Interview at the Book Fair Leipzig
Interview · zizekpodcast.com ·
2018-03-17 · 0:49:43 · 6,551 words
capitalismcommunism-socialismideologyhegel-dialecticsfascism-populismliberalism-political-correctnesstechnology-ai-cyberspacecinema-art-cultureecology-climatehistorygeopolitics-warsexuality-genderdemocracy
In this wide-ranging interview conducted around the Frankfurt Book Fair (likely 2017), Žižek discusses his book 'Disparitäten' and argues that capitalism is approaching its limits while the left lacks a viable alternative. He diagnoses the contemporary political landscape, the disappearance of the moderate left, the rise of authoritarian capitalism, the inadequacy of identity-politics movements like MeToo, and insists that a renewed, centralist communist project is needed to confront crises of ecology, biogenetics, immigration, and digitalization. He also reflects on DDR culture and literature, the Frankfurt School's failures, Hegel versus Marx, and the threat of post-human capitalist class division through genetic engineering.
every located moment in this recording, click one to read it
The ideas in it 15
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
A structural 'disparity' or mismatch within an apparently coherent totality, a small detail that does not fit, analogous to the detective's suspicious clue or Marx's symptom; used here as the title concept of his book.
as “Asiatischer Despotismus as pseudo-concept”
Žižek argues that Marx's category of 'Asiatic Despotism' is not a real historical stage but a placeholder for everything that does not fit his main conceptual framework, a symptom within Marxism's own taxonomy.
Following Marx and Lacan, a detail that does not fit the holistic image of a system, pointing to its concealed truth; Žižek likens Marxist analysis to psychoanalytic symptom-reading.
as “Kritik der politischen Ökonomie”
Marx's critique of political economy, which Žižek argues disappeared in the 1980s–90s under cultural-political movements and must be restored as the central task of Marxism today.
as “Warenfetischismus (commodity fetishism)”
A form of false consciousness that is simultaneously part of the economic base itself, a misperception constitutive of social reality, not merely a superstructural distortion.
as “ideology as part of gesellschaftliche Sein”
Ideology is not an ideal theological overlay but is embedded in actual social interactions and practices, in what people do rather than what they believe.
as “ideology kills hope”
Žižek's characterization of dominant ideology's function: it does not suppress critique but eliminates the belief that transformation is possible, its weapon is despair, not censorship.
as “ideologische Staatsapparaten (Ideological State Apparatuses)”
Althusser's concept: used by Žižek to show that what matters is what people do in social practice, not their inner beliefs, the key lesson from his Slovenian experience of late-socialist cynicism.
Žižek's ironic term for humanist-Marxist and Praxis-philosophy currents that were tolerated as official opposition, parasitic on the existing system and offering no real alternative.
as “Neuzentralismus”
Žižek's preferred model: a new centralism, a strong global organism, a new communist International, necessary to cope with ecology, biogenetics, and digitalization, opposed to Negri/Hardt's local self-organization.
as “Sitten (ethical life / mores)”
Hegel's concept of concrete ethical customs and practices, invoked by Žižek to argue that what MeToo needs is not new laws but a new ethics embedded in social life.
as “authoritarian capitalism”
The actually existing dominant form of capitalism globally: not liberal-democratic but authoritarian, with nationalist values, embodied by China, India under Modi, Putin, and Trump.
as “die Eule der Minerva (Owl of Minerva)”
Hegel's figure for the retroactive character of philosophical understanding: we can only conceptualize a form of life once its time has passed, Žižek uses this to argue Hegel's Rechtsphilosophie describes a superseded order, not an ideal.
Fredric Jameson's concept, cited by Žižek: the capacity to locate oneself within a social totality, which we currently lack, unable to understand what China is or where capitalism is heading.
as “post-human capitalism”
The emerging phase of capitalism in which biological and neurological engineering create a new class division where the wealthy literally become a separate race through genetic regulation.
Stories he reaches for 4
A man who knew Stephen Hawking told Žižek that in his last years Hawking no longer needed to move his finger, his brain was directly connected and he just thought 'forward' and his chair moved. If the signal goes out, it can also go in: who will control this?
“his brain was directly and he just thought forward and his chair moved forward”
German toilets display the shit on a shelf; French toilets flush it immediately; Russian toilets have only a hole; American toilets let it float. The different designs reflect different ideological attitudes toward waste. Even in the toilet, you are deep in ideology.
“Even when you go to the toilet to shit, you are deep in ideology.”
At a conference Žižek met the head of the Chinese Academy of Sciences cognitive sciences division, whose programmatic statement began: 'the goal of biogenetics in China is to regulate the biological and psychological welfare of the Chinese people.' Horrifying for its candor about population management.
“the goal of the development of biogenetics in China is to regulate the biological and psychological welfare of the Chinese people”
Althusser cites Pascal: if you believe in God that's your problem, but just act as if you believe. The lesson: ideology functions through practice, not inner conviction. Žižek found this invaluable in Yugoslavia.
“If you believe in God that's your problem, but you must just do as if you believe in God”
Works invoked 17
Elysium film
Naive film but cited positively as having a 'clear perception' that we are entering a new class society even worse than the old one, with classes becoming biologically different.
The Hunger Games film
Listed alongside Elysium as a naive but perceptive Hollywood film about the emergence of a new, potentially biological class division.
Das Kapital book
Žižek argues that Volumes II and III on circulation and reproduction are 'extremely useful to account for today's crisis' and have been neglected by the Frankfurt School who only read Fetishism chapters from Volume I.
Žižek 'hates' this film and uses it as a negative example: its liberal psychologization of DDR surveillance (evil minister wants to sleep with a writer's wife) inadvertently excuses the systemic logic and is thus paradoxically less critical than it appears.
Žižek defends against charges of authoritarian state-worship: the Owl of Minerva framing in the introduction shows it describes a superseded form of life, not an ideal blueprint.
Blade Runner 2049 film
Cited approvingly as being about 'the rise of post-human capitalism', one of several Hollywood blockbusters that intuitively perceive the emerging class division.
Cited approvingly: Adorno and Horkheimer recognized (as did Heidegger) that the horrors of modernity, Holocaust, are not remnants of barbarism but products of Enlightenment's own dialectic.
Otto Weininger's anti-Semitic and anti-feminist work; cited only for the claim 'socialism is Aryan, communism is Jewish' which Žižek perversely uses as an argument for communism.
Schiller's poem; Žižek calls it 'fascism' for aestheticizing social harmony and attributing revolutionary disruption to hysterical Hyänenfrauen; notes the Nazis used it.
Good Bye, Lenin! film
Described as naive but more honest than Das Leben der Anderen: its thesis is that the only way to survive as an honest communist is to go mad/withdrawn from reality. More critical than mere nostalgia.
Der junge Marx film
German film described as 'very fantastic, wonderful, a very good film'; Žižek only had to stop when Engels seduces Mary Burns.
Loved by Žižek for its scene where a woman and her friends objectify men, a 'wonderful reversal of Hollywood'; exemplifies hidden authentic spirit in DDR cinema.
Disparitäten book
Žižek's own book being discussed and promoted at the Frankfurt Book Fair; the source of the concept of Disparität as a structural mismatch within totality.
Empire / Multitude book
Negri and Hardt's multitude framework is rejected wholesale by Žižek as clinging to old leftist ideas of local self-organization instead of the centralism he advocates.
Franziska Linkerhand book
Brigitte Reimann's novel described as 'a big unfinished traumatic project', exemplifying authentic, honest DDR literature.
Solo Sunny film
Konrad Wolf's film praised as 'an excellent portrait of everyday despair', not anti-communist but extremely critical, going beyond socialist realism.
Reimann's diaries described as 'the closest you come to DDR pornography', frank erotic confessions from a Central Committee meeting; evidence of authentic spirit.
People invoked 35
Brigitte Reimann positive
Praised enthusiastically, her diaries are 'the closest you come to DDR pornography'; her novel Franziska Linkerhand is a big, unfinished traumatic project. She represents authentic DDR spirit.
Franz Kafka positive
Noted as having been prohibited in DDR despite Brecht's remarkable claim that Kafka is 'der einzige marxistische Romanschriftsteller'.
Cited as another figure in the line of authoritarian capitalism with nationalist preferences.
Blaise Pascal positive
Cited via Althusser: 'if you believe in God that's your problem, but you must just do as if you believe', illustrating how practice, not belief, is the site of ideology.
Vladimir Lenin positive
Referenced approvingly via the anecdote of his question to Trotsky; praised for seeing that revolutionary timing cannot be calculated, if you wait for the right moment, it never arrives.
Theodor W. Adorno positive
Called 'an authentic genius'; praised alongside Horkheimer for the Dialektik der Aufklärung which recognizes the dialectic of modernity producing its own horrors.
Cited as example of the paradox of the populist right: Bannon rejected Trump's tax plan as 'socialism for the rich' and proposed 50% taxes on the rich and public works, radical economic positions once belonging to the left.
Jacques Lacan positive
Cited on the unavoidability of risk in psychoanalytic practice, at some point you have to make a decision about what to tell your patient, which can bring them to suicide, used as analogy for revolutionary decision.
Cited as an example of direct brain-computer interface: in his last years, Hawking no longer needed to move his finger to control his wheelchair, his brain was directly connected.
Louis Althusser positive
Žižek aligns with Althusser's structuralism against Praxis-philosophy; praises his thesis on Ideological State Apparatuses and his use of Pascal on practice over belief.
Francis Fukuyama negative
His 'end of history' liberal democratic utopia thesis is declared definitively over; Žižek notes with irony that even Fukuyama himself no longer believes it, recognizing the need for new multinational organization.
Friedrich Schiller negative
Žižek declares having 'developed hatred' toward Schiller; his 'Das Lied von der Glocke' is called proto-fascist for aestheticizing social harmony and blaming revolutionary disorder on hysterical women.
Described as a model of what is wrong with the world; placed in the line of authoritarian capitalists (China, Modi, Putin); liberals' ironic mockery of him is dismissed as ineffective, he already functions as his own joke.
Heinrich von Kleist positive
Described as 'the greatest', much greater than Goethe and Schiller; was permitted in DDR, unlike Kafka.
Étienne Balibar positive
Listed alongside Althusser as part of the structuralist camp that Žižek sided with against Praxis-philosophy in his youth.
Antonio Negri negative
Žižek totally disagrees with Negri and Hardt's 'multitude' concept and the idea of local self-organization; he argues for centralism and a new communist International instead.
Alain Badiou positive
Cited approvingly as 'my friend': 'the ruling ideology today wants to kill hope', used to support Žižek's diagnosis of contemporary ideology.
Leon Trotsky positive
Initially described as 'not such an idiot as I thought'; praised for his question, 'the greater problem is what shall we do if we win?', as showing political intelligence.
David Harvey positive
Called 'my good friend, he is excellent', cited as an American Marxist economist who properly engages with Volumes II and III of Capital on circulation and reproduction.
Fredric Jameson positive
Cited as 'my friend American Marxist'; his concept of 'cognitive mapping' is invoked to describe what we currently lack to understand where we stand globally.
