Slavoj Žižek on world politics and peace
Talk · Talking Society ·
2023 · 0:26:48 · 3,062 words
geopolitics-warideologyfascism-populismcapitalismsexuality-genderdemocracy
Žižek analyzes the 'unholy alliances' between the far-right and far-left, arguing that both sides converge on anti-Western, anti-LGBT, and pro-Russian sentiments, creating a catastrophic political landscape. He deconstructs three common arguments for neutrality in the Ukraine war, abstract pacifism, 'complexity,' and pragmatic self-interest, refuting each by highlighting the moral necessity of opposing Russian aggression. He concludes by asserting that ideology possesses its own material efficiency, independent of economic interests, and critiques capitalism as a religious phenomenon of radical sacrifice.
every located moment in this recording, click one to read it
The ideas in it 8
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
A specific ideological trope cited from Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, used to frame Western values (LGBT, democracy) as demonic, thereby justifying Putin's 'exorcism'.
A reference to the period before WWII where communists claimed the conflict was imperialist and advocated fraternization with German soldiers, used as a historical foil for modern pacifists.
The critique that Western powers (and China) engage in exploitative resource extraction in the Global South, which is used by pro-Russian forces to justify their stance, though Žižek argues this does not make Russia's actions morally superior.
as “peace is always in the interest of the occupier”
The claim that calls for 'peace' from an occupying power are insincere, as peace allows the occupier to consolidate control without the friction of active resistance.
as “catastrophe can save us”
The paradoxical hope that the current geopolitical catastrophe (war, corruption) might force a political awakening and a redefinition of what Ukraine (or society) is fighting for, beyond mere survival.
The convergence of the far-right (fascist/conservative) and far-left (pacifist/anti-imperialist) on shared enemies: Western liberalism, LGBT rights, and Ukraine, often in support of Russia.
The argument that ideological beliefs (like anti-Semitism or religious fanaticism) have their own material efficiency and power, driving actions that contradict pure economic or military self-interest.
as “capitalism as a religious phenomenon”
The view that capitalism is not merely about egoistic interest but is a 'religious' system demanding radical sacrifice and the endless reproduction of capital, requiring a 'false capitalist ethics' of self-denial.
Stories he reaches for 2
When the Taliban took over Afghanistan, they made peace with China by agreeing to treat women badly in exchange for China not interfering with their treatment of Uyghur Muslims, illustrating the 'authentic multicultural' coexistence Putin supports.
“The deal was what: you Chinese allow us in Afghanistan to do what we want to treat women the way we do but we will not mess with what you are doing with Uyghur Muslims”
German left-wing politician Sahra Wagenknecht, who gave a pacifist speech against involvement in Ukraine, received an invitation from a high-ranking member of the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) the next day, showing the left-right convergence.
“Sahra Wagenknecht, gave a speech... And then you know what she got next day? Not ironically, an invitation from a high-ranking member of Alternative für Deutschland”
Works invoked 1
A text written by Žižek, attacked in Germany, arguing that while Russia colonizes Ukraine, the West is also making it 'neoeconomically... dependent' by owning its fertile land.
People invoked 10
Mao Zedong / Chinese Leadership negative
Cited as engaging in neocolonial exploitation in Zambia and making deals with the Taliban regarding Uyghur Muslims, showing that 'neocolonialism is expanding but it's everywhere.'
Charles de Gaulle positive
Cited for his resistance statement: 'No the war is not over. France did not capitulate,' rejecting the idea that peace negotiations with occupiers are valid.
Adolf Hitler negative
Referenced in the context of the 'phony war' and the Munich Pact, illustrating that 'peace' with an occupier is not true peace.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy positive
Noted as organizing an anti-corruption campaign under pressure from the Ukrainian people, who are asking 'what is the Ukraine for which we are fighting?'
