

Leader of Poland's Justice and Law party, cited as an example of a populist who adopts liberal social measures (student loans, healthcare) to maintain power, showing populism is a symptom of liberal failure.

Anthony Fauci negative

Cited as 'legendary' but used to illustrate the failure of authority and shifting predictions ('just suffer it will be bad for two weeks'). Žižek uses Fauci to show how predictions expanded from weeks to years.

Joe Biden positive

US President, whose spending measures Žižek calls 'trans-capitalist' and pragmatic, despite criticizing him in his book.

Keir Starmer negative

Current Labour leader, seen by Žižek as having only small differences with Boris Johnson compared to the internal conflict within Labour.

Vladimir Putin negative

Russian President, cited as having violated the post-Soviet agreement by attacking Ukraine, though Žižek also notes the West broke the promise of non-expansion.

Abraham Lincoln

Referenced in the context of the US Civil War and the Confederacy's desperate measures.

Immanuel Kant positive

Philosopher referenced for the concept of 'public use of reason,' which Žižek argues is lacking in authoritarian regimes like China's.

Tony Blair negative

Referenced as the figurehead of the 'Blairite' centrist faction that purged the left from the Labour Party.

Corbyn Besson positive

UK Labour leader, whom Žižek fully supports against his expulsion from the party.

Transcript 104 turns

unknown
Folks, we are doing what they and by they I mean we said we would never do. That's right. We're gonna do what they say can't be done, what what we said we wouldn't do and and that they said we couldn't do. That's right, we are officially announcing dates for the Chapo Trap House tour of the South. Insert banjo music here. That's right, all our all our boys all all our boys and girls in the South, we're coming. We're coming next year. Chris, should we roll down the dates and cities? Yes, we've got seven

unknown
dates for you, uh starting Tuesday, February 24th...

unknown
It says Thursday,

unknown
February 24th.

Slavoj Žižek
Goddammit.

unknown
Thursday, February 24th, Charlotte, North Carolina at The Underground. Sunday, February 27th in Atlanta at Buckhead Theatre. Thursday, March 3rd in Nashville, Tennessee at The Basement East. Friday, March 18th in Dallas at the Echo Lounge Music Hall. Then, Tuesday, March 22nd at Houston, the White Oak Music Hall, and rounding it out, Thursday, March 24th in N’Awlins at the Civic Theatre. That's right, Chapo is doing the

unknown
South. We will also have a date in Austin sometime between March 13th and 16th. That will be announced soon, so if you're in Austin keep those dates open. Uh pre-sale for these shows will start tomorrow, December 7th at AM uh for Patreon subscribers only. I will be posting a promo code to Patreon that you can use to get pre-sale tickets. Regular sale for all of these uh for the general public will go on sale this Friday at AM. So if you're a Patreon subscriber, go check out Patreon. There will be a code there for you to buy all these tickets beforehand, and then regular sale starts this Friday at AM. I cannot stress

unknown
it enough. They said it would never happen. They said three guys from let's run it down: Manhattan, New York City; Hyde Park, Chicago, Illinois; Manitowoc, Wisconsin. Just three of the most northern boys on the planet. That's right, we're crossing over. I cannot wait for all of the hijinks, culture clashes and comedic opportunities abound on our tour of the American South

unknown
and Texas. So get your tickets for those and uh few tickets left as well for our show in Buffalo in just two days on Wednesday, December 8th. We'll put the link to those tickets in the episode description. But otherwise, we'll see you in the South in February and March. Cheers.

Slavoj Žižek
No, no, no, because I'm in a bad mood. Here in Slovenia, it's total shit, numbers. We are that not even dark

unknown
red, black zone now.

Slavoj Žižek
Slovenia, Austria, this Central Europe, Central Eastern Europe, it's the worst area in the world now. And no, no, the sad thing is that people are in a strange depressive apathic apathetic indifference. They don't care. Life goes on, you know. We are beyond fear and anxiety and all that stuff. Uh you were just talking about um how you know uh Slovenia, Central Europe is the worst place in the world because people are just sort of uh depressed or whatever. But I just want to get into uh something you wrote about um at least as it regards one of the current cascading catastrophes roiling the world. You wrote about this state and it's

unknown
something that I've certainly felt right now about COVID like the COVID passing from a state of fear into depression, especially post-vaccine and it's this realize that like realization that people aren't afraid so much anymore of dying of COVID but they are deeply depressed because it's this feeling that like there is no going back to normal. And I guess I just want to start with that,

unknown
like this transition from fear into depression. Yes, first I must say I must praise myself a little bit. I

Slavoj Žižek
must say that I said this two years ago at the beginning. Okay, it was a risky thing to say that there will not be a return to normal as we know it. And maybe if you allow me to improvise a little bit on my favorite point, which is how how you can measure this the growth of this depression in different time units. Do you remember, if you still remember it, uh a little bit less than two years ago, the first wave, the unit was two weeks. At the beginning, February, March, we were told, even your legendary Dr. Fauci said, just suffer it will be bad for two weeks, be patient. And I remember he said April will already be yours. It will be better, free and so on, just two weeks. Then in the summer it became uh half a year, six months. Then in winter it became two years, like three waves and so on and so on. And now nobody even talks about it. Nobody wants to predict it and so on and so on. But what worries me even more than these psychic consequences in the sense of depression and so on and so on is maybe we can talk about these two, three other points. The first is and my good friend Yanis Varoufakis, the economist who was the Minister of Finance in Syriza government, how I am not an anti-vaxxer, absolutely not. But I still think that we have here a model how let's call it the system, the establishment, used the pandemic, not just in this primitive way. You know, people usually mention two things. One is big pharmaceutical companies are behind it to profit. No, I I looked at the numbers. Profits at this level are not so tremendous. Second thing is how big state agencies use this to enhance their control over us. This is also not a topic that's very important. And why? Let me mention you an example which is very convincing for me. When anti-vaxxers said even some of them even like Giorgio Agamben, the pandemic was basically invented or at least blown up so that those in power, digital companies, state administration, could enhance tremendously their control. I think this line of argumentation is catastrophically wrong. Why? Because first are we aware that we, most of us at least, in so-called developed countries—here I include also China of course and Russia—they all our countries have such a an efficient detailed system of control, not only all that we buy, what we read, but what we do in our free time, when you watch TV, when you use Kindle. We are already so so controlled that the the new control measures, especially digital ones, applied by uh in the course of the campaign against the pandemic are relatively modest. The idea was to follow where we move and so on and so on. And if we follow this line of argument, we really serve the establishment. You know why? Because let me give you again, now I am trying to improvise it, an extremely primitive example. Let's say that you are doing something horrible. It will be in my style, a bad taste example. Or okay, me, why you? Me. I am a bad guy, which I am not, at least not at this level. I am regularly beating my wife. Then once my wife eats something which almost chokes her, you know. And I, you know, one of the strategies is you put your body forward, you beat the person who is getting suffocated, you beat her on her back so that it comes out. So you catch me doing this and you attack me that it wasn't really the fear of strangulation, I just used this as an excuse to make her suffer. But this is a very unfortunate example because for me it's difficult to say no, I can prove it to you, I helped her, I saved her life. You see the parallel. We shouldn't attack the establishment at the level where it's even doing something which may be at least up to a certain level helpful. So like yeah

unknown
they, uh you know, like in this metaphor here, uh they may be like abusing us regularly but at this moment when we are choking to death and they do something that looks like similar to that abuse, uh you shouldn't um attack them for performing the Heimlich maneuver on you when you're choking, even if they've hit you, hit