Bertolt Brecht positive
Cited approvingly for his statement that Kafka is 'the only Marxist novelist', used to highlight the absurdity of DDR's prohibition of Kafka.
Martin Heidegger positive
Called 'undoubtedly a disgusting person', but his philosophy contains a genuine insight, shared with the Frankfurt School, that the horrors of modernity are not remnants of barbarism but products of Enlightenment's own dialectic.
Mentioned in the context of Praxis-philosophy figures that Žižek views as having disappeared with communism's collapse, offering no real alternative.
Christa Wolf positive
Žižek has 'a certain sympathy for her because it was unfair', her career was ruined over her brief, useless IM reports while Heiner Müller, who collaborated far more, survived due to insolence; also praised for revitalizing ancient texts (Medea).
Mentioned as a DDR author who collaborated much more with Stasi than Christa Wolf but survived accusations through insolence.
Acknowledged as a Frankfurt School figure; his Soviet Marxism is noted as providing only a partial analysis; the Praxis-philosophy currents linked to him are criticised as 'official opposition' without real alternative.
Konrad Wolf positive
Distinguished from his brother Markus Wolf; his film Solo Sunny is cited as an excellent portrait of everyday despair, not anti-communist but extremely critical.
Jürgen Habermas negative
Criticized for his 'modernity as unfinished project' thesis which denies the dialectical tension within Enlightenment; for practically never mentioning East Germany in his work; and for a conservative reaction to biogenetics (just say no).
Max Horkheimer positive
Co-author of Dialektik der Aufklärung, praised for recognizing the terrifying potential within modernity itself, unlike Habermas and his students.
Listed alongside Trump, Modi, and China as embodiments of authoritarian capitalism with nationalist values.
Otto Weininger positive
Described as a 'horrible anti-Semitic, anti-feminist classic who was an honest guy, he killed himself'; his claim that 'socialism is Aryan, communism is Jewish' is perversely cited by Žižek as a good argument FOR communism.
Karl Marx positive
Foundational reference throughout; Žižek argues one must read Marx closely, especially Volumes II and III of Capital, and that Marx himself had critical blind spots (Asiatic Despotism as pseudo-concept, teleological trust).
Wolfgang Fritz Haug positive
Mentioned as a personal acquaintance with whom Žižek talked about Disparitäten years ago when the DDR still existed; the conversation serves as a frame for the book.
Michael Hardt negative
Co-author with Negri of the 'multitude' thesis that Žižek explicitly rejects as clinging to old leftist ideas of local democracy.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel positive
Žižek defends Hegel as in some sense more materialist than Marx due to his retroactive, non-teleological method; argues his Rechtsphilosophie describes a superseded order, not an ideal state; sees him as a non-dogmatic thinker.
What it argues
capitalism approaching its structural limits without a left alternativeauthoritarian capitalism as the dominant global formideology as embedded in social practice rather than explicit beliefthe failure of identity politics and MeToo's legalismbiogenetics and post-human class divisionDDR culture: literature, film, and hidden critical authenticitythe need for a new communist International and centralism
Dialectical moves 10
“Ideology always presents itself as anti-ideology — it says 'we just observe facts, we don't care about ideas'; but there, in how you observe facts, in all the cynicism and realism, is the real ideology.”
The most effective ideology disguises itself as post-ideological factual realism, which is why cynical distance does not escape ideology.
“Sometimes a utopian stance is the only non-ideological stance — because it means simply: I don't know clearly what I want, but I know that what we have is not the final answer.”
The apparent irrationality of utopianism is actually the more rational and less ideological position when ideology operates by foreclosing alternatives.
“I am an optimist for the very same reason that I'm a pessimist — because pessimism and confusion mean maybe there is hope for something really new.”
Pessimism and optimism coincide: the very disorder that signals failure is also the opening for genuine novelty.
“Those who were utopians about DDR's collapse were in some sense less ideological than those who advocated simply joining the West — because the utopians clearly saw that capitalism brings new problems, it's not the final solution.”
The apparent utopians were the realists, while the apparent realists (advocates of Western integration) were the true ideologues.
“The paradox is that only the new populist right dares to do some radical gestures — more money for social welfare — which once were the specialty of the left.”
The right has appropriated the left's social-welfare programme, inverting the expected political alignment.
“Hegel was in a way more materialist than Marx — it sounds crazy, but Marx still had some teleological trust, whereas Hegel never makes speculations about the future; it's always retroactive.”
The idealist Hegel turns out to be the more genuinely materialist thinker because he avoids teleological determinism.
“Maybe in the twentieth century wir wollten die Welt nur verändern; es kommt darauf an heute, die Welt neu zu interpretieren — we need to re-interpret because we lack cognitive mapping.”
Marx's 11th Thesis is reversed for the present: after a century of failed change, the urgent task is understanding where we are.
“Das Leben der Anderen is fanatically anti-communist and yet paradoxically not critical — by personalizing the evil (the minister wants to fuck the writer's wife) it actually exculpates the systemic logic of surveillance.”
The most seemingly critical film about the DDR is the least genuinely critical because it psychologizes what is structural.
“The best managers of today's capitalism are the communists in China — a wonderful irony.”
The supposed enemies of capitalism prove to be its most competent administrators, inverting the expected opposition.
“Far from being ridiculous, Trump functions already in his behavior as his own joke — so you cannot make fun of him.”
Trump pre-empts ironic critique by already performing self-irony, making liberal mockery impotent.
Claims 25
asserts
Capitalism as we know it cannot survive its current contradictions, yet the left has no viable alternative to offer.the crisis of capitalism and the left
asserts
Marx's category of 'Asiatic Despotism' is not a genuine historical stage but a pseudo-concept that functions as a container for everything that doesn't fit his main framework.Marx's historical typology
asserts
The dominant ideology today operates not by defending capitalism but by extinguishing hope — insisting that every alternative is worse.the function of contemporary ideology
asserts
Commodity fetishism is not merely a superstructural illusion but a misperception constitutive of the economic base itself.Warenfetischismus
asserts
The political landscape no longer features moderate left versus moderate right, but a liberal pro-capitalist center versus anti-immigrant populism.contemporary political configuration
asserts
The paradox of the present is that only the new populist right dares to propose some socially radical gestures — welfare spending, taxing the rich — that were once the specialty of the left.right-wing populism and the failure of the left
asserts
The immigrant question was successfully transformed by those in power into a humanitarian ('open your hearts or not') issue, diverting attention from causes like the Yemen and Syria wars and setting the poor against each other.the immigration debate as ideological operation
asserts
Only Marxism can provide a proper analysis of why socialism failed — it cannot be left to liberals and the right.the Marxist analysis of socialism's failure
asserts
The DDR's failure was a classical Marxist one: cybernetics represented new Produktionsmittel that socialist relations of production could not absorb.DDR's collapse and Marxist theory
asserts
Hegel was in a certain sense more materialist than Marx, because he never made teleological predictions about the future and his retroactive method is non-dogmatic.Hegel versus Marx on materialism and teleology
reframes
Marx's 11th Thesis on Feuerbach should be inverted for today: in the twentieth century we only wanted to change the world; now we must learn to re-interpret it, because we lack cognitive mapping of our situation.Marx's thesis on changing the world
rejects
The Frankfurt School failed by not confronting Stalinism and by largely ignoring Volumes II and III of Capital on circulation and reproduction.the Frankfurt School's theoretical limitations
rejects
Negri and Hardt's 'multitude' and local self-organization is insufficient; what is needed is a new centralism and a new communist International.Negri/Hardt's multitude concept
rejects
The MeToo movement is too legalistic, privileging a specific mode of casual sexual exchange and ignoring the greater horror of systematic domestic violence in dependent marriages.MeToo
asserts
What we need in sexual ethics is not new laws but new Sitten — a new ethics in Hegel's sense of embedded social mores.sexual consent and ethics
asserts
The Fukuyama dream of a liberal democratic global utopia is definitively over — the actually existing dominant capitalism is authoritarian capitalism with nationalist values.Fukuyama's end-of-history thesis
asserts
The best managers of today's capitalism are the Chinese communists — a wonderful irony that Fukuyama himself never predicted.China and capitalism
asserts
Robotization, which in a rational society would enable people to work less, causes panic under capitalism — a sign of the system's irrationality.automation and capitalism's irrationality
asserts
Biogenetic engineering and brain-computer interfaces must be confronted publicly and politically rather than prohibited or left to states and private companies.biogenetics and political control
asserts
Das Leben der Anderen is paradoxically less critical of communism than it seems — by attributing surveillance to personal lust rather than systemic logic, it inadvertently exculpates the DDR system.Das Leben der Anderen as ideological film
asserts
Utopian stances in moments of systemic collapse are often less ideological than cynical realism, because they recognize that the existing order is not the final solution.utopianism versus cynical realism
asserts
Hegel's Rechtsphilosophie does not describe the ideal state but a form of life whose time has already passed — its character is retroactive description, not prescription.Hegel's political philosophy
asserts
Schiller's 'Die Glocke' is proto-fascist in its aestheticization of social harmony and its attribution of revolutionary disorder to hysterical women.Schiller's 'Das Lied von der Glocke'
rejects
The Praxis-philosophy humanist Marxists were official opposition parasitic on existing socialism and had no real alternative, which is why they disappeared with its collapse.Praxis-philosophy / humanist Marxism
asserts
A condition of belonging to the late-socialist Nomenklatura was cynical distance from official ideology — taking it seriously marked one as a half-dissident.late-socialist cynicism and ideology
Quotes 14
“Ideology always presents itself as anti-ideology. Ideology always says we just observe facts, we don't care about ideas. But there in how you observe facts, in all the cynicism, realism, there it's the real ideology.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology as anti-ideology / cynical realism as ideology
“Sometimes a utopian stance is the only non-ideological stance.”Slavoj Žižek · utopianism as anti-ideology
“The main task of ideology is you admit all the horrors, but the message must be there is no hope. TINA, there is no alternative.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology kills hope / TINA
“I am an optimist for the very same reason that I'm a pessimist. Because pessimism, confusion means maybe there is a hope for something really new.”Slavoj Žižek · optimism and pessimism coincide
“Even when you go to the toilet to shit, you are deep in ideology.”Slavoj Žižek · ideology in everyday material practice
“Capitalism which really functions today is authoritarian capitalism with nationalist preferences.”Slavoj Žižek · authoritarian capitalism as the real existing form
“The best managers of today's capitalism are communists in China when they're still in power.”Slavoj Žižek · communists as best capitalist managers
“In what society do we live when Robotisierung, which in a rational society should enable us to work less, will cause panic?”Slavoj Žižek · capitalism's irrationality revealed by automation
“Wouldn't it be beautiful of the left — to speak for the true moral majority, to advocate decency, common morality? It's a unique chance.”Slavoj Žižek · the left reclaiming moral majority from the right
“Maybe in the twentieth century wir wollten die Welt nur verändern; es kommt darauf an heute, die Welt neu zu interpretieren.”Slavoj Žižek · inversion of Marx's 11th Thesis
“Hegel was in a way more materialist than Marx. Marx still had some kind of teleological trust.”Slavoj Žižek · Hegel more materialist than Marx
“Warenfetischismus — it's of course fetishism, falsches Bewusstsein, but falsches Bewusstsein which is part of ökonomische Basis selbst. It's a kind of misperception which is part of social reality itself.”Slavoj Žižek · commodity fetishism as constitutive of the base
“Those in power... make a conflict between two of the poor. Our poor people are mad at immigrants stealing their jobs... those in power can present themselves as the only humanitarians.”Slavoj Žižek · ruling class playing the poor against each other via immigration
“He says there, socialism is Aryan, communism is Jewish. Good argument for communism for me.”Slavoj Žižek · Weininger's perverse argument repurposed for communism
Transcript 99 turns
unknown
Damit Slavoj Žižek in einen Eintrag schreibt über Disparitäten.