Kirill I of Moscow negative
Described as an 'old KGB fellow of Putin' who proclaimed Putin the 'greatest exorcist' and frames Western Europe as the 'realm of Satanism'.
Walter Benjamin positive
Cited for the insight that capitalism is a 'religious phenomenon' involving 'radical sacrifice' rather than just egoism.
Jürgen Habermas positive
Žižek states 'we don't like each other personally' but praises Habermas's formulation that 'Ukraine must not perish' rather than 'destroy Russia'.
Sahra Wagenknecht negative
A German politician whose 'false pacifist' speech led to an invitation from the far-right AfD, exemplifying the left-right convergence.
Vladimir Putin negative
Described as exploiting an 'unholy alliance' between the Orthodox Church and Marxists; his 'authentic multicultural' vision is rejected as worse than Western imperialism.
Mentioned in the context of WWII: 'Stalin was not a democrat,' yet the alliance with him was necessary against Nazism.
Transcript 7 turns
unknown
In this video we will discuss one of the most interesting philosophers of all time. He's maybe one of the more controversial figures today. One reason why I think this talk is especially important is because what's going on on the European continent with various conflicts as what we have seen with Ukraine and Russia, and Slavoj potentially sheds some answers on the way forward. Let's listen to what Slavoj Žižek had to say. Okay, I'm sorry now
In this video we will discuss one of the most interesting philosophers of all time. He's maybe one of the more controversial figures today. One reason why I think this talk is especially important is because what's going on on the European continent with various conflicts as what we have seen with Ukraine and Russia, and Slavoj potentially sheds some answers on the way forward. Let's listen to what Slavoj Žižek had to say. Okay, I'm sorry now
Slavoj Žižek
it's serious.
it's serious.
unknown
If you allow me I
If you allow me I
Slavoj Žižek
will not try to be too long. Please, if you will feel that some things are provocative, it's on purpose, not to beleidigen you, not to hurt you, but simply to bring out the real debate because I think that on both sides, the so-called wokeness, liberal side, and so-called new fundamentalist rightists debate is less and less possible. So let me begin. I was so glad to learn that the general title of this event is Unholy Alliances because this already provides the answer to my title: only a catastrophe or what can save us. Why? Because we live in a time of unholy alliances. I will try and then we go on a free dialogue, I will try to ground this in even if it will sound sometimes funny, it's very sad and serious. I think today we really live, it's not an empty phrase, in a complex time, not complex in this empirical sense. Yes, situation is always complex, you know. So for example to make a jump towards actual situation, I am basically of course in this war pro-Ukrainian, and I hate when some of my friends tell me but you know Ukrainians are not so good, the situation is very complex. Well, the situation is always complex. World War II, it was not simply democracy against Nazism because I'm sorry Stalin was not a democrat and so on and we had to join forces. But let me directly bomb you with a great unholy alliance which Putin, not only Putin, is exploiting to the end. I know people who know people who are close to Putin. And they told me that what Putin is doing is interesting. On the one hand he relies on Orthodox Church support. The how do you call it patriarch or whatever of Orthodox Church in Russia, in Russia Kirill, he is an old KGB fellow of Putin, no? But not only that. Putin did something very interesting. He hired, hired, okay, controls a group of young leftist Marxists and they are the ones who support his otherwise almost openly fascist conservative line of argumentation, you know. Western Europe is the realm of Satanism. Kirill patriarch even proclaimed Putin the greatest exorcist of our time. And for example I watched a wonderful debate on Russian TV, I follow it, you learn a lot there, I mean about ideological madness, when somebody confronts a Putin pro-Putin figure and says but are you really sure that Ukrainians are degenerate Nazis? And the guy said okay even if you abstract, ignore all other things, they allowed a pride parade in Kyiv. Like the greatest horror you can imagine. But so what are the Marxists doing, Marxists? They're providing, be careful to this other line of argument which is: we are fighting for all the third world people against the imperialist, neocolonialist, whatever Western dominance. And the sad thing is how these two axes, first anti-gay LGBT Western decadence and the other like Western imperialism and so on, they get together. This is a catastrophe. That's the first unholy alliance. Read in your newspapers, it happened a day or two ago, in in Uganda the parliament passed a terrifying law that if you