Slavoj Žižek
you in the face many times. Yes, yes. Pick up an example where we are really abused totally, where we are really controlled. Don't make it easy to them, you know. So uh let me finish this line. Recently I two other things are much more interesting for me. The first one is how the pandemic was used to—and we can return to it later if you want—the pandemic was used to make a passage in today's global capitalism much faster, the passage which is so radical. Again, Varoufakis my friend even claims, maybe he goes a little bit too far here, but basically I think he is right, and Jodi Dean in the United States claims the same, that we are passing from what we called neoliberal capitalism, rule of the market and so on, to something called—different names are used here, I will stick to although I find this name problematic—the neo the corporate neo-feudalism. The idea is that uh there is a new let's call it class opposition. On the one hand, stronger, greater and greater number of precarious workers, which is a wonderful way to exploit us because you experience yourself as a freelancer, free small owner of a small business of yours, you are not directly subordinated to anyone. On the other hand, we are getting mega-corporations which uh I will not talk for too long, you find everything this in my book, these mega-corporations are doing something that was unimaginable for Marx. They privatized or are privatizing our commons. They don't privatize directly the products but the very medium in which we communicate to exchange products, ideas or whatsoever. You use Bill Gates as the primary example of someone who like he makes money not from creating Microsoft... Yes, Bill Gates or or Zuckerberg, Facebook and so on and so on. So I think one have to has to be more precise here. What the source of their extreme wealth is not the classical profit, it's rent. If we today are talking, we in different ways, I don't know how it works with Zoom, but with others and so on, they get a profit for this, they own the very common space within which we interact now. And uh now the catastrophe is this one: that this neo-feudalism of the new masters and it's really, this shocks me too much how these figures are even in the big media more and more accepted as our feudal lords but in a very traditional way, that they are presented even as wise men advising us how. For example, I was shocked when recently Bill Gates said, you know, we will have to organize differently our pharmaceutical companies so that everybody even in the third world will be vaccinated, blah blah blah blah. My shock is wait a minute, what does this guy know? He is not a medical specialist, he is not an epidemiologist, you know. Or even with other economic topics. These guys really function like these new wise persons. And you know who is much worse than Bill Gates for me at least? Did you all, you William, Matt, but also uh our public, I

unknown
hope it's worth listening to. I am doubtful about death penalty, but in this case I said, my God, maybe

Slavoj Žižek
death penalty should be used, Mark Zuckerberg presentation of his Meta. Oh yeah, we yes, the Metaverse is oh man, yeah we had a whole episode about the Metaverse. I yes, isn't this a kind of a feudal manifesto. He is literally offering us an artificial digital space which within which we will fluently communicate and so on and so on, within which our actual differences will be somehow obliterated in this fake freedom, but a space which will be controlled, regulated by him. This is again the biggest neo-feudal manifesto. Uh Slavoj did you I was wondering did you see the article in the New York Times the other week about how um basically uh real estate speculators are already buying property in the Metaverse, like entirely imaginary digital property or they're buying up uh like you know location, location, location, but in a completely imaginary digital world that's owned and created by Mark Zuckerberg. Yeah, but what I like here is that it's a little bit similar, I know the analogy is uh too vague, but it's similar for me to crypto coins and so on. You know, you thought there is one medium of payment or one common space controlled by state and so on. Now we get multiple commons and so on and so on. And I think that these multiple commons also make open up the space of new—that's the other side of this neo-feudalism—of new tribal communities. Like I think, that's why I will say now something horrible to provoke maybe even you but definitely our listeners. I am as an old-fashioned totalitarian—I think we will come to a point where we will regret the good old-fashioned simple totalitarianism—I am for obligatory vaccination. Because the big why? I remember even a relatively undeveloped but well-organized till the chaos of last two decades

unknown
country like Yugoslavia, we had some epidemics, one of these old-fashioned ones, I even forgot for which illness, and you know, the state was

Slavoj Žižek
well-organized. They mobilized all the doctors, army doctors and so on in a totally apolitical way. None of these political debates, whatever, and in a little bit over one week the entire population at that point million was vaccinated. No talk about the free choice and so on. Why is this important? It sounds non-democratic. But uh I think it's much more fair than what we are getting today. Uh my country is here even you know sometimes in small as your beloved ex-president would have put it in a small shithole of a country like Slovenia, you get the case, the example in a

unknown
much clearer way. On the one hand, those the authorities want to get people vaccinated, but they don't want to make the step towards mandatory vaccination. So at on the one hand they insist it's free, it's your decision. On the other hand, they are piling up complications. Practically, it will be total lockdown for those who are not vaccinated. I see in this the worst

Slavoj Žižek
possible combination of state regulation and pseudo-personal freedom. And in my country again, I think about three weeks ago, an announcement from our Ministry of Health, even by a slip of tongue of course, directly produced this uh the truth when they said, it's obligatory for all pupils in elementary school to freely choose vaccination. Like they pronounced they literally pronounced the formula. I think it would have been much more liberating to depoliti- the again to depoliticize this field. The horror is that this purely purely it's not medical, I know all the economic background and so on, but isn't it horrible that this uh at least in its form of appearance medical emergency got caught into these neo-tribal debates of you know each group, its identity, I have my freedom, you have your freedom and so on and so on. This is the worst combination of state authority with this fake individualism. This is one big problem for me and I think we are paying the price now. So uh sorry yes you wanted to— No I was gonna say like I mean how how does this fit into your idea that you argue for um in the new book of you know of calling for like a mobilization of a kind of like permanent wartime communism. Like what does that mean and how does that fit in? I will tell you. I will tell you. Uh even now take this please with a grain of salt, how do they say, you know. But even I did something horrible when I gave, I forgot to which country, although it was in English, an interview where they asked me, what do you think about this as a democratic socialist. And automatically I couldn't control myself, I said sorry, I'm not a democratic socialist, I'm a non-democratic communist. It didn't end well. What I meant is this. Do you know Monty Python? Of course. The movie The Life of Brian. Classic. Do you know, it's endlessly repeated even used in politics, that joke when some kind of an anti-Roman Palestinian Liberation Front? What have the Romans ever done for us outside the aqueducts? Well, and and then at the end, the conclusion is they brought roads, regular water supply, health, safety and basically nothing, you know. Yeah. All right, apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us? Brought peace? Oh peace, shut up! And so uh I would say, do we want communism? Absolutely not. Nothing with it. We just want uh global healthcare, uh social some kind of social control over economy, and so on and so on. And then basically we enumerate measures which for me sound like already some kind of communism. But by communism I don't mean, don't be afraid, I try to be that's the paradox I will use. Uh recently some I don't know if I use this in the book, not recently sorry, it must be one year ago, a German conservative daily making an interview with me, one journalist asked me, in what sense are you a communist, and I answered I'm a moderately conservative communist, you know. And then they gave me a wonderful answer. They say that's nice because we are moderately communist conservatives. My point is this one: I'm very sensitive to all of these uh personal freedoms, social solidarity and so on. That's also why if you ask me China, what they are doing now, this new order imposed although there are obviously some correct insights to help the poor, the impoverished and so on will not work. Because their ideal is that against this modern consumerism to return to forms of organic community, neo- they use the term neo-conservative, neo-conservative solidarity. But the form in which they are doing it is a typically authoritarian state of emergency, you know. It will not work. But