Damit Slavoj Žižek in einen Eintrag schreibt über Disparitäten.
Slavoj Žižek
Yeah, but you know what I mean with Disparitäten. I will maybe give you because I know Wolfgang Fritz Haug and we talked about it I remember years ago when DDR noch hier war. And we talked about a good example of Disparitäten. You know, in detective Romanen, a detective comes to visit a site of murder and let's say the murderer wanted to make the appearance that it was a suicide. And then everything stimmt, but you find a tiny moment which is suspicious. Like, why is there a knife in that corner? Why this, why that? This would be Disparität. That you have a holistic image, totality, but then something does not fit it. And I think a good Marxist analysis is like Psychoanalyse, symptom. Something that does not fit in it. And one has to be critical here. I think we find even in Marx critical moments. For example, I claim that, you know, in official Marxism you have all these epochs: Urgesellschaft, Klassengloss, then Asiatischer Despotismus, antike Sklavengesellschaft, feudalism, capitalism, communism. But if you read Marx closely, you see that Asiatischer Despotismus is a pseudo-concept. First Marx's classification was without it, then he saw that some systems like ancient China, India, Latin America don't fit his category. So he created a category which appears to be just another category, but its real meaning was all that which doesn't fit into my conceptual framework. This would be Asiatischer Despotismus.
Yeah, but you know what I mean with Disparitäten. I will maybe give you because I know Wolfgang Fritz Haug and we talked about it I remember years ago when DDR noch hier war. And we talked about a good example of Disparitäten. You know, in detective Romanen, a detective comes to visit a site of murder and let's say the murderer wanted to make the appearance that it was a suicide. And then everything stimmt, but you find a tiny moment which is suspicious. Like, why is there a knife in that corner? Why this, why that? This would be Disparität. That you have a holistic image, totality, but then something does not fit it. And I think a good Marxist analysis is like Psychoanalyse, symptom. Something that does not fit in it. And one has to be critical here. I think we find even in Marx critical moments. For example, I claim that, you know, in official Marxism you have all these epochs: Urgesellschaft, Klassengloss, then Asiatischer Despotismus, antike Sklavengesellschaft, feudalism, capitalism, communism. But if you read Marx closely, you see that Asiatischer Despotismus is a pseudo-concept. First Marx's classification was without it, then he saw that some systems like ancient China, India, Latin America don't fit his category. So he created a category which appears to be just another category, but its real meaning was all that which doesn't fit into my conceptual framework. This would be Asiatischer Despotismus.
unknown
Wittfogel already also wrote about it.
Wittfogel already also wrote about it.
Slavoj Žižek
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but it was always a problem for Marxism. And I think that this is a big problem in Geist der neuen Deutschland today. We are in a, sorry, nervous, just I will get better in a few. Don't mind. Blaue Sofa where I want to be blue like an obelisk or what sit there on sofa. Okay, seriously. Today we are in a totally crazy situation. On the one hand, it's absolutely clear that capitalism is approaching a limit. My God, even mega-corporate guys like Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, they all talk about it. It's clear, capitalism the way we know it cannot survive. On the other hand, this is the tragedy, the left does not seem to have a viable alternative. Do you
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but it was always a problem for Marxism. And I think that this is a big problem in Geist der neuen Deutschland today. We are in a, sorry, nervous, just I will get better in a few. Don't mind. Blaue Sofa where I want to be blue like an obelisk or what sit there on sofa. Okay, seriously. Today we are in a totally crazy situation. On the one hand, it's absolutely clear that capitalism is approaching a limit. My God, even mega-corporate guys like Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, they all talk about it. It's clear, capitalism the way we know it cannot survive. On the other hand, this is the tragedy, the left does not seem to have a viable alternative. Do you
unknown
have the alternative?
have the alternative?
Slavoj Žižek
No, but I do know the way, now I will be very careful, the way towards an alternative.
No, but I do know the way, now I will be very careful, the way towards an alternative.
unknown
Like the Maulwurf? Like Hegel's Maulwurf. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Wühlarbeit, subversive Wühlarbeit. The first
Like the Maulwurf? Like Hegel's Maulwurf. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Wühlarbeit, subversive Wühlarbeit. The first
Slavoj Žižek
thing is that instead of this obsession with the victims of this system like Immigranten
thing is that instead of this obsession with the victims of this system like Immigranten
unknown
or whatever, we should focus, we should do the work of Bill Gates and Elon Musk better than they. Because the ABC of Marxism is that communism only has a chance if you don't make it into a... You still believe in communism? Absolutely. Not socialism, communism. And you believe also in the revolutionary radical solution? Yeah, but what shape it
or whatever, we should focus, we should do the work of Bill Gates and Elon Musk better than they. Because the ABC of Marxism is that communism only has a chance if you don't make it into a... You still believe in communism? Absolutely. Not socialism, communism. And you believe also in the revolutionary radical solution? Yeah, but what shape it
Slavoj Žižek
will take? No, radicality means simply that it's clear that this gradual social-democratic
will take? No, radicality means simply that it's clear that this gradual social-democratic
unknown
appropriation doesn't work. And the proof is how today, it's very sad, the whole political scenery is changing. We no longer have moderate left, moderate right
appropriation doesn't work. And the proof is how today, it's very sad, the whole political scenery is changing. We no longer have moderate left, moderate right
Slavoj Žižek
exchange. We have the new liberal center which is absolutely pro-capitalist, but more liberal in Sachen der Abtreibung, homosexuality. And then we have anti-immigrant populism. Which is an extremely tragic thing because the anti-immigrant populists in some countries took over where the left failed. For example, the horror of liberals in Vereinigten Staaten, Steve Bannon. Yeah, but you know that he rejected Trump's tax plan? He said this is socialism for the rich. His proposal was raise the taxes for the rich to fifty percent, engage in big public works. This is the main deadlock today, that paradoxically only the new populist right dares to do some radical, some
exchange. We have the new liberal center which is absolutely pro-capitalist, but more liberal in Sachen der Abtreibung, homosexuality. And then we have anti-immigrant populism. Which is an extremely tragic thing because the anti-immigrant populists in some countries took over where the left failed. For example, the horror of liberals in Vereinigten Staaten, Steve Bannon. Yeah, but you know that he rejected Trump's tax plan? He said this is socialism for the rich. His proposal was raise the taxes for the rich to fifty percent, engage in big public works. This is the main deadlock today, that paradoxically only the new populist right dares to do some radical, some
unknown
gestures like
gestures like
Slavoj Žižek
more money for social welfare and so on which once were the
more money for social welfare and so on which once were the
unknown
specialty of the left. The fundamental
specialty of the left. The fundamental
Slavoj Žižek
fact today is that again, moderate left is disappearing, like here in Germany, in France. Because one has to question, is there a fundamental difference? Martin Schulz, maybe a sympathetic person as a person, but is this enough? It's not enough. It's not enough. On the other hand, what kind of radical left? Look at the tragedy of Syriza. They began as a radical left, now they are the best executors of austerity. I think European establishment was really bright to allow them, Syriza, to remain in power. Why? Because they were the radical left, they can do austerity and there is no other left political force to organize protest against him. People are totally demoralized politically. So we have either this or you have countries like Maduro, Venezuela, where they simply screwed it up. So the situation is bad, but where I remain a Marxist-communist, communist not socialist. You know whom I like here? You remember that horrible anti-semitic, anti-feminist classic who was an honest guy, he killed himself? Otto Weininger, Geschlecht und Charakter. He says there, socialism is Aryan, communism is Jewish. Good argument for communism for me. Because socialism is only just Gemeinschaft, take care of all. No. So I'm saying that it's clear the problems we are confronting today: ecology, intellectual property, it's clear this will be the ruin of capitalism, they cannot deal, financial speculations, immigrants and so on. I don't think the existing system will be able in the long term to confront this problem. And maybe something important for your readers. Here one has to do a very precise analysis. I'm not against Immigranten. All I'm saying is that the way the topic of immigrants was transformed into a, let's call it humanitarian problem, should we open our hearts to them or not, it's terrifying. Instead of confronting the causes like what happens now in Yemen, in Syria still. What did those in power succeed in doing? What they always like to do: make a conflict between two of the poor. Our poor people are mad at immigrants stealing their jobs, and our media portray our poor people as the one who are proto... And that is stupid. It's stupid and dangerous. Because those in power can thus present themselves as the only humanitarians fighting our racism and their fundamentalism and so on and so on. Sein bestimmt das Bewusstsein, wissen wir als Marxisten und Materialisten. Aber was heißt sein? Aber Rechtspopulisten—ich meine, die ganz den Rechtspopulisten hinterherrennen und den Rassisten—denen geht es ja gar nicht so schlecht. Die müssen nicht wie im Süden auf Müllhalden nach Essbarem suchen. Also wie kommt das eigentlich? Ist das Ihr triadisches Modell: Reales, Imaginäres und Symbolisches irgendwie zu erklären? Wie kommt das falsche Bewusstsein? Dieses falsche Bewusstsein? I would complicate things here. If you read closely Marx, and it should be read. What I like in Neue Marx-Lektüre is that American Marxist economists like my good friend, he is excellent, David Harvey, they... you know the sad thing about Frankfurter Schule is that when they speak about critique of political economy, they mostly mean Fetischismus chapter, they really read only two-three chapters in Kapital I. But now it's proven how Bände zwei und drei of Kapital about circulation, reproduction are extremely useful to account for today's crisis. Second thing, Bewusstsein. Take a category like Warenfetischismus. It's something very strange. It's of course fetishism, falsches Bewusstsein, but falsches Bewusstsein which is part of ökonomische Basis selbst. It's a kind of a misperception which is part of social reality itself. It's something very mysterious and this is where we are today. Ideology today it's no longer some ideal, theological, nobody... Man redet immer vom post-ideologischen Zeitalter, das stimmt nicht. No, but this is... this type of ideology maybe it's in decay. But what I'm interested is ideology which is part of our gesellschaftliche Sein, of actual interactions.