are caught in homosexual relation it's not just you are a little bit ostracized, you can even get death penalty, but at least years of of prison and all that. And then when a Western journalist protected, protested—this happened two days ago—a a member of Ugandan parliament told him: you are either with us supporting our anti-gay legislation or you are with the Western world. You see, this is a terrifying unholy alliance that you address third world nations but at the same time playing this sexually conservative anti-gay rights anti-LGBT+ and so on logic. And so can you imagine for so-called, I hate the term but I will use it as an abbreviation, for so-called non-binary people, you know what's the bad news? That to fight for gay rights and all this is perceived in many countries as part of Western Western imperialism. This this alliance had to be broken somehow. The now I go to another example of this unholy alliance. It happened I think maybe you know more like two weeks ago or three when there were big pro-freedom pro-peace demonstrations in Berlin and in Dresden and so on. I mean I almost cried, it's so sad. A part of Die Linke Partei in Deutschland, Sahra Wagenknecht, gave a speech, all this false pacifist stuff, why should we get involved this is not our war, blah blah blah. And then you know what she got next day? Not ironically, an invitation from a high-ranking member of Alternative für Deutschland. But you speak like us, like join us and so on. And this is not a joke. This is now happening in my own country in Slovenia, in England, in United States and so on that the pro-Russian attitude is adopted by extreme left and extreme right. I noticed that this pro-sympathy for Russia argument has exactly the same structure. Did you notice that there are three arguments. First is generally pacifist. Wars are madness, we shouldn't give arms because as a general wisdom if you give arms you only prolong the conflict. This is I think a terrifying notion. Because at the same time these pacifists claim but now there is a situation more or less how do you call it stalemate stable position on front to push for peace. Yes but how did we arrive at this position? By supporting Ukraine. Can you imagine what would have happened there without? And then I draw a comparison for which I got much hatred that I draw a parallel between today's peaceniks and some crazy communists at the beginning of World War II when on the west they had that phony war who claimed this is imperialist conflict we should stay neutral and fraternize with German German soldiers this is not our war and so on and so on. So the first reasoning is this abstract pacifist. I disagree with it not because I like war, but I think it's absolutely clear that Russia is engaged in a long-term geopolitical rearrangement and it's clear not by any sinister hermeneutics but they say it the Russian that they want to go on. Moldova, now they officially claim to have real peace we have to push the borders of Poland a little bit to the west. We already have Georgia and Gruziya, we already we already had Crimea and so on. So I think the that's the paradox I accept that yes we shouldn't aim at destroying Russia. That's unacceptable. But Habermas, Jürgen, who we don't like each other personally but he put it very nicely almost a year ago where he says we shouldn't speak the language of destroy Russia but simply negatively Ukraine must not perish. It's in our interest especially again in view of this more and more crazy directly male chauvinist ideological foundation which is Western Europe is the rain of Satan, unholy orgies and all that and all that and all that stuff. Now this here again there is unfortunately a moment of truth that the West is still engaged many times in some kind of neocolonial or postcolonial exploitation. But my answer to this is double. First do you think that China is any better? I don't know what our media report but do you know that when Chinese buy some resources some mines in I think it was Zambia when they bought them there was a local rebellion because the local workers there wanted monthly salary of It was too much Chinese brought their own start people who were ready to work for a little bit over per month and so on. So neocolonialism is expanding but it's but it's everywhere. I just wanted to pause there for a second and comment a little bit on this what he said. I think this is totally unacceptable if we think about big countries like China if they have this kind of exploitative you know tactics. Have our countries and our leaders been too naive about various countries relationships, you know just thinking about what happened with I think it was Germany and Russia, you know the Gazprom pipeline and now, you know, so okay we will continue the video. Second thing that makes this alliance between left and Putin unholy is I don't know what's the logic ah yes another thing sorry. The first argument we want peace peace