unknown
again, what I'm saying is just this: look at what they are saying they were saying in Glasgow. The the big demands are clear and especially uh the case of Omicron now made it clear my argument for what I call communism. First, specialists are confirming that uh new variants, the breeding ground

Slavoj Žižek
for new variants are countries where a little very small percentage of relatively

unknown
small percentage of the population is

Slavoj Žižek
vaccinated. Second thing, so uh and we, the developed countries or the world, totally failed in establishing even a basic mechanism of solidarity which would profit ourselves even. Not even in the long term, even in the short term to control as much as it is possible the pandemic. So this is first thing: there was no actual although everybody was calling for worldwide vaccination, nothing was really done. Second thing that I find really ethically terrifying: do you know that in many developed countries—I don't know how it is in the United States, but I know this is the case in Europe—uh states were hoarding big amounts of vaccines, we don't know what to do with them. And now discreetly they are already

unknown
doing it, states are destroying

Slavoj Žižek
vaccine because their deadline date has passed, they can no longer be used. Nobody thought

unknown
at least of giving them a little bit earlier quickly to to non-developed countries. So no cooperation and so on, no global

Slavoj Žižek
healthcare and we are now all paying uh the price for it. By communism I mean simply series of things like this. It's I'm not saying we should privatize, sorry, we should nationalize things. No, for example uh I would allow companies competition to produce, otherwise if state simply nationalizes health industry—I know this is then a a ground it opens up a space for immense corruption, no? But nonetheless the state should set the standards in the sense of here is the money, we need vaccines and so on and so on. Now we are making steps towards this. Just look what happened in the last two years. As again Varoufakis pointed out, the whole logic of investment and so on of market profitability was at some level abandoned. States printed money, spent incredible amounts of it, but of course then this money was diverted in another way, but it is as if there was a worldwide fear, panic and ordinary not only ordinary people but even capital, even big capital couldn't manage the situation. Everybody, most of the people expected the state to strongly intervene. And that's why I don't buy the story of uh this crisis was invented by big companies by states. The moment of truth was for me I remember around a year ago in United Kingdom, in England, where uh Boris Johnson tried to his government tried to postpone for as long as possible harsher measures, lockdown of schools and so on. And it was the demand from below, people, parents, teachers who demanded stronger uh measures. So something happened which was, I now use the formulation of my friend I really appreciate him Álvaro García Linera, the ex-Vice President of Bolivia. He is a great theorist also. He said are we aware what a strange thing happened with the pandemic: it was as if global capitalism, capitalism organized its own general strike. Uh most of the production closed down, people were iso- and so on and so on and so on. And this and then we all expected from the state, local communities and so on to do something to make our life livable in ways which are not done with with regard to the profitability. We were all in panic. So this this, let's call it, this was de facto a step towards communism. But aha, now I know how the establishment tried to uh turn this around, how the money which was printed was uh used uh I don't know in Europe there is an incredible example described by Varoufakis how this money was used. Uh Deutsche Bank gave Volkswagen a couple of billions of Euros to get to survive the crisis and what Volkswagen did is was it used this money to buy back its own stocks which were not owned by Volkswagen itself etc. This is a horrible story. But what is happening is that like it's no longer for me so that I don't get lost, it's no longer for me just the choice uh neoliberal capitalism or whatever we call it socialism. No, liberal capitalism, that should be the lesson, is already in the form that we all knew disappearing. And the real choice today is neo-feudalism, corporate rule or something that I call communism. Right, well I mean like uh you know to one example of that uh you write in the book about um like this sort of worst of all worlds that we find ourselves in in America and the West in terms of the way we have dealt with this crisis. You write about like uh we we all know that like uh these sort of half lockdowns that were imposed totally don't work and then but we also all agree that the economy in our country can't handle another even half lockdown or even a full lockdown which would be like you know the stronger measure of what is necessary. But so like if that's the case like left unsaid in all this is the idea well if the economy can't take it, we need to change the economy. Yeah but this again, I think that this precisely is the lesson of the continuing pandemic because after the first wave of lockdowns in the spring of a year and a half ago, it's obvious that the system as it is cannot sustain other strong lockdowns and in some sense we lost and we will be paying the price now. But I think the problem in this way we call this elegantly uh to learn to live with COVID. You learn to live, people are dying and so on and so on. I think uh this in the long term will not be a solution. Not only will the pandemic go on but I think that it will get combined with new ecological forms of ecological crisis and it will be again and again a pressure. I know what's the temptation here: the temptation is to do it the Chinese way in a strong authoritarian way, you know. That's the Chinese dream: to allow even a strong amount of capitalism but the state administration, the party, there is a higher agency which controls it and so on and so on. I think this doesn't work because this higher agency lacks what I in my philosophical mood call following Immanuel Kant the public use of reason. The space of communication is closed, is controlled and so on and it doesn't work. But nonetheless I'm saying that this whole view of let's suffer for a year or two then things will return back to normal again, it doesn't work. And back to my another point that may interest our viewers, wouldn't you agree that also this is how we can explain the rise of conspiracy theories? Not only the old Marxist or liberal modes of cognitive mapping—by cognitive mapping I mean we have a general view of history, we know there is progress, like the last big liberal cognitive mapping was Fukuyama, the end of history, we are there and it's just how slowly all will catch up with this. Then we have the communist cognitive mapping. Even that one at least in its traditional form no longer works. Here I much prefer—I don't know who said this, Saint-Just or Robespierre, one of my favorite Jacobins—who said that revolution is not you follow a higher plan and then just gradually realize it, one of them said that a revolution revolutionary leader is like a captain on a ship in wild roaring sea without a compass, without orientation. We have to improvise, things will go wrong, we have to get used to this openness. And I think conspiracy theories are, as my good friend Alenka Zupančič developed, are the closest we can come today to theology. Nobody or at least most of us we don't believe in divine providence and so on like you know the divine attitude is oh sorry the theology uh believer's attitude, religious attitude is uh don't worry, these are problems but there is an old guy up there, this old guy can also be called historical providence, direction of history, it will take us out. We no longer trust this. So the lesson of conspiracy theories is for me something like better an evil god than no god. Because it's the same as with anti-semitism. I like this parallel. Hitler, what did Hitler do in the late 20s early 30s? Uh ordinary citizens were totally confused in Germany, no? What's happening? Strikes, moral decadence, uh hyperinflation, economic crisis, the world was falling apart. Hitler provided a simple answer:

unknown
it's the Jews, the Jewish conspiracy. Isn't something similar that the anti-pandemic conspiracy theories are doing? Isn't something similar to this? They provide a clear answer, although there are multiple versions, but the clear answer is there is a big conspiracy of state controlling agencies, secret services, big corporations and so on and so on. So uh uh to put it in a condensed way, better an evil god than no god. At least we know where history is moving. But I think what is behind this, now I will say I wonder if you would agree, is something very naive.

Slavoj Žižek
Till now, okay,

unknown
there was an earthquake here and there, uh problems, but basically life went on. At least we in the West experienced catastrophes as something boom it happens, then we

Slavoj Žižek
have mourning, it's horrible, but somehow we had this trust in daily life which somehow goes on. And with the pandemic and it will get even stronger, I think, with global warming, we will really find ourselves in this radical uncertainty and it will be a very concrete thing. I mean, for example take, I don't know, take Seattle, although my favorite city on the upper West Coast of the United States it's not Seattle, it's Portland. Why? Because they have the best bookstore in the United States I think, but that's another story. What I'm saying is that look, in the summer you got almost degrees Celsius heat, then you get tremendous floods now and so on and so on. And uh these catastrophes are no longer exceptions which happen once in a lifetime. Like I remember when there was—was it with floods or it was with that heat wave in Southwest Canada, Northwest United States—when they said this happens every years. Yes, but now every year something that should have happened every years will be coming. Now I'm not saying the situation is lost, I'm saying we will have to reorganize our life. And again, I am not preaching for a Chinese way. There are other possibilities. I will give you although usually in these days we only hear bad news sorry bad things about Modi and India, and I'm very opposed to him. But look how uh combining vaccination with local measures, self-mobilization of people, how well India dealt with the pandemic. When was it half a year ago when it exploded in India, we thought oh that will be the big catastrophe. No, now they are at I don't know to cases a day and it can it can be done. Just think about how—I'll put it this way, that's my message to some conservatives maybe they are listening to us, that was the point of my Monty Python joke—please think as an anti-communist and you will end up on my side. You know, uh the German and French philosophers have a wonderful way that when you precisely when you try to repel the truth you unknowingly embrace it. It's the same as sorry if I'm jumping, a wonderful detail that I remember I read about the end of Civil War, Lincoln versus Confederacy in United States. You know what the South had to do to survive in the last year of the war? They tried to mobilize black slaves as soldiers. They offered them freedom and so on just to fight for them. They had because they lacked industry, armaments and so on, they have to socialize whatever little industry they had and so on and so on. That's what we will— Maybe, maybe, that's my totally crazy optimistic wager. Precisely when we think how to do it without falling into the Chinese way of authoritarian order, if we want to be anti-communist in this way, no I don't want that, that's maybe the only chance today to slowly arrive at a more open type of communism. Because by communism I mean again: we have to help global health coordination, soon we will have to have global food coordination. It's clear that things are get- for example I already read, it's not yet felt but because of the drought and floods in Brazil and main coffee producing countries, everybody knows there will be a crisis in soy, in coffee and so on and so on. It can be done and I'm not talking about some stupid global government, no that would have been a breeding ground for incredible corruption, but cooperation, cooperation, global cooperation because there will be millions of new refugees, how to avoid wars. But the lesson we have to take is what happened in Glasgow now. It was a model of how what they were saying, all the idiots there from Prince Charles down, it's basically true, we have only this earth, we have to do something, but the way they put it was precisely to make it sure with no precise obligations and so on that nothing really will happen. And that's the perversity, would you agree of the situation today? You try to sabotage truth—by truth I mean what we really need to do—precisely by talking about it all the time. In a new text of mine I quote again my favorite uh text by uh it's George Orwell who said in a wonderful text from '37 that he knew where we are today. It is as if he is writing about liberal leftist politically correct ones and so on, that uh that progressive intellectuals talk all the time about the need to change. But they talk in such a way that it really means let's talk all the time about it to make it sure that nothing will really change. If I could um just go back for a second uh to something you were talking about earlier about uh conspiracy theories and anti-semitism. And I want to talk about like the the the sections in your book where you talk about uh what happened to uh like Corbyn's expulsion from the Labour Party in the UK over allegations— Not only but you know what's the madness? Sorry to interrupt you, I'll allow you immediately. Alec what happened to Corbyn, I don't agree, I support as it's clear from my book fully Corbyn. But I can understand it as this uh revenge of Blairite, of Blair centrist Labour Party against the left. But you know what's so horrible? Here you get this surplus revenge. They threw out also Ken Loach. Yeah. A movie director who was just solidary with the Labour Party. That was not necessary. He was just helping them, he wasn't in any way active and so on. And this is uh what I find today, this uh unnecessary excess. You know in the old days it was we have different streams in the Labour Party and so on, one wins, the other wins. Now the conflicts are getting much harsher and I can understand why. Because the the only true difference in the United Kingdom is within Labour Party, Keir Starmer versus the left. Keir Starmer and Johnson, Boris Johnson, these are small differences, accents are different and so on and so on. And what worries me is, but you should teach me here uh tell me, uh what's the situation in the United States. Because I on the one hand I'm very pragmatic. Although I was and in the book you still have this very critical of Biden, but some of his measures are already let me put it like this, trans-capitalist. I don't buy the idea of some of my radical leftist friends, no this is just a trick to keep capitalism alive. No, the trillions of dollars that Biden wants to spend on on— this is already a kind of a trans-market social intervention. But the true tragedy is another one, if I may improvise a little bit. I find this the danger. You know we in Slovenia we have a saying, when the devil has young has young children, he usually have a lot of them at the same time, not just one but many. So combined with global warming, pandemic and so on, we have now I think a real threat of war. People think it will be local, but you don't know how it can explode. I think that—and let me tell you, I'm not here simply anti-China and Russia—but I see first I have friends in China who are now scared like shit. I they are afraid to email me from there, if somebody goes to another country where probably Chinese authorities don't control, they are telling me that all the signs, and there are too many signs to dismiss them as contingent, all the signs are pointing that China is getting ready for a military action to liberate, occupy, use your term, Taiwan. First thing, I like in a Freudian way this small details, it tells a lot. Do you know that China just this year produced, I mean produced it was already shown in movie theaters, their biggest— Oh their big uh The Battle of um The Battle at Lake Changjin or whatever, the Korean War battle, yeah yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And it's uh although it was not quite as spontaneous big hit, but it is immensely popular. And the message that all my friends read into it is that it's not about the revolutionary fight, war to liberate China, it's about foreign intervention, you know. Right. Chinese army to save goes out to save North Korea. Second thing, my friends are telling me, it's this immense wave of new patriotism in China. This anti-West uh stance, at the same time combined this patriotism with again, a shift of China towards nation-state. Till now China was very proud, I spoke with many people there, to point out don't apply to us the Western notion of of nation-state. We are just a large shared civilization but we don't have this homogeneity. Now they are getting it. For example I learn that even in all those parts from Tibet to how is that part called, I forget the name where Uighurs live, Muslims, Han is taught in schools as the first language. They try to unify the country. It's a move towards nation-state. Then uh I know a very good Slovene journalist who was for years in China and even now she, an old lady, follows Chinese military journals, not the secret ones but you know, they have one or two big representative military journals where it's meant for the public although for a narrow public where they uh present strategic thinking and so on. And already for more than years she told me, the fear of the Chinese military theorists is this one: that United States and other Western countries wisely always engage in small wars, small for their scope, like Afghanistan, Iraq and so on, to keep their army battle ready. You have to test your armed forces in real conflict, even if it's a limited one. And they worry, the Chinese strategists, that the last real conflict, small one they had was this was already years ago, You remember when as a punishment