fact today is that again, moderate left is disappearing, like here in Germany, in France. Because one has to question, is there a fundamental difference? Martin Schulz, maybe a sympathetic person as a person, but is this enough? It's not enough. It's not enough. On the other hand, what kind of radical left? Look at the tragedy of Syriza. They began as a radical left, now they are the best executors of austerity. I think European establishment was really bright to allow them, Syriza, to remain in power. Why? Because they were the radical left, they can do austerity and there is no other left political force to organize protest against him. People are totally demoralized politically. So we have either this or you have countries like Maduro, Venezuela, where they simply screwed it up. So the situation is bad, but where I remain a Marxist-communist, communist not socialist. You know whom I like here? You remember that horrible anti-semitic, anti-feminist classic who was an honest guy, he killed himself? Otto Weininger, Geschlecht und Charakter. He says there, socialism is Aryan, communism is Jewish. Good argument for communism for me. Because socialism is only just Gemeinschaft, take care of all. No. So I'm saying that it's clear the problems we are confronting today: ecology, intellectual property, it's clear this will be the ruin of capitalism, they cannot deal, financial speculations, immigrants and so on. I don't think the existing system will be able in the long term to confront this problem. And maybe something important for your readers. Here one has to do a very precise analysis. I'm not against Immigranten. All I'm saying is that the way the topic of immigrants was transformed into a, let's call it humanitarian problem, should we open our hearts to them or not, it's terrifying. Instead of confronting the causes like what happens now in Yemen, in Syria still. What did those in power succeed in doing? What they always like to do: make a conflict between two of the poor. Our poor people are mad at immigrants stealing their jobs, and our media portray our poor people as the one who are proto... And that is stupid. It's stupid and dangerous. Because those in power can thus present themselves as the only humanitarians fighting our racism and their fundamentalism and so on and so on. Sein bestimmt das Bewusstsein, wissen wir als Marxisten und Materialisten. Aber was heißt sein? Aber Rechtspopulisten—ich meine, die ganz den Rechtspopulisten hinterherrennen und den Rassisten—denen geht es ja gar nicht so schlecht. Die müssen nicht wie im Süden auf Müllhalden nach Essbarem suchen. Also wie kommt das eigentlich? Ist das Ihr triadisches Modell: Reales, Imaginäres und Symbolisches irgendwie zu erklären? Wie kommt das falsche Bewusstsein? Dieses falsche Bewusstsein? I would complicate things here. If you read closely Marx, and it should be read. What I like in Neue Marx-Lektüre is that American Marxist economists like my good friend, he is excellent, David Harvey, they... you know the sad thing about Frankfurter Schule is that when they speak about critique of political economy, they mostly mean Fetischismus chapter, they really read only two-three chapters in Kapital I. But now it's proven how Bände zwei und drei of Kapital about circulation, reproduction are extremely useful to account for today's crisis. Second thing, Bewusstsein. Take a category like Warenfetischismus. It's something very strange. It's of course fetishism, falsches Bewusstsein, but falsches Bewusstsein which is part of ökonomische Basis selbst. It's a kind of a misperception which is part of social reality itself. It's something very mysterious and this is where we are today. Ideology today it's no longer some ideal, theological, nobody... Man redet immer vom post-ideologischen Zeitalter, das stimmt nicht. No, but this is... this type of ideology maybe it's in decay. But what I'm interested is ideology which is part of our gesellschaftliche Sein, of actual interactions.
unknown
That's why I'm proud
That's why I'm proud
Slavoj Žižek
of that, it's still popular. I did years ago an analysis—an American architect helped me with—did you notice if you visited France and Vereinigten Staaten? That, it's an old joke of mine, sorry. If you look
of that, it's still popular. I did years ago an analysis—an American architect helped me with—did you notice if you visited France and Vereinigten Staaten? That, it's an old joke of mine, sorry. If you look
unknown
at old German toilets, they are like this so
at old German toilets, they are like this so
Slavoj Žižek
that the shit is displayed there. French is different, the
that the shit is displayed there. French is different, the
unknown
hole is in the back, shit disappears immediately. And in Russia it's totally different, there is only a hole. And American it floats. And why is this? And then you can
hole is in the back, shit disappears immediately. And in Russia it's totally different, there is only a hole. And American it floats. And why is this? And then you can
Slavoj Žižek
see
see
unknown
different ideological perception of what to do with shit. Even when you go to the toilet to shit, you are deep in
different ideological perception of what to do with shit. Even when you go to the toilet to shit, you are deep in
Slavoj Žižek
ideology. Ich muss das natürlich korrigieren, das war in der Sowjetunion zu realsozialistischen Zeiten, wo die Toiletten noch nicht so luxuriös waren, ja? Jetzt sieht es natürlich auch anders aus, so viel Zeit muss sein. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But even there, you know, I will give you another example of how ideology functions. When there was Die Wende, you had this cynical western view—everything is over, all we can do is simply accept West Germany. And there were those utopians who claimed maybe the Zerfall der DDR offers a chance of a different socialism, of a different socialism. Of course in some sense they were utopian. But in some sense they were less ideological than those who advocated the simple joining the West. Because what those utopians clearly saw was that capitalism brings new problems, it's not the final solution. Okay, they were utopians, we can do it now. But it's important because precisely in moments like Ende der Ideologie, Zerfall der Kommunismus, these are true ideological... Ideology always presents itself as anti-ideology. As okay, ideology always says we just observe
ideology. Ich muss das natürlich korrigieren, das war in der Sowjetunion zu realsozialistischen Zeiten, wo die Toiletten noch nicht so luxuriös waren, ja? Jetzt sieht es natürlich auch anders aus, so viel Zeit muss sein. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But even there, you know, I will give you another example of how ideology functions. When there was Die Wende, you had this cynical western view—everything is over, all we can do is simply accept West Germany. And there were those utopians who claimed maybe the Zerfall der DDR offers a chance of a different socialism, of a different socialism. Of course in some sense they were utopian. But in some sense they were less ideological than those who advocated the simple joining the West. Because what those utopians clearly saw was that capitalism brings new problems, it's not the final solution. Okay, they were utopians, we can do it now. But it's important because precisely in moments like Ende der Ideologie, Zerfall der Kommunismus, these are true ideological... Ideology always presents itself as anti-ideology. As okay, ideology always says we just observe
unknown
facts, we don't care about ideas. But there in
facts, we don't care about ideas. But there in
Slavoj Žižek
how you observe facts, in all the cynicism, realism, there it's the real ideology. And sometimes a utopian stance is the only non-ideological stance. Because it means simply a utopian stance, although I don't know clearly what I want, but I know that what we have is not the final answer, that it has its own problems. And that's so important today because as my friend Alain Badiou put it nicely, the ruling ideology today does not oppress directly progressive forces—for this the state has police, ideologische Apparaten—it wants to kill hope. Ideology today... let's imagine an ideal ideological conformist intellectual today. I meet them all the time in England. They don't say capitalism is the best, no they say capitalism is shit,
how you observe facts, in all the cynicism, realism, there it's the real ideology. And sometimes a utopian stance is the only non-ideological stance. Because it means simply a utopian stance, although I don't know clearly what I want, but I know that what we have is not the final answer, that it has its own problems. And that's so important today because as my friend Alain Badiou put it nicely, the ruling ideology today does not oppress directly progressive forces—for this the state has police, ideologische Apparaten—it wants to kill hope. Ideology today... let's imagine an ideal ideological conformist intellectual today. I meet them all the time in England. They don't say capitalism is the best, no they say capitalism is shit,
unknown
it's crisis, what to do with precarious...
it's crisis, what to do with precarious...
Slavoj Žižek
they just claim but every alternative is even worse, it will bring Gulag and so on. The main task of ideology is you admit all the horrors, but the message must be there is no hope. TINA, there is no alternative. And it's here that we should begin. Capitalism has a history of
they just claim but every alternative is even worse, it will bring Gulag and so on. The main task of ideology is you admit all the horrors, but the message must be there is no hope. TINA, there is no alternative. And it's here that we should begin. Capitalism has a history of
unknown
three hundred or more years and socialism just only hundred years. It was just an experiment. Yeah, it failed but I agree—I cannot develop this now with my friends who claim to do a
three hundred or more years and socialism just only hundred years. It was just an experiment. Yeah, it failed but I agree—I cannot develop this now with my friends who claim to do a
unknown
really
really
Slavoj Žižek
good analysis of why socialism failed. It may sound a bad joke but I really believe in it: only Marxism can do it. For example, I know some friends who were Wunderkinder of digitalization in DDR. They ran some big computerization programs and they explained to me how the tragedy of DDR was that they saw—Ulbricht was even obsessed by it—how important Kybernetik. Yeah, cybernetic. But it didn't fit their social organization. Das war ein Thema auf Parteilehrjahren und Parteiversammlungen. Yeah, so you see, it is simply as Marx would have put it, Kybernetik were a new Produktionsmittel and the gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse, the DDR, they were not able to recapture them. It's a classical Marxist explanation, it's not dissident. Dissidents play a good role blah blah, but the basic problem was that there was a new stage of Produktionsverhältnisse, not Verhältnisse, Mitteln, digitalization and so on and communism or socialism the way we knew it there was not able to do it. But now that we all know how bad DDR was and so on, it's nonetheless interesting to draw attention to some facts like... I'm not a DDR-ostalgic nostalgia, but I like to watch sometimes their films like Die Legende von Paul und Paula and others. And it's so interesting to see how in some minor points of persönliche Verhältnisse, they
good analysis of why socialism failed. It may sound a bad joke but I really believe in it: only Marxism can do it. For example, I know some friends who were Wunderkinder of digitalization in DDR. They ran some big computerization programs and they explained to me how the tragedy of DDR was that they saw—Ulbricht was even obsessed by it—how important Kybernetik. Yeah, cybernetic. But it didn't fit their social organization. Das war ein Thema auf Parteilehrjahren und Parteiversammlungen. Yeah, so you see, it is simply as Marx would have put it, Kybernetik were a new Produktionsmittel and the gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse, the DDR, they were not able to recapture them. It's a classical Marxist explanation, it's not dissident. Dissidents play a good role blah blah, but the basic problem was that there was a new stage of Produktionsverhältnisse, not Verhältnisse, Mitteln, digitalization and so on and communism or socialism the way we knew it there was not able to do it. But now that we all know how bad DDR was and so on, it's nonetheless interesting to draw attention to some facts like... I'm not a DDR-ostalgic nostalgia, but I like to watch sometimes their films like Die Legende von Paul und Paula and others. And it's so interesting to see how in some minor points of persönliche Verhältnisse, they
unknown
are much... For example, you know in
are much... For example, you know in
Slavoj Žižek
Legende von Paul und
Legende von Paul und
unknown
Paula, when
Paula, when
Slavoj Žižek
she with her friends she goes to a cafeteria and watches the men there like whom I would like to fuck and so on. But it's a wonderful reversal of Hollywood where men objectify women. I love this. Women should not be this puritan MeToo, oh you want to objectify, no, women's attitude should be I also want to objectify men. Let's play the same game. And they were doing this wonderfully. So even in such an oppressive regime as DDR it's... Ich muss das korrigieren, das ist nicht Ihre... No. And also homosexuality. They were always liberal towards it in DDR and somebody to be cynical explained to me why. All their Johannes Becher, big poets, were gay. So for them to prohibit homosexuality meant you lose your intellectual elite, you
she with her friends she goes to a cafeteria and watches the men there like whom I would like to fuck and so on. But it's a wonderful reversal of Hollywood where men objectify women. I love this. Women should not be this puritan MeToo, oh you want to objectify, no, women's attitude should be I also want to objectify men. Let's play the same game. And they were doing this wonderfully. So even in such an oppressive regime as DDR it's... Ich muss das korrigieren, das ist nicht Ihre... No. And also homosexuality. They were always liberal towards it in DDR and somebody to be cynical explained to me why. All their Johannes Becher, big poets, were gay. So for them to prohibit homosexuality meant you lose your intellectual elite, you
unknown
know. So I think that it is clear how in many DDR films it was not just dark socialist realism. You find hidden quite authentic and even
know. So I think that it is clear how in many DDR films it was not just dark socialist realism. You find hidden quite authentic and even
Slavoj Žižek
desperate... For example, the guy who was not a dissident, Wolf, Konrad Wolf, not Markus, his brother. You know his film Honey... no, Solo Sunny. Solo Sunny. Isn't it an excellent portrait of the everyday despair and so on? It's not anti-communism, but it's extremely critical. And in our literature also we had very good critical... Now I will shock you because you would never expect this from me. Not so much Christa Wolf, although I have a certain sympathy for her because it was unfair, as we know. Heiner Müller, he collaborated much more with Stasi but with his insolence he survived the accusations. While Christa Wolf, who reported for a couple of months and it's proven now that her reports as IM were totally useless, they let her go. Her career was basically ruined, she lost hope for Nobel Prize because of that. But you know whom I like? Also because
desperate... For example, the guy who was not a dissident, Wolf, Konrad Wolf, not Markus, his brother. You know his film Honey... no, Solo Sunny. Solo Sunny. Isn't it an excellent portrait of the everyday despair and so on? It's not anti-communism, but it's extremely critical. And in our literature also we had very good critical... Now I will shock you because you would never expect this from me. Not so much Christa Wolf, although I have a certain sympathy for her because it was unfair, as we know. Heiner Müller, he collaborated much more with Stasi but with his insolence he survived the accusations. While Christa Wolf, who reported for a couple of months and it's proven now that her reports as IM were totally useless, they let her go. Her career was basically ruined, she lost hope for Nobel Prize because of that. But you know whom I like? Also because
unknown
I'm a male chauvinist, she was sexy: Brigitte Reimann.