at any price and usually in my country in Slovenia then the politicians who follow this line add something very cynical they say every war has to end up with negotiations and compromise. And my answer to them is ah really then we were taught wrong. You remember in '45 there were negotiations and pact with Hitler? No it wasn't. There was a clear defeat. So so again this general pacifist stance has to be rejected on behalf of real peace itself. Remember one thing that I repeat all the time: peace is always in the interest of the occupier. I believe I'm not anti-Semitic I'm totally pro-Jewish. But on the West Bank Israel is colonizing it. And when Israel says we want peace there I believe them because peace means they can occupy it in peace, you know. Of course. Even Germans when they occupied France in '39 were they sincerely for peace? Of course they were because peace means we can occupy it. That's why General de Gaulle, you know what was his great statement which founded resistance: No the war is not over. France did not capitulate. So I reject this general line. Then the second line of defense is what I already mentioned: the situation is complex. Nobody is clear there. I know I will not bore you now with it but I can give you some once I enumerated them some to points of mistake stupidity committed by Ukrainians. But
will not try to be too long. Please, if you will feel that some things are provocative, it's on purpose, not to beleidigen you, not to hurt you, but simply to bring out the real debate because I think that on both sides, the so-called wokeness, liberal side, and so-called new fundamentalist rightists debate is less and less possible. So let me begin. I was so glad to learn that the general title of this event is Unholy Alliances because this already provides the answer to my title: only a catastrophe or what can save us. Why? Because we live in a time of unholy alliances. I will try and then we go on a free dialogue, I will try to ground this in even if it will sound sometimes funny, it's very sad and serious. I think today we really live, it's not an empty phrase, in a complex time, not complex in this empirical sense. Yes, situation is always complex, you know. So for example to make a jump towards actual situation, I am basically of course in this war pro-Ukrainian, and I hate when some of my friends tell me but you know Ukrainians are not so good, the situation is very complex. Well, the situation is always complex. World War II, it was not simply democracy against Nazism because I'm sorry Stalin was not a democrat and so on and we had to join forces. But let me directly bomb you with a great unholy alliance which Putin, not only Putin, is exploiting to the end. I know people who know people who are close to Putin. And they told me that what Putin is doing is interesting. On the one hand he relies on Orthodox Church support. The how do you call it patriarch or whatever of Orthodox Church in Russia, in Russia Kirill, he is an old KGB fellow of Putin, no? But not only that. Putin did something very interesting. He hired, hired, okay, controls a group of young leftist Marxists and they are the ones who support his otherwise almost openly fascist conservative line of argumentation, you know. Western Europe is the realm of Satanism. Kirill patriarch even proclaimed Putin the greatest exorcist of our time. And for example I watched a wonderful debate on Russian TV, I follow it, you learn a lot there, I mean about ideological madness, when somebody confronts a Putin pro-Putin figure and says but are you really sure that Ukrainians are degenerate Nazis? And the guy said okay even if you abstract, ignore all other things, they allowed a pride parade in Kyiv. Like the greatest horror you can imagine. But so what are the Marxists doing, Marxists? They're providing, be careful to this other line of argument which is: we are fighting for all the third world people against the imperialist, neocolonialist, whatever Western dominance. And the sad thing is how these two axes, first anti-gay LGBT Western decadence and the other like Western imperialism and so on, they get together. This is a catastrophe. That's the first unholy alliance. Read in your newspapers, it happened a day or two ago, in in Uganda the parliament passed a terrifying law that if you are caught in homosexual relation it's not just you are a little bit ostracized, you can even get death penalty, but at least years of of prison and all that. And then when a Western journalist protected, protested—this happened two days ago—a a member of Ugandan parliament told him: you are either with us supporting our anti-gay legislation or you are with the Western world. You see, this is a terrifying unholy alliance that you address third world nations but at the same time playing this sexually conservative anti-gay rights anti-LGBT+ and so on logic. And so can you imagine for so-called, I hate the term but I will use it as