unknown
for invading Kampuchea, uh Deng Xiaoping ordered an an operation occupying part of Northern Vietnam. And then they immediately withdrew, it was a scandalous failure. But they claim we need to test our country. If you combine this with all the worrying signs about again uh Taiwan

Slavoj Žižek
and so on. And uh now I don't know what is true but but wait a minute, I'm not now buying the Western story because I will tell you immediately also the other side. If you combine this with new tensions in Ukraine between Russia and Ukraine, there are many signs pointing in the direction that these two superpowers, Russia, China, are planning uh simultaneous attack. They count that the West is so tired in its liberalism and so on, peaceful multiculturalism, that they will not risk a global war. And now you will say I'm dreaming, oh I will tell you another nice story that a friend of mine who lives in the West but is Chinese citizen, uh read there and it was also in our media, something very mysterious happened. About two months ago, you must have read it in your media, Chinese authorities advised people, ordinary people, families, to gather food sup- supplies for at least a month or two. Now they didn't give a reason. Maybe it was just they feared some uh some uh ecological breakdown, weather, drought or whatever. But it sounded also like get ready for a possible war. Because uh the irony is that this friend of mine told me that another friend of him just wanted to do a report in the media about this and started to ask politicians, you know, what is the sense of this measure, why should people hoard buy get supplies. Uh the guy disappeared for a couple of days. So but uh now the other side of the story. It's not that we in the West are weak, liberal and so on and these evil countries are uh just collecting to attack us. You know, uh another thing, here again Varoufakis and some other economists uh warned me, very worrying. Let's face it and it's not bad, this is now I will sound like US propagandist, great American creativity, you, the United States, more or less dominate digital software and hardware and software hardware and software. You know, you do the great digital project and so on, all that, it's yours. You have only one serious competition: China. That's why such an accent on uh against Huawei and so on, they will control us, listen to us and so on and so on. It's really a battle for monopoly. And that's why, did you notice how although there was a big change, big I don't know how big, also in foreign policy from Trump to Biden, but this obsession with China, trade war with China, remained, if anything it got a little bit worse even with Biden. Here I think the United States are guilty and I understand a little bit the Chinese paranoia. As for uh Soviet Union and Ukraine, I also think that it's not as clear as it may appear. The people say, yes Russia broke the rule because when Soviet Union fell apart there was an explicit deal which is that between uh at that point Yeltsin and the West, which was Russia should retain all nuclear weapons but it should unconditionally recognize all borders with other republics, especially Ukraine as they are. So they claim Putin violated this. Yes, but the other part of this agreement was that uh no ex-Soviet republics will join NATO, NATO. And there also the West broke the promise. So you know, it's as if secretly both sides are getting ready for this conflict. And this is what again makes

unknown
me a pessimist. I talk too much, please.

Slavoj Žižek
Yeah, if I could uh you know uh be sort of an American chauvinist and uh refocus it here at home