I'm a male chauvinist, she was sexy: Brigitte Reimann.
Slavoj Žižek
Oh my God, oh my God. I read her Tagebücher. It's the closest you come to DDR pornography. Like she reports, I was at some Central Committee meeting in Berlin and there was a party secretary, young, from Saxony, a nice guy, I want to fuck him and so on. It's wonderful spirit and we know that she was authentic like her Franziska Linkerhand book. It's a big unfinished traumatic project. So and also what, you know what I like about DDR literature? Because it was of course prohibited to them to deal directly critically with contemporary society, we get a strange revitalization of antique old texts. Like Christa Wolf, you write about modern problems but you mask it as Medea and so on. And this brought a new life to ancient Greek literature and I like this feature there. I think very important to see if you want to do an ideological analysis of DDR, which classics were allowed. Like unfortunately Kafka was not allowed. Kafka, Franz Kafka. Although my God, Brecht said Kafka is der einzige marxistische Romanschriftsteller. But for example strangely, one that we all favor, Kleist, von Kleist, was permitted. And Kleist is, if you ask me, the greatest. Much more than Goethe and Schiller. I'm especially... I have developed it here, hatred towards Schiller. You know Schiller's most famous song, Die Glocke? This is fascism. It's so... you know how horrible this song is? It portrays a nice thriving society, then he describe French Revolution caused by what? Hyänenfrauen. Crazy women are not satisfied with their proper role and then men... so he literally portrays hysterical women laughing as hyenas as the cause and then men take over, establish proper social hierarchy and then they are all together harmoniously build. I mean, if you ask me, the... I agree with those who claim that the spiritual origin of fascism is this aesthetization of society. Die Nazis haben Schiller ja auch für sich gefragt. Die Glocke oder was? Das war deren klassischer Song. Wobei ich nicht unbedingt Schiller jetzt als Faschist bezeichnen möchte. Ich möchte gern noch ein anderes Thema anschneiden, und zwar als DDR-Bürgerin Praxis-Philosophie. Das war für uns ungemein spannend. Ich bin auch Absolventin der Humboldt-Universität. Ja, damals in Jugoslawien
Oh my God, oh my God. I read her Tagebücher. It's the closest you come to DDR pornography. Like she reports, I was at some Central Committee meeting in Berlin and there was a party secretary, young, from Saxony, a nice guy, I want to fuck him and so on. It's wonderful spirit and we know that she was authentic like her Franziska Linkerhand book. It's a big unfinished traumatic project. So and also what, you know what I like about DDR literature? Because it was of course prohibited to them to deal directly critically with contemporary society, we get a strange revitalization of antique old texts. Like Christa Wolf, you write about modern problems but you mask it as Medea and so on. And this brought a new life to ancient Greek literature and I like this feature there. I think very important to see if you want to do an ideological analysis of DDR, which classics were allowed. Like unfortunately Kafka was not allowed. Kafka, Franz Kafka. Although my God, Brecht said Kafka is der einzige marxistische Romanschriftsteller. But for example strangely, one that we all favor, Kleist, von Kleist, was permitted. And Kleist is, if you ask me, the greatest. Much more than Goethe and Schiller. I'm especially... I have developed it here, hatred towards Schiller. You know Schiller's most famous song, Die Glocke? This is fascism. It's so... you know how horrible this song is? It portrays a nice thriving society, then he describe French Revolution caused by what? Hyänenfrauen. Crazy women are not satisfied with their proper role and then men... so he literally portrays hysterical women laughing as hyenas as the cause and then men take over, establish proper social hierarchy and then they are all together harmoniously build. I mean, if you ask me, the... I agree with those who claim that the spiritual origin of fascism is this aesthetization of society. Die Nazis haben Schiller ja auch für sich gefragt. Die Glocke oder was? Das war deren klassischer Song. Wobei ich nicht unbedingt Schiller jetzt als Faschist bezeichnen möchte. Ich möchte gern noch ein anderes Thema anschneiden, und zwar als DDR-Bürgerin Praxis-Philosophie. Das war für uns ungemein spannend. Ich bin auch Absolventin der Humboldt-Universität. Ja, damals in Jugoslawien
unknown
diskutiert. Ist Praxis-Philosophie—gibt's
diskutiert. Ist Praxis-Philosophie—gibt's
Slavoj Žižek
die noch oder ist die tot, ist die gestorben mit Badiou und Bloch und Marcuse? No, no, no, and I think they deserve it, they didn't really have an alternative. They were just
die noch oder ist die tot, ist die gestorben mit Badiou und Bloch und Marcuse? No, no, no, and I think they deserve it, they didn't really have an alternative. They were just
unknown
parasites to the existing
parasites to the existing
Slavoj Žižek
system and it's typical how with the disintegration of communism, they simply disappeared. They I... they were way to, you know what they were what I ironically call offizielle Opposition. They were tolerated but they were not really, they didn't really—this humanistischer Marxismus—did not offer a real alternative. Because when I was young, the conflict was between Praxis-Philosophie which was even in Yugoslavian closely linked to Heideggerian, Korčula, yeah, yeah, yeah, and the Strukturalisten, Althusser, Balibar. I was absolutely on structuralist side. I and so I think that also Althusser's thesis on ideologischen Staatsapparaten was extremely useful to us. Because we... the lesson we got is it doesn't matter your beliefs. It matters what you do in your social practice. Like Althusser has this wonderful idea he likes to quote Blaise Pascal. If you believe in God that's your problem, but you must just do as if you believe in God and so on and so on. And I remember how useful this was in Yugoslavia where in Slovenia, a small state, I was able to... Where do you come from? Slovenia. Yeah, there you come from. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I noticed how in the last decadent phase of socialism, it was a condition to become part of the Nomenklatura not to take the ruling ideology seriously. You have to have a cynical distance. If you took it seriously, you were already suspicious as half a dissident. It was a wonderful irony where a condition to be part of Nomenklatura is not to take the official ideology seriously, you know. No, no, I think that more than ever today, of course a renewed Marxism but nonetheless a Marxism is useful. Because what happens in the last ten years is that in the eighties, nineties, we lived in this happy time of... of feminist, cultural movement. It was Kulturpolitik. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie almost disappeared. All that it remained was fight for feminism—I agree with all these fights. But isn't it clear at least after that we have to return to Kritik der politischen Ökonomie? And this is what is... this is this Maulwurf which is deep. Yeah, it's happening there. This way is where I think the true renovation of Marxism will come, will come from. Sie haben ein Kapitel hier auch, wo Sie sagen, also Heidegger sollte man nicht kriminalisieren. Nicht kritisieren ja. Da bin ich nicht ganz bei Ihnen. Warum nicht? Kritisieren ja. But I think that Heidegger was undoubtedly a disgusting person. But in his philosophy, he has an insight which incidentally appears in a different way also in Frankfurter Schule, Dialektik der Aufklärung. Which means that the horrors of modernity, Holocaust and so on, are not simply remainders of an ancient barbarism. That there is a kind of a dialectic where Aufklärung, modernity itself has a terrifying potential.
system and it's typical how with the disintegration of communism, they simply disappeared. They I... they were way to, you know what they were what I ironically call offizielle Opposition. They were tolerated but they were not really, they didn't really—this humanistischer Marxismus—did not offer a real alternative. Because when I was young, the conflict was between Praxis-Philosophie which was even in Yugoslavian closely linked to Heideggerian, Korčula, yeah, yeah, yeah, and the Strukturalisten, Althusser, Balibar. I was absolutely on structuralist side. I and so I think that also Althusser's thesis on ideologischen Staatsapparaten was extremely useful to us. Because we... the lesson we got is it doesn't matter your beliefs. It matters what you do in your social practice. Like Althusser has this wonderful idea he likes to quote Blaise Pascal. If you believe in God that's your problem, but you must just do as if you believe in God and so on and so on. And I remember how useful this was in Yugoslavia where in Slovenia, a small state, I was able to... Where do you come from? Slovenia. Yeah, there you come from. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I noticed how in the last decadent phase of socialism, it was a condition to become part of the Nomenklatura not to take the ruling ideology seriously. You have to have a cynical distance. If you took it seriously, you were already suspicious as half a dissident. It was a wonderful irony where a condition to be part of Nomenklatura is not to take the official ideology seriously, you know. No, no, I think that more than ever today, of course a renewed Marxism but nonetheless a Marxism is useful. Because what happens in the last ten years is that in the eighties, nineties, we lived in this happy time of... of feminist, cultural movement. It was Kulturpolitik. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie almost disappeared. All that it remained was fight for feminism—I agree with all these fights. But isn't it clear at least after that we have to return to Kritik der politischen Ökonomie? And this is what is... this is this Maulwurf which is deep. Yeah, it's happening there. This way is where I think the true renovation of Marxism will come, will come from. Sie haben ein Kapitel hier auch, wo Sie sagen, also Heidegger sollte man nicht kriminalisieren. Nicht kritisieren ja. Da bin ich nicht ganz bei Ihnen. Warum nicht? Kritisieren ja. But I think that Heidegger was undoubtedly a disgusting person. But in his philosophy, he has an insight which incidentally appears in a different way also in Frankfurter Schule, Dialektik der Aufklärung. Which means that the horrors of modernity, Holocaust and so on, are not simply remainders of an ancient barbarism. That there is a kind of a dialectic where Aufklärung, modernity itself has a terrifying potential.
unknown
And Adorno and Horkheimer saw that while Habermas and his Schüler deny this. For them it's only, as he put it,
And Adorno and Horkheimer saw that while Habermas and his Schüler deny this. For them it's only, as he put it,
Slavoj Žižek
modernity as an unfinished project. They don't admit this
modernity as an unfinished project. They don't admit this
unknown
tension in modernity. And I have another problem with Frankfurter Schule which... You have many problems with Frankfurter Schule I guess. No, no, I think Adorno is an authentic genius and so on, but... And Marcuse also. Yeah, but something. How, did you notice how they did not succeed—you don't okay you have Marcuse Soviet Marxism, but it's a partial analysis.
tension in modernity. And I have another problem with Frankfurter Schule which... You have many problems with Frankfurter Schule I guess. No, no, I think Adorno is an authentic genius and so on, but... And Marcuse also. Yeah, but something. How, did you notice how they did not succeed—you don't okay you have Marcuse Soviet Marxism, but it's a partial analysis.