an abbreviation, for so-called non-binary people, you know what's the bad news? That to fight for gay rights and all this is perceived in many countries as part of Western Western imperialism. This this alliance had to be broken somehow. The now I go to another example of this unholy alliance. It happened I think maybe you know more like two weeks ago or three when there were big pro-freedom pro-peace demonstrations in Berlin and in Dresden and so on. I mean I almost cried, it's so sad. A part of Die Linke Partei in Deutschland, Sahra Wagenknecht, gave a speech, all this false pacifist stuff, why should we get involved this is not our war, blah blah blah. And then you know what she got next day? Not ironically, an invitation from a high-ranking member of Alternative für Deutschland. But you speak like us, like join us and so on. And this is not a joke. This is now happening in my own country in Slovenia, in England, in United States and so on that the pro-Russian attitude is adopted by extreme left and extreme right. I noticed that this pro-sympathy for Russia argument has exactly the same structure. Did you notice that there are three arguments. First is generally pacifist. Wars are madness, we shouldn't give arms because as a general wisdom if you give arms you only prolong the conflict. This is I think a terrifying notion. Because at the same time these pacifists claim but now there is a situation more or less how do you call it stalemate stable position on front to push for peace. Yes but how did we arrive at this position? By supporting Ukraine. Can you imagine what would have happened there without? And then I draw a comparison for which I got much hatred that I draw a parallel between today's peaceniks and some crazy communists at the beginning of World War II when on the west they had that phony war who claimed this is imperialist conflict we should stay neutral and fraternize with German German soldiers this is not our war and so on and so on. So the first reasoning is this abstract pacifist. I disagree with it not because I like war, but I think it's absolutely clear that Russia is engaged in a long-term geopolitical rearrangement and it's clear not by any sinister hermeneutics but they say it the Russian that they want to go on. Moldova, now they officially claim to have real peace we have to push the borders of Poland a little bit to the west. We already have Georgia and Gruziya, we already we already had Crimea and so on. So I think the that's the paradox I accept that yes we shouldn't aim at destroying Russia. That's unacceptable. But Habermas, Jürgen, who we don't like each other personally but he put it very nicely almost a year ago where he says we shouldn't speak the language of destroy Russia but simply negatively Ukraine must not perish. It's in our interest especially again in view of this more and more crazy directly male chauvinist ideological foundation which is Western Europe is the rain of Satan, unholy orgies and all that and all that and all that stuff. Now this here again there is unfortunately a moment of truth that the West is still engaged many times in some kind of neocolonial or postcolonial exploitation. But my answer to this is double. First do you think that China is any better? I don't know what our media report but do you know that when Chinese buy some resources some mines in I think it was Zambia when they bought them there was a local rebellion because the local workers there wanted monthly salary of It was too much Chinese brought their own start people who were ready to work for a little bit over per month and so on. So neocolonialism is expanding but it's but it's everywhere. I just wanted to pause there for a second and comment a little bit on this what he said. I think this is totally unacceptable if we think about big countries like China if they have this kind of exploitative you know tactics. Have our countries and our leaders been too naive about various countries relationships, you know just thinking about what happened with I think it was Germany and Russia, you know the Gazprom pipeline and now, you know, so okay we will continue the video. Second thing that makes this alliance between left and Putin unholy is I don't know what's the logic ah yes another thing sorry. The first argument we want peace peace at any price and usually in my country in Slovenia then the politicians who follow this line add something very cynical they say every war has to end up with negotiations and compromise. And my answer to them is ah really then we were taught wrong. You remember in '45 there were negotiations and pact with Hitler? No it wasn't. There was a clear defeat. So so again this general pacifist stance has to be rejected on behalf of real peace itself. Remember one thing that I repeat all the time: peace is always in the interest of the occupier. I believe I'm not anti-Semitic I'm totally pro-Jewish. But on the West Bank Israel is colonizing it. And when Israel says we want peace there I believe them because peace means they can occupy it in peace, you know. Of course. Even Germans when they occupied France in '39 were they sincerely for peace? Of course they were because peace means we can occupy it. That's why General de Gaulle, you know what was his great statement which founded resistance: No the war is not over. France did not capitulate. So I reject this general line. Then the second line of defense is what I already mentioned: the situation is complex. Nobody is clear there. I know I will not bore you now with it but I can give you some once I enumerated them some to points of mistake stupidity committed by Ukrainians. But