unknown
in America. Um in your chapter you've

Slavoj Žižek
written in this book and before that uh the the true post-modernists in in present culture are conservatives. Yeah. And I want to talk about that in the context of the January 6th Capitol riot. You describe it as sort of a carnival, a farce, but like is it isn't it also like a kind of expression of a postmodern conservative. And I mean like you use the example of the QAnon shaman, the guy with the Viking hat, which is like not uh which is a product of a 19th century romantic imagination about who the Vikings were, but is part of this this spectacle of uh they showed up to the Capitol and then like, you know, looked around and then went home. Like uh how do you see like the uh January 6th riot and like the reactions to it as like a indicative— But do you know now I try to develop, I think there is some sub sub-chapter maybe in the book where I go into it, that's why I think that uh I'm not saying that Trump is good, was good or better than fascist, but that he is still not the old way fascist. Old way fascists really want to abolish even the form of democracy, they have a program. I think that Trump strategy is to remain within what is formally a democratic space and that's the postmodern feature, but at the same time profit from accusing the deep state or whatever that it's a false democracy controlled by hidden elites and so on and so on. That's for me the logic of populism. Populism in this sense is not fascism. Fascists simply want power, full power, they really want to abolish democracy. What Trump and this new right wants is this uh call it democracy which loses its legitimacy but still remains as an empty form. Uh that's why and here enters postmodernism, I think I use in the book a couple of examples. For example, this is again the moment of truth like the one I mentioned in Slovenia when a government representative said it's obligatory that all uh pupils in a school uh do voluntary mand- do voluntary mandatory vaccination. Do you remember one of those uh propagandists, a lady senator, journalist, doesn't matter, I thought the example for Trump, uh celebrated the the the the Congress riots, and then you know when she was put to court, you know what was her defense? What? Isn't it clear that what I said was so crazy that it couldn't have been true. Oh this is I think like the the lawyers uh was it like like um— yeah yeah. You see this is for me typical postmodern politics. It's not but it's wrong to say it doesn't matter since they don't think take it truthfully. No, even if you that's the lesson to be learned from this, even if you consciously lie, lies become a material reality. They have a certain efficiency. So I I am here in this sense, an obscenity again, a moderately conservative communist. I think that we should abandon this liberal left marginalist stance, you know. So what we should do, now comes my conservative communism, is to take from the right the motive, don't be afraid of the majority of ordinary people. Many of them are just confused but they are basically honest people and so on, we should trust them. Or to use my provocative formula which I regularly use: our message should be—and Bernie Sanders knew how to play this game—our message should be we are the true moral majority. Not, you know, if you mention to a to a to a liberal leftist moral majority oh but what about the minorities, they immediately think about some crazy conservative. No, they are the crazy minority, they are the exception. We shouldn't be afraid to go this way. Um well you also write in the book about this uh this ongoing deadlock and you describe this conflict between AOC and her like, you know, uh a qualified support for Joe Biden and and what his administration is trying to do and then sort of like uh radical Democratic Socialists who are, you know, uh saying that you know she's selling out by like propping up this, you know, like awful capitalist government or whatever. And like in this deadlock over like race versus class and like the these things that are just seemingly continue to be unresolved in like American democratic socialism or whatever you whatever you want to call it. But I mean like you you take the position that basically both sides are wrong but they are each right about the other. Yeah that's my Stalinist paradox detail because I think that strategically in that no, sorry tactically at that pre- at that precise point I think AOC was right that this mega financial measures, spending trillions on new investments, ecology and so on, we have to support here Biden, especially since it's a question how much it was even Biden, to what extent it was Janet Yellen and some others. But at the same time we should uh keep a critical distance. So our stance should be okay, we support you here, but let's see will you really do it. But I where I don't agree with so-called leftist radicals, it's this comfortable position, you know, we are waiting for an authentic change. Well sorry, if you wait for it it will never come. You will end up with like that how is she called Bob Avakian or what, you remember that small communist— "The German?" "Yeah." "No, uh we should shamelessly use all means, invest, engage ourselves, even if we know that probably they will fail. Don't wait for the right moment. The right moment arises only through failed attempt. For example, detail that I like uh now it's fashionable to say among some radical leftists that uh Occupy Wall Street was just a minority thing, a couple of upper middle class students and so on, it didn't have real popular support. Well maybe and it disappeared, but I think it formed the fertile ground for for for Bernie Sanders and all those. You know slowly, slowly things are changing. Like although I have doubts about the term socialism because you know it's such a vague term that once even who was it Bill Gates or or Elon Musk called himself a socialist. But it's a big

unknown
progress for the United States that Democratic Socialism was nonetheless legitimized as a term in the mainstream discourse. So slowly, slowly what I would advise is this: a combination of patient approach with the urgency. Yes, the situation is urgent. Here

Slavoj Žižek
I agree with the guy who who was

unknown
till now now he's old and tired attacking me Noam Chomsky, but I agree with him when he said, we don't have time to afford this slow

unknown
approach, you know. Now it's not yet the time, let's wait and so on and so on. If we just wait it will be a horrible awakening that is ahead. And this is if you ask me my uh basic pessimism unfortunately. I first what needs to be done all what I ironically call war communism measures, we cannot afford this

Slavoj Žižek
Marxist opportunism: we are following the laws of historical progress. No, it's against the spontaneous tendency. The spontaneous tendency is towards suicide. What global ecological and so on suicide. So uh but at the same so it's not that we can have this trust in the future. It's voluntarism what we need to do, it's doing things which are not grounded in any deeper historical law. And what I am afraid is that we had a couple of half-awakenings. Pandemic brought forward this necessity of new modes of social solidarity and so on, global warming will lead to this, but obviously it was not enough. I think unfortunately what I'm afraid of is that—and don't be afraid—they will come much stronger catastrophic shocks. Well uh we're running out of time here, I've I've one more question for you but uh uh before that I just want to see if uh Matt Matt do you have any uh questions or comments for Slavoj here? I mean if we're going to I'm just really curious if we're going to have a war between I guess China and the US, uh who do you got? Who who do you put your money on? Who do you think will win? Uh I'm here a I must admit my uh limitation. I'm here I there are so many things that I don't know. I hope at least that maybe they are already in advance making some secret negotiations and so on, you know. So I hope it will be if it will happen, everything is possible. I don't want to bluff too much. On the one hand uh I don't think that the West will risk a total war. Which is why even in reaction to these threats, Western powers in some recent declaration clearly talk about economic boycott, other defensive measures, but they don't talk about we will fully counterattack

unknown
militarily, you know. So uh what I would like to is

Slavoj Žižek
not for this threat to give rise to a Western militarism. I I think the deep deepest answer should be such wars are madness because we should be all together in a much more urgent fight for ecology and so on and so on. And China is also becoming aware of it. What the relatively good news from my friends in China is that the leadership Xi, the new one, is taking very seriously now ecological threat. It's not a fake. Because they are you know we don't read all of it, informations are controlled from China, but do you know for example that that the last year or so was catastrophic for Chinese agriculture, they had to import much more. They had drought, they have floods and so on and so on. It was a catastrophe. They are simply no longer self-sufficient and they know they have to do it. On the other hand China is already to such an extent interconnected with other countries. For example, getting meat and especially soy from Argentina although China's relations with Australia are now bad but China imports so much raw stuff, minerals and so on from Australia. You know China is uh just for the bare survival at a certain level much more dependent on import export than for example United States. United States would have survived a total isolation

unknown
in a much easier in a much easier way. So I simply don't know enough to okay is this a kind of a double level game where secretly unknown to us ordinary people some basic rules are already established or whatsoever. I just find it sad that in a situation where we are at war with ourselves, at war of survival because of pandemic, ecological crisis and so on and so on, that we that at the same time this very situation instead of sobering us, my God we don't have time for our stupid conflict. What I would have been obsessed with this today is: what if the desertification in some parts of the world is going on? On the other hand because of global warming in Siberia now enormous land will become defrozen, fertile and so on. It's clearly that for all of us to survive there will have to be