Slavoj Žižek
They didn't
They didn't
unknown
confront the problem of Stalinism, how to read that, they practically ignored it. But I think we Marxists should do it. We
confront the problem of Stalinism, how to read that, they practically ignored it. But I think we Marxists should do it. We
Slavoj Žižek
should not allow the right-wingers and liberals to do this. And they... for example, take somebody like Habermas. Read all of his work. Would you ever guess by reading Habermas that there were two Germanys, East and West? No. He practically doesn't mention that. And this was the big problem, it is still open. We more or less know what was fascism and it's our task, those who are still Marxists, to give a good theory of Stalinism. We are still waiting for it. It's still a big task. And the right and the center will not do it. They just schimpfen in this kind of a vulgar way and so on. You know, I like to... you know which film I use as an example which I
should not allow the right-wingers and liberals to do this. And they... for example, take somebody like Habermas. Read all of his work. Would you ever guess by reading Habermas that there were two Germanys, East and West? No. He practically doesn't mention that. And this was the big problem, it is still open. We more or less know what was fascism and it's our task, those who are still Marxists, to give a good theory of Stalinism. We are still waiting for it. It's still a big task. And the right and the center will not do it. They just schimpfen in this kind of a vulgar way and so on. You know, I like to... you know which film I use as an example which I
unknown
hate? Das Leben der Anderen. Yeah,
hate? Das Leben der Anderen. Yeah,
Slavoj Žižek
they claim it's fanatically anti-communist. But at the same time it's too naive. You remember the story? This evil minister organizes the secret observation of the writer why? Because he wants to fuck his wife. It's typical liberal view, as if whenever a bad thing happens, there must be some private level evil: sex, money or whatever. But the problem of DDR was rather that even if there were not any minister who wants to fuck your wife, he you would probably still be under observation. It does so paradoxically fanatically anti-communist as it is, it's not critical. I think that the other film is much more tragic, Lenin, Lenin, Good Bye! Nadezhda Krupskaya, Lenin's wife? No, no,
they claim it's fanatically anti-communist. But at the same time it's too naive. You remember the story? This evil minister organizes the secret observation of the writer why? Because he wants to fuck his wife. It's typical liberal view, as if whenever a bad thing happens, there must be some private level evil: sex, money or whatever. But the problem of DDR was rather that even if there were not any minister who wants to fuck your wife, he you would probably still be under observation. It does so paradoxically fanatically anti-communist as it is, it's not critical. I think that the other film is much more tragic, Lenin, Lenin, Good Bye! Nadezhda Krupskaya, Lenin's wife? No, no,
unknown
no, although
no, although
Slavoj Žižek
that's... no, no, Good Bye Lenin!, the film. You see... Ah Good Bye Lenin!, ja, ja. It's also naive. Yeah, but it's more honest because the thesis is that the only way to survive as an honest communist is you have to go crazy, you have to have a so... it's not because people usually said Good Bye Lenin! is too nostalgic. No, it's in some way more critical, more. I it's naive, I agree with you. As for Krupskaya, I was so shocked. Do you know there was ten-fifteen years ago, there was a film The Train or what? About Lenin's trip from Zurich to Petrograd. Yeah, you know who plays Lenin? Ben Kingsley, the one who plays Gandhi. And then Nadezhda Krupskaya is Leslie Caron and Dominique Sanda is the mistress. Inessa Armand? Yeah, Inessa Armand is Dominique Sanda and so on and it's surprisingly pro-Leninist, an excellent film and so on, you know. It's strange how I haven't seen it, is it any good? This new German film Der junge Marx? It's very fantastic, wonderful, a very good film. I just had to stop, my eye hurts when... when Engels is seducing Mary Burns. That's where... If you have a card for me I can send you the CD. No, no, no, thank you
that's... no, no, Good Bye Lenin!, the film. You see... Ah Good Bye Lenin!, ja, ja. It's also naive. Yeah, but it's more honest because the thesis is that the only way to survive as an honest communist is you have to go crazy, you have to have a so... it's not because people usually said Good Bye Lenin! is too nostalgic. No, it's in some way more critical, more. I it's naive, I agree with you. As for Krupskaya, I was so shocked. Do you know there was ten-fifteen years ago, there was a film The Train or what? About Lenin's trip from Zurich to Petrograd. Yeah, you know who plays Lenin? Ben Kingsley, the one who plays Gandhi. And then Nadezhda Krupskaya is Leslie Caron and Dominique Sanda is the mistress. Inessa Armand? Yeah, Inessa Armand is Dominique Sanda and so on and it's surprisingly pro-Leninist, an excellent film and so on, you know. It's strange how I haven't seen it, is it any good? This new German film Der junge Marx? It's very fantastic, wonderful, a very good film. I just had to stop, my eye hurts when... when Engels is seducing Mary Burns. That's where... If you have a card for me I can send you the CD. No, no, no, thank you
unknown
I have it, I downloaded it. You know we live in illegal times, Pirate Bay all the time, you know. Ich habe eine
I have it, I downloaded it. You know we live in illegal times, Pirate Bay all the time, you know. Ich habe eine
Slavoj Žižek
Frage auch noch, Sie schimpfen ja nicht nur gegen Habermas und kommunikatives Handeln, sondern auch gegen Antonio Negri und Michael Hardt. Ich habe mit Antonio Negri mal ein Interview gemacht, das fand ich eigentlich irgendwie sehr interessant mit der Multitude. Res publica geht auf Res publica zurück. Die Bevölkerung muss sich der Sache der Republik annehmen. Yeah, but how do they mean? I totally disagree with this multitude stuff and so on. Because I think that they still cling to this old leftist idea of local democracy, self-organization of the people. I'm for Neuzentralismus. I think the only way to cope with biogenetic, ecology and so on, we need a strong global organism. I don't believe in this. That means we need a new communist Internationale, kommunistische Internationale? Absolutely. That's the lesson of Griechenland, of Syriza fiasco. You cannot play heroic Grexit and we will do it alone.
Frage auch noch, Sie schimpfen ja nicht nur gegen Habermas und kommunikatives Handeln, sondern auch gegen Antonio Negri und Michael Hardt. Ich habe mit Antonio Negri mal ein Interview gemacht, das fand ich eigentlich irgendwie sehr interessant mit der Multitude. Res publica geht auf Res publica zurück. Die Bevölkerung muss sich der Sache der Republik annehmen. Yeah, but how do they mean? I totally disagree with this multitude stuff and so on. Because I think that they still cling to this old leftist idea of local democracy, self-organization of the people. I'm for Neuzentralismus. I think the only way to cope with biogenetic, ecology and so on, we need a strong global organism. I don't believe in this. That means we need a new communist Internationale, kommunistische Internationale? Absolutely. That's the lesson of Griechenland, of Syriza fiasco. You cannot play heroic Grexit and we will do it alone.
unknown
It had to be done
It had to be done
Slavoj Žižek
all around Europe, even wider or nothing will happen. Werden Sie diese neue kommunistische Internationale begründen? Rufen Sie ein nach Ljubljana zu einem Gründungskongress? Where am I? No, no, no, check it up. In Germany I have a good standing, but check it up in England, Vereinigten Staaten, I'm practically prohibited now by the right and especially by parts of the new left. For example, if you raise about MeToo or LGBT this simple question how much more complex the situation is. How, you know the problem of MeToo for me is that it's way too legalistic. The, for example, their rule now is if a woman says no, it's not enough to say no means no. Because it can still be an erzwungenes no. Es ist natürlich wichtig dass sowas—also ich bin ja eine Frau—es ist wichtig dass das thematisiert wird und problematisiert wird. Aber mein Problem ist mit solchen kampagnenmäßigen Debatten, dass davon also—ich will nicht sagen Nebenschauplatz oder Schauplätze—aber sie lenken von vielen anderen gravierenderen sozialökonomischen Problemen ab. Exactly. The main problem was how some producers wanted to fuck movie stars and so on. But what of hundreds of thousands of ordinary women who are married, terrorized a little bit by their husbands and so on and so on? I mean and also, you know, all this topic of when sex is not erzwungenes ja. This already privileges a certain mode of sexual exchange. This easy life where you go to a bar, you for one night stands and so on and so on. But every sociologist will tell you, real horror happens in this marriages where a husband, wife is dependent on the husband who terrorizes her a little every day and so on. And also, let me give an ironic example I
all around Europe, even wider or nothing will happen. Werden Sie diese neue kommunistische Internationale begründen? Rufen Sie ein nach Ljubljana zu einem Gründungskongress? Where am I? No, no, no, check it up. In Germany I have a good standing, but check it up in England, Vereinigten Staaten, I'm practically prohibited now by the right and especially by parts of the new left. For example, if you raise about MeToo or LGBT this simple question how much more complex the situation is. How, you know the problem of MeToo for me is that it's way too legalistic. The, for example, their rule now is if a woman says no, it's not enough to say no means no. Because it can still be an erzwungenes no. Es ist natürlich wichtig dass sowas—also ich bin ja eine Frau—es ist wichtig dass das thematisiert wird und problematisiert wird. Aber mein Problem ist mit solchen kampagnenmäßigen Debatten, dass davon also—ich will nicht sagen Nebenschauplatz oder Schauplätze—aber sie lenken von vielen anderen gravierenderen sozialökonomischen Problemen ab. Exactly. The main problem was how some producers wanted to fuck movie stars and so on. But what of hundreds of thousands of ordinary women who are married, terrorized a little bit by their husbands and so on and so on? I mean and also, you know, all this topic of when sex is not erzwungenes ja. This already privileges a certain mode of sexual exchange. This easy life where you go to a bar, you for one night stands and so on and so on. But every sociologist will tell you, real horror happens in this marriages where a husband, wife is dependent on the husband who terrorizes her a little every day and so on. And also, let me give an ironic example I
unknown
wrote
wrote
Slavoj Žižek
about it. They say now no, a woman must enthusiastically say
about it. They say now no, a woman must enthusiastically say
unknown
yes, yes,
yes, yes,
Slavoj Žižek
yes, I want sex. But are they crazy? It doesn't work like that. Imagine, I'm sorry to be personal. Imagine you are a woman, you wanted to have a sex with some man. And he doesn't get your hints because he is politically correct. So what should you do? You should jump yes, I want you to fuck me or what? I mean these explicit rules doesn't work. It's much more refined. We need not new laws but new ethics, new what Hegel called Sitten. And this is the last important conclusion. When I was young, sixty-eight, conservatives pretend to speak for moral majority
yes, I want sex. But are they crazy? It doesn't work like that. Imagine, I'm sorry to be personal. Imagine you are a woman, you wanted to have a sex with some man. And he doesn't get your hints because he is politically correct. So what should you do? You should jump yes, I want you to fuck me or what? I mean these explicit rules doesn't work. It's much more refined. We need not new laws but new ethics, new what Hegel called Sitten. And this is the last important conclusion. When I was young, sixty-eight, conservatives pretend to speak for moral majority
unknown
and we leftists
and we leftists
Slavoj Žižek
like to speak rudely using dirty words, fuck you and so on. Today it's the opposite. The new right is extremely vulgar. And it's our task—wouldn't it be beautiful of the left—to speak for the true moral majority, to advocate decency, common morality? It's a unique chance
like to speak rudely using dirty words, fuck you and so on. Today it's the opposite. The new right is extremely vulgar. And it's our task—wouldn't it be beautiful of the left—to speak for the true moral majority, to advocate decency, common morality? It's a unique chance
unknown
because again
because again
Slavoj Žižek
what is happening now is that the new right is getting full of blasphemies and so on.