unknown
sorry this is like condemning and we should for example the Allied attack in March '45 I think on Dresden which was totally unnecessary militarily or for example the Allied bombing of Hamburg with those terrible storms. Why? Because as parents of my friends in Hamburg told me you know what they did the Allies they were obsessed with the idea that it's more important to break the morale of the working class than to destroy industry so they focus their bombings on working class suburbs and
sorry this is like condemning and we should for example the Allied attack in March '45 I think on Dresden which was totally unnecessary militarily or for example the Allied bombing of Hamburg with those terrible storms. Why? Because as parents of my friends in Hamburg told me you know what they did the Allies they were obsessed with the idea that it's more important to break the morale of the working class than to destroy industry so they focus their bombings on working class suburbs and
Slavoj Žižek
they left all the great villas and so on and so on. But nonetheless this doesn't change the fact who was right. So often complexity is an excuse. And the third argument is a vulgar pragmatic one. It's it's not our war why should we because of two crazy nations fighting on the edge of Europe why should we pay more for electricity and so on and so on. I find again I find this this logic terrifying. It's true what my friends are saying some pro-Russians that the conflict in Ukraine is a conflict between two visions of the world. But their interpretation is it's Western imperialist vision and authentic multicultural vision of of of of coexistence and so on of different both. I don't like the coexistence that Putin stands for, you know where you get a model of this coexistence. You remember when Taliban took over. They immediately made peace with China. The deal was what: you Chinese allow us in Afghanistan to do what we want to treat women the way we do but we will not mess with what you are doing with Uyghur Muslims in your country. It tells a lot if you look at who are Russia's direct allies today: Iran, North Korea and so on, Afghanistan even. It tells you a lot about how and this is a horrible thing to accept but yes world imperialism and so on and so on but my God can't we accept that in spite of all the horrors of Western imperialism what Putin stands for is nonetheless worse. And now I come to first time I return to my title: catastrophe can save us. You know that the latest news I got from my friends in Ukraine give a little bit of hope. Ukraine no doubt was an extremely corrupted country and so on with all the oligarchs. But do you know that now the left is awakening slowly there. They said organizing themselves: wait a minute half even more of the oligarchs, I don't know how it is in Austria. For example many of them came to Slovenia and close to Austrian border Radenska a big spa. They simply rented for months the biggest luxurious hotel and so on and people in Ukraine are asking we are doing the fighting they're doing that. It's under their pressure that Zelenskyy is now is now organizing this anti-corruption campaign. He knows that people are not simply fighting. They are raising the crucial question which is: but what is the Ukraine for which we are fighting? Will it be the same extremely corrupt oligarch system? And that's why I wrote a text for which I was attacked maybe I don't know if it appeared in Germany with the title Ukraine between Two Colonizations. Yes Russia wants to colonize it. But what do you think the West is doing? Do you know that they have in the south that chernozem the black earth allegedly the most fertile best in the world. But do you know that one-third of this best earth in the world is already owned by American agricultural corporations. Do you know that there is all the time pressure also from the West on Ukraine that it should become neoeconomically at least dependent on the West. My hope is that now maybe something will come out of it maybe not that Ukraine will begin to awaken you know to ask the question again again: not just free Ukraine but what kind of Ukraine. So another thing then people tell me and I come again to this unholy alliances and so on other people