Slavoj Žižek
tremendous exchanges of movements of millions, hundreds of millions of people. For example, the whole Middle East oil producing area, which means Emirates, uh Bahrain, Kuwait, Southern Iraq and Iran is now getting too hot even for ordinary people, uh I don't want to call them its autochthonous aborigines, but local Arab people there. It's simply too much. So what will happen, that's what I would be dealing with. Uh so but I don't know enough. I'm stupid, I don't know enough. And I would be very grateful for your critical reaction here. Like do you have another idea? Is maybe a more paranoiac one, like those in power don't care about it and so on, they're ready to risk total war? It may be a meta-paranoia theory that they are just trying to scare us, there already secret underst- secret pacts and so on. I don't know enough. I'm really asking you here. It does feel like as crises um metastasize that that these uh these forms, these these nation-states are going to start bumping up against each other in more and more violent ways and that's going to have to be uh processed somehow. Uh I mean if if there is hope for American socialism, sometimes I think it it really our only real hope is some sort of Free Officers movement in the American military because the US military really is the only institution in America that has legitimacy and uh and power. Sorry what do you mean Free Officers? I didn't get it. Oh I just like uh a movement of like middle officers in the United States military uh deciding essentially to seize control of the American economic system uh in an emergency capacity rather than just allow uh liberal capitalism to produce itself into oblivion. This is a wonderful idea. You I love you, you cannot even imagine to what extent you touch my deep totalitarian spirit. But but don't on the other hand, you know that these middle officers are very ambiguous creatures. I hope United States is an exception here. But in Chile Pinochet and the other, you have quite often the opposite situation where top army is relatively enlightened, the mid-officers can be new right neo-fascist and so on. But this idea, yes, I immediately because uh support it, you know why? Because army nonetheless is not fully even in reality army in even if in reality army is interconnected with economy, civil life, but nonetheless you are at some kind of symbolic distance. You have a minimum of distance towards the madness of economic political life. You have a different type of safety and that maybe enables it. My God I will use this, I have to write about it what you said. It's a wonderful theory of enlightened mid-level officers because somehow taking control, you know like severe good parents saying sorry guys you screwed it up, we will just set some minimal standards and so on. And uh

unknown
I don't care if this happens. Sometimes you I sometimes it has to be done and anybody who comes— I don't care who it is. I was always against this demonization

Slavoj Žižek
of the army as if they are automatically uh fascists and so on

unknown
and so on. There are progressive uh interventions of state forces. But I like the

unknown
your idea especially for the obvious reason that it will be so shocking for the wide public like, you know, United States the greatest democracy in the world of all

Slavoj Žižek
times, only a military coup d'état can save it, you know. That's maybe precisely the situation. You know why? Because again, because of this neo-tribalism and so on. What you already have in the United States, it's a de facto state of civil war, ideological for the time being, but who knows where it will go like— And don't underestimate here the state power. It's very important now this Roe v. Wade uh abolition of move towards further limitations on abortion. But we in Europe are in a sad negative sense further than you. You know what Poland is now experiencing? A new wave of demands for total prohibition of abortion. You know what's happening there? Till now they had three exceptions: if it was rape, especially a family rape, if uh mother's life is in danger so that it that if you don't uh stop the pregnancy she may die, or if the the baby is defected, it's clear that it will be a birth of a dead- But now they want they already I don't know which one, one of the three, I think this one that even if the pregnancy poses danger for the mother, it's already uh prohibited and you know they already had a couple of deaths. Yeah I saw that. Totally unnecessary. Yeah. So what I'm saying is that in such a situation of total almost civil war, there are two Americas, there are two Polands, there are— in the Western Europe it's not yet at that, it's still uh the populist neo-conservatives are a little bit more limited. But in Hungary and so on. And you know what makes me really sad as many intelligent observers noticed? That this conflict between how do we call them neo-conservative populists and traditional liberals in power is basically a pseudo-conflict. We cannot simply take side there because as we all know some intelligent neo-conservative populists are assumed included into their program some measures which were traditionally left liberal measures. For example, as my friends from Poland explained to me, this horrible party of Kaczyński, uh Justice and Law or whatever. But do you know they raised lower the retirement age, made very good credit loans for students, better healthcare and so on and so on. So uh we have always to reject this fetishistic fascination with uh my God right-wing populism. No, they are the symptom of what the liberal mainstream was doing wrong, inclusive of political correctness. What they are doing wrong. We have always to be aware of this. And so the act who maybe can only come from somebody who is simply neutral, neutral not really, nobody's neutral but in the formal sense of because of their professional position standing outside this direct conflict. And yes, frankly I don't see any other force than the army here. It's horrible what we are saying today. I hope we will be lynched by all the lefties and so on, you know. But we live in terrible times and we have to be very- Do you Matt, you said this, did you dare already to write somewhere about this? Huh huh? Nasser and and the the Carnation Revolution in Portugal, you know like that's a more realistic path than any kind of mass political path in the US. Yes, and very good idea because you know why? I was in Portugal, I met some of them, and they are so they were so deeply honest. I read in a bourgeois centrist media an interview with all the surviving officers of this Carnation Revolution. They did try to put to push revolution a little bit further, but when it didn't go they very honorably stepped back. Not one case of corruption, they all now live retired lives, they did it. My God they did it, you know, in a relatively honest way and so on. They that's important what

unknown
you said, they did it, not not the political opposition. Yeah, well I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna save both of you uh and our listeners from uh going full Mishima here, you know before Matt, you know arms himself and forms a cadre to, you know, occupy West Point. No no, I want army, I don't want pop-— You don't

unknown
want a writer doing this. You want people already in the army. That was Mishima's that was his

Slavoj Žižek
problem.

unknown
You know me, I totally root from the sidelines, I'm not doing it. But do you know incidentally if we are— I don't like Mishima as a writer blah blah. But do you know that many leftists in Japan liked him and saw him as a kind of a model? Yeah, yeah. Like he's

Slavoj Žižek
doing right thing just in the wrong direction. Yeah. Well okay, so I'm gonna I'm gonna save us from going down the Mishima route. But so I'm just like uh the last thing I want to talk to you about is movies and it's just simply what you've been watching, seen anything good lately? No, no, I'm getting bored. Again we are coming back to my totalitarian temptations. I liked, but it's not a mega movie, more because of this fatal sacred war Islamist almost fantasy Dune. I like Dune. Oh you liked Dune? Okay I liked Dune too, I thought it was great. Absolutely! And uh people tell me but it's a kind of a Islamofascism new leader. I told them but that's why I like it! Good, yes, yes. Uh but the movie I hate, I written about it, is uh— Oh is this Nomadland? Is that what you critique that in the book. Sorry? Nomadland? Yeah and it's clear why. Yeah. Because I think it's class identity politics. The message is each class even the poorest nomadic proletarians, they have their own way of life, they have to- It's sort of nice and earthy and sort of there's a beauty in it or whatever. Yeah, yeah. I must say I don't like that, yes. Otherwise I watch more TV series, I don't know, I watch old movies and so on. What about TV series? What what TV shows you watching? I have some problems with eyes, nothing really great. For example, but it kind of disappeared, it didn't do so well, you know there was a TV series Clarice about Hannibal Lecter and so on. Oh right, yeah yeah yeah. But no it's not it's just it's just she, Clarice, it happens takes place after Silence of the Lambs. I watched I watched the first episode of it but I did not stick with it, yeah. If you go on it's get even it's the beginning is not so good, but what I like is that it is kind of a leftist twist. It moves—that's what I like—from these solo serial murderers to a big medical company making horrible experiments and so on and so on, the usual thing. The one I wrote about it also, I don't think it's in the book, uh my friends convinced me that it's uh my Japanese and my South Korean friends. You know that uh how is it with your in your country Squid Game? It was a huge hit. Yeah, but do you know that it is uh first it was greater hit in the West than in South Korea itself I was told. Second thing, be careful. It's not even perceived as anti-capitalist. And I know a guy who knows the creator of the series and confirmed this to me because it's not like the message is not the one that was even, do you know, this taken over by North Korean media. You see this is the real portrayal of South Korea where people have to get killed to survive to get out of debt. No, the obsession of the guy is he has nothing against the game as such. The point is that the game is twisted, spin, you know, that it's not a fair— Yeah no no like yeah like the worst part in it is that like is that the people involved in the game are are adulterating the purity of it by giving advantages to like you know one player to help them out in exchange for, you know, harvesting someone's organs or whatever. Yeah, yeah. So the desire beneath it is the basic premise is: yes, life is too dull today, we need such violent games but they should be fair, just games. No cheating. So the whole direction is against cheating. It's for honest capitalism, we put it like this. It's totally false to perceive it as a radical critique of capitalism. No they they um Squid Game, they just want to get rid of crony Squid Game, they just want the pure real Squid Game, you know, yeah. Yeah, yeah, that's it. Yes, you see this is the big danger today of pseudo anti-capitalism. It pretends to be anti-capitalist but if you look at it closely, you know. I'm not saying now there is another