what is happening now is that the new right is getting full of blasphemies and so on.
unknown
Look Trump. Trump is a wonderful
Look Trump. Trump is a wonderful
Slavoj Žižek
model of what is wrong with our world. And I think here liberal critics are mistaken when they make all the irony, you know Jon
model of what is wrong with our world. And I think here liberal critics are mistaken when they make all the irony, you know Jon
unknown
Stewart, all of them, of of Trump. But it's not enough. I mean the more you make fun of Trump, the better he is doing. He is not ridiculous, but he he functions already as in his behavior as his own joke. So you cannot make fun of. Amüsiert Sie das, dass jetzt ein Handelskrieg ausgebrochen
Stewart, all of them, of of Trump. But it's not enough. I mean the more you make fun of Trump, the better he is doing. He is not ridiculous, but he he functions already as in his behavior as his own joke. So you cannot make fun of. Amüsiert Sie das, dass jetzt ein Handelskrieg ausgebrochen
Slavoj Žižek
ist oder ausbricht zwischen USA
ist oder ausbricht zwischen USA
unknown
und Europa, weil schließlich diese Sache
und Europa, weil schließlich diese Sache
Slavoj Žižek
ja im Prinzip die marxistische Theorie bestätigt, dass zwischen kapitalistischen Ländern es eigentlich keine Harmonie geben kann? Yeah, but also another thing, it's very sad, that's my analysis. Nicht nur nationalstaatlicher Egoismus, sondern auch der Industrien, verschiedene Kapitalsektoren. Yeah. But the what this demonstrates is that the Fukuyama dream is over. Even as a
ja im Prinzip die marxistische Theorie bestätigt, dass zwischen kapitalistischen Ländern es eigentlich keine Harmonie geben kann? Yeah, but also another thing, it's very sad, that's my analysis. Nicht nur nationalstaatlicher Egoismus, sondern auch der Industrien, verschiedene Kapitalsektoren. Yeah. But the what this demonstrates is that the Fukuyama dream is over. Even as a
unknown
dream. We are not approaching some liberal democratic
dream. We are not approaching some liberal democratic
Slavoj Žižek
global utopia. Capitalism which really functions today is authoritarian capitalism with nationalist preferences. Trump is for me one of the figures in the line of China, Kina, India,
global utopia. Capitalism which really functions today is authoritarian capitalism with nationalist preferences. Trump is for me one of the figures in the line of China, Kina, India,
unknown
Modi, Putin and so on. Capitalism but with national
Modi, Putin and so on. Capitalism but with national
Slavoj Žižek
values, authoritarian capitalism. So I think that as I always repeated, it's clear that even if democracy will survive, it will survive as an irrelevant toy. You know like we to to survive today you must act like the Chinese do. They and it's a wonderful irony that the best managers of today's capitalism are communists in China when they're still in power. I mean I once I spoke with Fukuyama who is aware of this and said he was never able to predict this that communist will be the best managers of
values, authoritarian capitalism. So I think that as I always repeated, it's clear that even if democracy will survive, it will survive as an irrelevant toy. You know like we to to survive today you must act like the Chinese do. They and it's a wonderful irony that the best managers of today's capitalism are communists in China when they're still in power. I mean I once I spoke with Fukuyama who is aware of this and said he was never able to predict this that communist will be the best managers of
unknown
capitalism, no? And he's pretty desperate. You know what's so interesting? Fukuyama himself is no longer a Fukuyamaist. He knows that with this new problems, you cannot play just liberal democratic cards. You have to have new form of global solidarity, multinational organization and so on and so on, you know. So we live in interesting times, but this is a nice joke. You know
capitalism, no? And he's pretty desperate. You know what's so interesting? Fukuyama himself is no longer a Fukuyamaist. He knows that with this new problems, you cannot play just liberal democratic cards. You have to have new form of global solidarity, multinational organization and so on and so on, you know. So we live in interesting times, but this is a nice joke. You know
Slavoj Žižek
that when people say we live in interesting times, they usually mean add that this is a Chinese proverb. If you hate somebody, you tell him may you live in interesting times. Because this you usually times of war and confusion. Okay let me tell you a joke. When I was in Kina, I asked people and they say no, nobody has ever heard of this proverb: may you live in interesting times. It's strictly an European invention of what projection. But in a way... But Hegel said the same basically. What? That happy times are dead times in history. Yeah, yeah. And Trotsky was intelligent enough. Trotsky said somewhere and Trotsky always—he was not such an idiot as I thought—on the evening of October Revolution Lenin asked Trotsky, but what we will do, should we organize our escape if we if we fail? You know what Trotsky answer him? It's much greater problem is what shall we do if we win? No, no, Trotsky was interesting here. But yeah, yeah, and so I don't want... but I think that interesting times at the same time offer a new chance. So we should not be just afraid of the confusion now. Maybe something new will emerge and we have to patiently work for that. So I am an optimist for the very same reason that I'm a pessimist. Because pessimism, confusion means maybe there is a hope for something really new. Um unseren Lesern und Leserinnen eine Vorstellung vielleicht zu geben, was glauben Sie, werden wir den Kommunismus noch erleben oder wird das erst die zweite, dritte, vierte Generation? Ah I am afraid of... for example, you're always wrong here. It's easy to be over-optimistic. At the same time, do you know that in February, January, Lenin gave a speech to some socialist youth members in Switzerland and he said, maybe you will be happy enough to see the first socialist state? This he said a couple of months before Bolsheviks took over. So I'm here I'm Hegelian. You know Hegel was here very non-dogmatic. Hegel was always afraid to make any predictions about the future. Ein vorsichtiger Philosoph, der wollte sich nicht festlegen.
that when people say we live in interesting times, they usually mean add that this is a Chinese proverb. If you hate somebody, you tell him may you live in interesting times. Because this you usually times of war and confusion. Okay let me tell you a joke. When I was in Kina, I asked people and they say no, nobody has ever heard of this proverb: may you live in interesting times. It's strictly an European invention of what projection. But in a way... But Hegel said the same basically. What? That happy times are dead times in history. Yeah, yeah. And Trotsky was intelligent enough. Trotsky said somewhere and Trotsky always—he was not such an idiot as I thought—on the evening of October Revolution Lenin asked Trotsky, but what we will do, should we organize our escape if we if we fail? You know what Trotsky answer him? It's much greater problem is what shall we do if we win? No, no, Trotsky was interesting here. But yeah, yeah, and so I don't want... but I think that interesting times at the same time offer a new chance. So we should not be just afraid of the confusion now. Maybe something new will emerge and we have to patiently work for that. So I am an optimist for the very same reason that I'm a pessimist. Because pessimism, confusion means maybe there is a hope for something really new. Um unseren Lesern und Leserinnen eine Vorstellung vielleicht zu geben, was glauben Sie, werden wir den Kommunismus noch erleben oder wird das erst die zweite, dritte, vierte Generation? Ah I am afraid of... for example, you're always wrong here. It's easy to be over-optimistic. At the same time, do you know that in February, January, Lenin gave a speech to some socialist youth members in Switzerland and he said, maybe you will be happy enough to see the first socialist state? This he said a couple of months before Bolsheviks took over. So I'm here I'm Hegelian. You know Hegel was here very non-dogmatic. Hegel was always afraid to make any predictions about the future. Ein vorsichtiger Philosoph, der wollte sich nicht festlegen.