are telling me but these are just words. Okay Putin talks against Satanism world domination but he really wants just a piece of land there a little bit. No sorry this is a big philosophical even mistakes. Ideology is never just ideology. It has its own power you pay the price for it. Look at the Nazis. The standard Marx explanation is anti-Semitism was just an Ersatz for Klassenkampf really they wanted to keep capitalism Nazis and so on. Yeah but the result was nonetheless millions of death and so on and ideology gets its own efficiency. Like I don't know why this anecdote stuck so deeply in my mind: when in '44 Germany was withdrawing from Greek islands they noticed that on one island they left Jews. And in that crazy situation where they needed every soldier they sent a military boat back to get those Jews. This didn't help them militarily in any way. So again I don't buy this story it's really just about material interests. No ideology is to be taken seriously. My next conclusion here to provoke you a little bit with philosophy. This is why I'm sick and tired of this critique of capitalism that it's egoist we care only for our interests. No the problem of capitalism is as Walter Benjamin knew that it's a religious phenomenon religious in the sense of a radical sacrifice. A true fanatic capitalist he doesn't enjoy good life. He is ready to work all the time fanatically so that capital reproduces itself. No we need today more egotism. We need to ask not what about the fate of living on Earth but my God how will I and my children live in in years from now if we go on with this destruction of nature. No we should appeal to good egotism against this false capitalist ethics. So I don't know what you think about this kind of unholy alliance that Slavoj was talking about but it is very worrying not to say the least looking what's happening in different countries. It's also very worrying that we have so many kind of radical groups or kind of weird ideas floating in the political landscape and some questions are not being addressed at all and you know as you probably have known by now many European countries are struggling financially and many people are questioning if the government is interfering too much on the individuals we are taking away too much liberty too many freedoms say just thinking about the war on drugs and how could that connect to this story? To have the talk what kind of society do we really want to live in? Is this really a democracy that we are living in that is sustaining these questions and more need to be addressed if we're gonna have a sustainable
they left all the great villas and so on and so on. But nonetheless this doesn't change the fact who was right. So often complexity is an excuse. And the third argument is a vulgar pragmatic one. It's it's not our war why should we because of two crazy nations fighting on the edge of Europe why should we pay more for electricity and so on and so on. I find again I find this this logic terrifying. It's true what my friends are saying some pro-Russians that the conflict in Ukraine is a conflict between two visions of the world. But their interpretation is it's Western imperialist vision and authentic multicultural vision of of of of coexistence and so on of different both. I don't like the coexistence that Putin stands for, you know where you get a model of this coexistence. You remember when Taliban took over. They immediately made peace with China. The deal was what: you Chinese allow us in Afghanistan to do what we want to treat women the way we do but we will not mess with what you are doing with Uyghur Muslims in your country. It tells a lot if you look at who are Russia's direct allies today: Iran, North Korea and so on, Afghanistan even. It tells you a lot about how and this is a horrible thing to accept but yes world imperialism and so on and so on but my God can't we accept that in spite of all the horrors of Western imperialism what Putin stands for is nonetheless worse. And now I come to first time I return to my title: catastrophe can save us. You know that the latest news I got from my friends in Ukraine give a little bit of hope. Ukraine no doubt was an extremely corrupted country and so on with all the oligarchs. But do you know that now the left is awakening slowly there. They said organizing themselves: wait a minute half even more of the oligarchs, I don't know how it is in Austria. For example many of them came to Slovenia and close to Austrian border Radenska a big spa. They simply rented for months the biggest luxurious hotel and so on and people in Ukraine are asking we are doing the fighting they're doing that. It's under their pressure that Zelenskyy is now is now organizing this anti-corruption campaign. He knows that people are not simply fighting. They are raising the crucial question which is: but what is the Ukraine for which we are fighting? Will it be the same extremely corrupt oligarch system? And