unknown
leftist paranoia to be avoided here. You know

Slavoj Žižek
the idiots to think uh everything is already cooperated, there is no space, you

unknown
just— No, it's not as simple as that. Just don't look at sub- don't look for subversive elements in places which are

Slavoj Žižek
the most obvious, you know. No you have to find you're more likely to find the the actually subversive threads in uh in media that is not not is like you know openly right-wing or uh like uh just sort of jingoistic or stupid. Yeah I'm not afraid to say this, yes. For example, I was told by friends from Hong Kong who are now not doing

unknown
well, how you remember that how was he called, my God the great era of those Kung Fu movies uh no Jet Li, who was the great one?

Slavoj Žižek
Jackie Chan? No no no he sold he sold

unknown
himself to the Chinese establishment.

Slavoj Žižek
Bruce Lee! Bruce Lee! But you know that in Eastern Asia there, this this series had a real anti-capitalist twist. The idea was

unknown
we poor people, we don't have big armies and so on, we only have our bodies. The only thing we can do is with disciplining our bodies and so on and so on.

Slavoj Žižek
Don't underestimate the progressive background of this whatever they will call like Bruce Lee, Kung Fu heroes and so on and so on. It's very interesting. So I am and my big advice is, as

unknown
you already said, don't be afraid to fully

Slavoj Žižek
enjoy these dirty pleasures, you know. You like Kung Fu, no problem, enjoy it and so on. I'm always suspicious of this leftist

unknown
puritanism, you know. That's why on the other

Slavoj Žižek
hand, I stopped watching it the last season, that was my problem with as I've written often, with uh especially more than the novel with the

unknown
TV series Handmaid's Tale. Yeah.

Slavoj Žižek
I did not like that show. It's so ambiguous because I think the ideal viewer is the one who under the pretext that oh it's a horrible

unknown
portrayal of

Slavoj Žižek
patriarchal order so let's uh we enjoy it critically, but it allows you to fully enjoy No you get to do a fantasy of how kind of like

unknown
secretly

Slavoj Žižek
fun it would be to be enslaved in that manner. Yeah, yeah, yeah. All my

unknown
friends,

Slavoj Žižek
even women, enjoyed this you know how this new modes, how they screwed up women there, this obligation that they all enjoyed it secretly. And that one I don't like I must say. Also already in the novel, you know it was a sad fail- failure. I forgot what was the title of the part two novel? Oh of the sequel that Margaret Atwood— Oh man, I forget, I don't know. Yeah, doesn't matter, but you see you were right to forget it because it's over. Like it disappeared, it's uh she didn't succeed in finding a formula of how to destroy Gila- the failure of the novel is not just a narrative one. It demonstrates the the lack of sociopolitical even imagination, I would say. But you know where are my true loves in movies? I'm here for classical slapstick against the big catastrophe for me for me 50s with Actor Studio and so on. You know this

unknown
psychological Marlon Brando is a bad guy for me for this with this— Yeah. My ideal actor is Cary Grant if you ask me. This totally artificial non-expressive face and so on and so on, you know. So I I think that

Slavoj Žižek
all these slapstick comedies and so on, they are maybe a secret secret treasure to be rediscovered. Have you watched Bringing Up Baby recently? Oh they're crazy, these

unknown
are my eternal movies. Bringing Up— the one I like

Slavoj Žižek
although it's based on a play, it's not original story, Arsenic and Old Lace. It's in a purely formal way. I haven't seen a more nervous movie. Cary Grant is something running around all the time, you know, this pure historical hysterical nervousness

unknown
and so on. No they those are great movies if you ask me, you know. All right. That's a movie mindset from Slavoj Zizek. I think

Slavoj Žižek
we gotta end it there. Slavoj, thank you so much for your time. Okay, listen, I'm very grateful to help publicize the book because I am now so how do you survive? Like you are the leftists who are not politically correct. By you I mean Chapo Trap House. You must be also attacked from all sides, whatever, no? Somehow we get by, I don't know, I mean you know— I also, I hope I will— I'm God's most punished man but you know I suffer for for everyone on their behalf. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah although I prefer slightly others to suffer for me, I would say. It's always— Listen, I am really grateful that you gave me a chance. Just please, who is the master? Not you Matt, you William, well you are the master. Yes. Please do the proper censorship. I cannot but appear

unknown
an idiot but try to lower

Slavoj Žižek
a little bit the level of my stupidity, no? I will I will do my best Slavoj. The book is Heaven in Disorder. I want to thank you

unknown
again so much for spending

Slavoj Žižek
some time with us. But you know can I tell you something? They are my friends Colin Robinson, OR Books, but a slight stab at

unknown
them. Didn't

Slavoj Žižek
they exaggerate it a little bit with that Mao portrayal of me on the cover? You know, I have nothing against this but you know in these politically correct times where everything is taken literally, what I'm afraid is that

unknown
some

Slavoj Žižek
idiots will really mean look, he thinks he is a new Mao. You know, you never know when you will be taken seriously, no?

unknown
Listen, I wish you all the best sincerely.

Slavoj Žižek
I think you and a couple of other podcasts are literal, I mean it, our only hope today. To debate crazy things like that, you know uh the repetition of Portuguese

unknown
Revolution here. This is

Slavoj Žižek
what Kant called public use of reason. You don't care about institutional background

unknown
how it will work, you just go to the

Slavoj Žižek
end in exploring crazy ideas. That's the only thing that can save us. You hey, he said it not me, but I agree. Ah, you

unknown
will not do the usual trick, claiming he

Slavoj Žižek
said something but basically you already said it better earlier and so on, you know like— Okay. Yeah. Thanks very much. Thank you. I'm grateful.