unknown
Yeah, but vorsichtiger, but at the same time ready to take risks. You have to take risks. You know is what Jacques Lacan says about psychoanalytic? You cannot be in your
Yeah, but vorsichtiger, but at the same time ready to take risks. You have to take risks. You know is what Jacques Lacan says about psychoanalytic? You cannot be in your
Slavoj Žižek
psychoanalytic
psychoanalytic
unknown
practice, you cannot be covered by
practice, you cannot be covered by
Slavoj Žižek
any rules. At a certain point you have to make a decision what you will tell to your patient and it's always risky decision. It can bring him to or
any rules. At a certain point you have to make a decision what you will tell to your patient and it's always risky decision. It can bring him to or
unknown
her to suicide. Is the same with a revolution. Lenin saw
her to suicide. Is the same with a revolution. Lenin saw
Slavoj Žižek
this very clearly. It's never that now objective conditions are ripe, we see revolution is necessary. If you wait for the right moment, the right moment will never arrive. In Ihrem neuen Buch Disparitäten, in der wissenschaftlichen Buchgesellschaft erschienen, justement frisch aus der Druckerei zur Buchmesse noch erschienen, beschäftigen Sie sich sehr stark mit Hegel. Nun hat ja bekanntlich Marx den Hegel schon von Kopf auf die Füße gestellt. Warum müssen Sie jetzt noch mal sich so mit Hegel auseinandersetzen, lassen Sie ihn jetzt Purzelbäume schlagen oder wollen Sie ihn wieder auf den Kopf stellen? Because one has to be a little bit critical towards Marx and paradoxically I think that Hegel was in a way more materialist (it sounds crazy) than Marx. Marx still had some kind of teleological trust into... Aber bei Hegel spielt doch der Weltgeist und Gott eine Rolle und nicht bei Marx. Yeah but it's always retroactive. Hegel never makes speculations about the future. It's always retroactive: now we see how it was. But we cannot draw any... like, we cannot, Hegel would have never allowed something like the Stalinist party which claimed we know the laws of history and we can act as instruments of history. Aber er war autoritätsgläubig oder hat seine Philosophie zumindestens hat so eine Staatsgläubigkeit, Obrigkeitshörigkeit drin. Sich zufriedengeben mit den Zuständen. It's so ambiguous. I will ask you... a simple question. A simple question. His Rechtsphilosophie. What is he describing there? Doesn't he say in the introduction die Eule der Minerva, the owl takes off only in the evening? That is to say we can describe in Begriffe, begrifflich, a certain social order only when its time has passed. But doesn't this hold also for his Rechtsphilosophie? I think all those who think he is describing in his Rechtsphilosophie the ideal state are simply... No, he is describing some form of life whose time is already over and he is totally open about what will happen. That is to say where I am... Okay, I will tell you something horrible for which many Marxists hate me. You know I saw it in Humboldt Universität those... Die Philosophen haben die Welt nur verschieden interpretiert; es kommt aber darauf an, sie zu verändern. Yeah. I would say that maybe in the twentieth century wir wollten die Welt nur verändern; es kommt darauf an heute, die Welt neu
this very clearly. It's never that now objective conditions are ripe, we see revolution is necessary. If you wait for the right moment, the right moment will never arrive. In Ihrem neuen Buch Disparitäten, in der wissenschaftlichen Buchgesellschaft erschienen, justement frisch aus der Druckerei zur Buchmesse noch erschienen, beschäftigen Sie sich sehr stark mit Hegel. Nun hat ja bekanntlich Marx den Hegel schon von Kopf auf die Füße gestellt. Warum müssen Sie jetzt noch mal sich so mit Hegel auseinandersetzen, lassen Sie ihn jetzt Purzelbäume schlagen oder wollen Sie ihn wieder auf den Kopf stellen? Because one has to be a little bit critical towards Marx and paradoxically I think that Hegel was in a way more materialist (it sounds crazy) than Marx. Marx still had some kind of teleological trust into... Aber bei Hegel spielt doch der Weltgeist und Gott eine Rolle und nicht bei Marx. Yeah but it's always retroactive. Hegel never makes speculations about the future. It's always retroactive: now we see how it was. But we cannot draw any... like, we cannot, Hegel would have never allowed something like the Stalinist party which claimed we know the laws of history and we can act as instruments of history. Aber er war autoritätsgläubig oder hat seine Philosophie zumindestens hat so eine Staatsgläubigkeit, Obrigkeitshörigkeit drin. Sich zufriedengeben mit den Zuständen. It's so ambiguous. I will ask you... a simple question. A simple question. His Rechtsphilosophie. What is he describing there? Doesn't he say in the introduction die Eule der Minerva, the owl takes off only in the evening? That is to say we can describe in Begriffe, begrifflich, a certain social order only when its time has passed. But doesn't this hold also for his Rechtsphilosophie? I think all those who think he is describing in his Rechtsphilosophie the ideal state are simply... No, he is describing some form of life whose time is already over and he is totally open about what will happen. That is to say where I am... Okay, I will tell you something horrible for which many Marxists hate me. You know I saw it in Humboldt Universität those... Die Philosophen haben die Welt nur verschieden interpretiert; es kommt aber darauf an, sie zu verändern. Yeah. I would say that maybe in the twentieth century wir wollten die Welt nur verändern; es kommt darauf an heute, die Welt neu
unknown
zu interpretieren auch. Why? In a Marxist... you know what I want to say? What is
zu interpretieren auch. Why? In a Marxist... you know what I want to say? What is
Slavoj Žižek
happening today? What is China, Kina? Is it simply a new capitalist? We simply lack what my friend American Marxist Fredric Jameson calls cognitive mapping. Like a map. We don't know where we stand, what is happening. There are so many things which are open, not only gesellschaftlich, like capitalism is disintegrating, but what will happen? Even... Auch sozio-ökonomisch vieles offen durch die Digitalisierung, digitaler Kapitalismus spricht man schon. Yeah, yeah, biogenetisch. What does all this mean? In what way will... You know what's for me fürchterlich? That our brains—and they are already making it—will be directly computerized. And I knew a man who knew Stephen Hawking who died now. And he told me you know that now in the last years he no longer needed to move his finger. His brain was directly and he just thought forward and his chair moved forward.
happening today? What is China, Kina? Is it simply a new capitalist? We simply lack what my friend American Marxist Fredric Jameson calls cognitive mapping. Like a map. We don't know where we stand, what is happening. There are so many things which are open, not only gesellschaftlich, like capitalism is disintegrating, but what will happen? Even... Auch sozio-ökonomisch vieles offen durch die Digitalisierung, digitaler Kapitalismus spricht man schon. Yeah, yeah, biogenetisch. What does all this mean? In what way will... You know what's for me fürchterlich? That our brains—and they are already making it—will be directly computerized. And I knew a man who knew Stephen Hawking who died now. And he told me you know that now in the last years he no longer needed to move his finger. His brain was directly and he just thought forward and his chair moved forward.
unknown
But don't forget what goes out also goes in. So if I can influence computer in this way that just by thinking some... it goes the other way around. So who will control this? And the Chinesen made a project. At some conference I met the boss of Chinese Academy of Sciences
But don't forget what goes out also goes in. So if I can influence computer in this way that just by thinking some... it goes the other way around. So who will control this? And the Chinesen made a project. At some conference I met the boss of Chinese Academy of Sciences
Slavoj Žižek
Kognitionswissenschaften Abteilung. And he gave me a programmatic statement and the first sentence horrified me. It says, the goal of the development of biogenetics in China is to regulate the biological and psychological welfare of the Chinese
Kognitionswissenschaften Abteilung. And he gave me a programmatic statement and the first sentence horrified me. It says, the goal of the development of biogenetics in China is to regulate the biological and psychological welfare of the Chinese
unknown
people. So they already... and I'm not here blaming the Chinese, Americans
people. So they already... and I'm not here blaming the Chinese, Americans
Slavoj Žižek
are also secretly doing it and so on. Everybody knows that forget all about this chemical, atomic weapons. The real things are now this directly how to manipulate and directly influence... Big data also. Yeah, the brain directly. And who will control this? If we leave this to state
are also secretly doing it and so on. Everybody knows that forget all about this chemical, atomic weapons. The real things are now this directly how to manipulate and directly influence... Big data also. Yeah, the brain directly. And who will control this? If we leave this to state
unknown
and just to states and private companies, we are lost. And
and just to states and private companies, we are lost. And
Slavoj Žižek
you know who knows this? Here I trust Hollywood. All big many big Hollywood blockbusters now are about did you see Elysium, Hunger Games? They are naive films, but they have a clear perception that if the world goes on the way it does, we are entering a new Klassengesellschaft which is even worse than the old Klassengesellschaft. Because the two Klassen will be more and more even biologically different. Like go to the suburb of Shanghai, I was there, a friend took me, where you have now some twenty-thirty institutes where rich western people come to regulate before birth their child. Regulate genetically and so on. It's already happening. The rich are already—it's limited, but that's the clear perspective—the wealthy
you know who knows this? Here I trust Hollywood. All big many big Hollywood blockbusters now are about did you see Elysium, Hunger Games? They are naive films, but they have a clear perception that if the world goes on the way it does, we are entering a new Klassengesellschaft which is even worse than the old Klassengesellschaft. Because the two Klassen will be more and more even biologically different. Like go to the suburb of Shanghai, I was there, a friend took me, where you have now some twenty-thirty institutes where rich western people come to regulate before birth their child. Regulate genetically and so on. It's already happening. The rich are already—it's limited, but that's the clear perspective—the wealthy
unknown
are already creating themselves as a new race. As a new race. It's pretty horrible what is happening.
are already creating themselves as a new race. As a new race. It's pretty horrible what is happening.
Slavoj Žižek
Na was bedeutet das jetzt? Die neuen Technologien, die neuen Klassenstrukturen bestätigen sie oder negieren sie dann die Marx'sche Theorie und Lehre? First, we must in a certain way sie bestätigen. Here I'm skeptical about Habermas who even co-wrote a book, okay with Pope Benedict, not co-wrote they put some texts together, and his reaction is more conservative in the sense
Na was bedeutet das jetzt? Die neuen Technologien, die neuen Klassenstrukturen bestätigen sie oder negieren sie dann die Marx'sche Theorie und Lehre? First, we must in a certain way sie bestätigen. Here I'm skeptical about Habermas who even co-wrote a book, okay with Pope Benedict, not co-wrote they put some texts together, and his reaction is more conservative in the sense
unknown
of we should put a limit
of we should put a limit
Slavoj Žižek
to it. If you mess too much with genetic regulating your brain it's too dangerous. But I claim we cannot avoid it. It's already being done. We have to confront... I mean all secret services are doing it like crazy—Chinesen, Russen, they are all doing it like crazy. And we have to confront this problem. You cannot just say no, it's prohibited, we will not go in this direction. So we absolutely have to confront it. But it must be done publicly. What I fear is if you do it secretly in this half hidden way, you know. So yes, we live in interesting... Even films, I like them very much. Did you see the second part, Blade Runner You should—it's about the rise of what we should call post-human capitalism. And capitalism will move in this way, more and more robot... and this question of robots I think is a crucial one. It you can clearly
to it. If you mess too much with genetic regulating your brain it's too dangerous. But I claim we cannot avoid it. It's already being done. We have to confront... I mean all secret services are doing it like crazy—Chinesen, Russen, they are all doing it like crazy. And we have to confront this problem. You cannot just say no, it's prohibited, we will not go in this direction. So we absolutely have to confront it. But it must be done publicly. What I fear is if you do it secretly in this half hidden way, you know. So yes, we live in interesting... Even films, I like them very much. Did you see the second part, Blade Runner You should—it's about the rise of what we should call post-human capitalism. And capitalism will move in this way, more and more robot... and this question of robots I think is a crucial one. It you can clearly
unknown
perceive
perceive
Slavoj Žižek
the irrationality of our society. They claim oh but robots, Robotisierung will cause unemployment. Sorry, but in my view robots is the best thing that can happen. Which means we will all have... Yeah, and we will work less. In what society do we live when Robotisierung, which in a rational society should enable us to work less, Robotisierung now will will cause panic and so on? I mean we live in irrational times. Sorry I'm getting a little bit confused and now I
the irrationality of our society. They claim oh but robots, Robotisierung will cause unemployment. Sorry, but in my view robots is the best thing that can happen. Which means we will all have... Yeah, and we will work less. In what society do we live when Robotisierung, which in a rational society should enable us to work less, Robotisierung now will will cause panic and so on? I mean we live in irrational times. Sorry I'm getting a little bit confused and now I
unknown
will be evil
will be evil
Slavoj Žižek
towards myself. I must learn to get in that obelisk pose for the Blaue Sofa, you know how I'll be there as a lady. I thank you very much for this very interesting lecture we had. Ah I will use another dirty word—not dirty but—ich muss mich einsatzbereit machen für Blaue Sofa. Yes, of course. Einsatzbereit and many thanks. Thank you.
towards myself. I must learn to get in that obelisk pose for the Blaue Sofa, you know how I'll be there as a lady. I thank you very much for this very interesting lecture we had. Ah I will use another dirty word—not dirty but—ich muss mich einsatzbereit machen für Blaue Sofa. Yes, of course. Einsatzbereit and many thanks. Thank you.