that's why I wrote a text for which I was attacked maybe I don't know if it appeared in Germany with the title Ukraine between Two Colonizations. Yes Russia wants to colonize it. But what do you think the West is doing? Do you know that they have in the south that chernozem the black earth allegedly the most fertile best in the world. But do you know that one-third of this best earth in the world is already owned by American agricultural corporations. Do you know that there is all the time pressure also from the West on Ukraine that it should become neoeconomically at least dependent on the West. My hope is that now maybe something will come out of it maybe not that Ukraine will begin to awaken you know to ask the question again again: not just free Ukraine but what kind of Ukraine. So another thing then people tell me and I come again to this unholy alliances and so on other people are telling me but these are just words. Okay Putin talks against Satanism world domination but he really wants just a piece of land there a little bit. No sorry this is a big philosophical even mistakes. Ideology is never just ideology. It has its own power you pay the price for it. Look at the Nazis. The standard Marx explanation is anti-Semitism was just an Ersatz for Klassenkampf really they wanted to keep capitalism Nazis and so on. Yeah but the result was nonetheless millions of death and so on and ideology gets its own efficiency. Like I don't know why this anecdote stuck so deeply in my mind: when in '44 Germany was withdrawing from Greek islands they noticed that on one island they left Jews. And in that crazy situation where they needed every soldier they sent a military boat back to get those Jews. This didn't help them militarily in any way. So again I don't buy this story it's really just about material interests. No ideology is to be taken seriously. My next conclusion here to provoke you a little bit with philosophy. This is why I'm sick and tired of this critique of capitalism that it's egoist we care only for our interests. No the problem of capitalism is as Walter Benjamin knew that it's a religious phenomenon religious in the sense of a radical sacrifice. A true fanatic capitalist he doesn't enjoy good life. He is ready to work all the time fanatically so that capital reproduces itself. No we need today more egotism. We need to ask not what about the fate of living on Earth but my God how will I and my children live in in years from now if we go on with this destruction of nature. No we should appeal to good egotism against this false capitalist ethics. So I don't know what you think about this kind of unholy alliance that Slavoj was talking about but it is very worrying not to say the least looking what's happening in different countries. It's also very worrying that we have so many kind of radical groups or kind of weird ideas floating in the political landscape and some questions are not being addressed at all and you know as you probably have known by now many European countries are struggling financially and many people are questioning if the government is interfering too much on the individuals we are taking away too much liberty too many freedoms say just thinking about the war on drugs and how could that connect to this story? To have the talk what kind of society do we really want to live in? Is this really a democracy that we are living in that is sustaining these questions and more need to be addressed if we're gonna have a sustainable
unknown
peace and end the starvation and all the misery that's going on in the world. But somehow it seems like politics has become like some kind of entertainment news where the readers and viewers on certain established media platforms are being kind of misled and journalists and politicians are even giving wrong facts and in an order to sabotage for an opponent instead of having a serious debate. Isn't this maybe a threat to democracy in itself? And if certain subjects cannot even be talked about on state-owned news channels? I don't know what you think, I would love to know your opinions and yeah what should your country do to face some of these issues? This was it for today, thanks for watching, have a great day, see ya.
peace and end the starvation and all the misery that's going on in the world. But somehow it seems like politics has become like some kind of entertainment news where the readers and viewers on certain established media platforms are being kind of misled and journalists and politicians are even giving wrong facts and in an order to sabotage for an opponent instead of having a serious debate. Isn't this maybe a threat to democracy in itself? And if certain subjects cannot even be talked about on state-owned news channels? I don't know what you think, I would love to know your opinions and yeah what should your country do to face some of these issues? This was it for today, thanks for watching, have a great day, see ya.