Slavoj Žižek über Philosophie und Raclette
Interview · Canal9 | Kanal9 ·
2026-08 · 0:17:50 · 2,135 words
philosophy-generaltechnology-ai-cyberspaceecology-climatedemocracygeopolitics-wareveryday-lifecapitalism
A short Canal9 interview recorded at the European Graduate School in Saas-Fee. Žižek argues that philosophy is needed more than ever because today's crises, artificial intelligence, ecological catastrophe, war, are problems we do not yet know how to define, and criticizes the pragmatization of universities that leaves problem-definition to those in power. He praises Switzerland's anonymous, functioning power structure and referenda as a model, argues liberal democracy may be too slow for coming emergencies, and defends Europe against the fashionable charge of Eurocentrism. The conversation ends in his 'private perversions': the 15-minute city, anti-tourism in Venice and Jerusalem, and a theory of raclette as repackaged poor people's food.
every located moment in this recording, click one to read it
The ideas in it 10
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
The first step of serious ecological politics is to drop the image of nature as a good mother we disturbed: nature is in itself a big catastrophe, our oil and coal being the residue of mega-catastrophes before us.
Reversing Marx's eleventh thesis: the twentieth century tried to change the world too fast without understanding it; the time is now to interpret the world again.
Philosophy's task is not to solve given problems but to see that the way a problem is formulated is itself part of the problem, those in power want to define problems and have academics merely propose solutions.
His definition of true free thinking: not saying whatever you want, but thinking that questions whether the way it perceives a problem is part of the problem.
Switzerland's model: nobody abroad knows its ministers, yet the power structure simply functions without charismatic leaders, combined with referenda, a model he holds up against leader-centred politics.
The paradoxical coordination he thinks today's global problems demand: more global coordination (ecology, AI regulation) and simultaneously more local autonomy.
He inverts the fashionable accusation: when Trump, Putin and postcolonial critics all converge on hating Europe, this signals that Europe contains something global capitalism experiences as a threat.
His ideal city: everything reachable in fifteen minutes, cinema first, bookstores, hospital, big cities recomposed as combinations of local townships.
His self-described provocation for his secret dream: a power efficient enough to act fast in emergencies, but with the popular feedback that China lacks.
A Swiss friend's definition of the Swiss that he elevates into a formula for today: even with money, act like poor people with money.
Works invoked 1
Theses on Feuerbach essay
Engages the eleventh thesis directly and inverts it: the twentieth century changed the world without understanding it; now is the time to interpret again.
People invoked 3
Donald Trump negative
Cited alongside Putin as haters of Europe, evidence that Europe threatens the existing global order.
Vladimir Putin negative
Cited alongside Trump as haters of Europe.
Karl Marx positive
Invokes the eleventh thesis on Feuerbach in order to reverse it: philosophers tried to change the world too fast; the time is now to interpret it again.
What it argues
philosophy as problem-definition, not problem-solvingthe pragmatization of academiaanonymous power and direct democracy in Switzerlandemergency politics and the limits of liberal democracyEurope as a threat to global capitalismlocalism and the 15-minute cityeveryday life against the tourist spectaclefood and class origins of taste
Dialectical moves 4
“Maybe the lesson of the 20th century is that we tried to change the world too fast without really understanding it. The time is now to interpret the world again.”
Inverts Marx's eleventh thesis on Feuerbach: interpretation, not change, is today's revolutionary task.
“Nature is in itself a big catastrophe — our main sources of energy are the outcome of mega natural catastrophes before we were here.”
Ecology grounded not in harmony but in catastrophe: the ecological attitude begins by dropping 'nature'.
“The way we formulate a problem is in itself problematic — it's part of the problem.”
The philosophical act is displaced from solving problems to seeing the problem in the problem's own framing.
“You are not rich — you are poor people with a lot of money.”
Wealth inverted into an attitude: the virtue is not having money but retaining the poor person's relation to it.
Claims 9
asserts
Philosophy is needed today more than ever because our crises — artificial intelligence, ecological catastrophe, war — are problems we do not yet know how to define.the role of philosophy
asserts
Old ethical models, religious and Enlightenment alike, no longer provide orientation; only philosophy can.ethics after tradition
rejects
The demand that academics merely propose solutions to problems defined by those in power must be refused; the first duty is to ask whether the questions are right.the pragmatization of academia
asserts
Serious ecological politics begins by abandoning the image of nature as a caring mother; nature is itself catastrophic.ecology
reframes
The lesson of the twentieth century is that we tried to change the world too fast without understanding it; the time is now to interpret the world again.Marx's eleventh thesis on Feuerbach
asserts
Traditional liberal democracy is not efficient enough for the fast, radical decisions coming emergencies will demand; the task is a power that acts fast but keeps popular feedback, which China lacks.democracy under emergency
asserts
Switzerland's anonymous, functioning power structure combined with referenda is a model to follow.Switzerland as political model
asserts
The convergence of opposed ideologies — Trump, Putin, postcolonial critique — on hating Europe signals that Europe contains something global capitalism feels as a threat.Europe and Eurocentrism
asserts
Today's problems are global and demand stronger global coordination together with more local autonomy.global governance
Quotes 7
“We tried to change the world too fast without really understanding it. The time is now to interpret the world again.”Slavoj Žižek · reversing Thesis 11
“Nature is in itself a big catastrophe.”Slavoj Žižek · ecology without nature
“The way we formulate a problem is in itself problematic. It's part of the problem.”Slavoj Žižek · philosophy as problem-definition
“My secret dream, if you ask me, is a provocation. Stalinism with a human face.”Slavoj Žižek · efficient power with popular feedback
“There is something in Europe which the existing global capitalism feels as a threat.”Slavoj Žižek · defense of Europe
“You are not rich, you are poor people with a lot of money.”Slavoj Žižek · the Swiss formula
“Even if you have money, we have to act like poor people with money.”Slavoj Žižek · wealth as attitude
Transcript 13 turns
Slavoj Žižek
I'm stupid. Okay, okay, okay. Okay. Läuft! Sorry, I look at him. You don't exist. I ignore you.
I'm stupid. Okay, okay, okay. Okay. Läuft! Sorry, I look at him. You don't exist. I ignore you.
Interviewer (Canal9)
Okay, Slavoj Žižek, you are a philosopher. Why do you need a philosopher today? And what does a philosopher do?
Okay, Slavoj Žižek, you are a philosopher. Why do you need a philosopher today? And what does a philosopher do?
Slavoj Žižek
We need today philosophy more than ever. Because we live in a critical time where we don't have just to solve problems. We even don't know how to define these problems. Look at some of these problems. Artificial intelligence. We don't know what it is, how it will affect our being human. What can artificial intelligence do? What it cannot do? These are philosophical problems. look at look at environmental crisis it confronts us with basic problems it's not just let's analyze nature how not to hurt it and so on we have to rethink things what is nature the first thing to do is sorry it's okay I go I will begin this sentence against is this me it's not me for sure yes I don't have a page right sorry it's glucose is too low no problem let's go on what is nature we should the first step towards serious ecology I think ecological politics is to get rid of nature as a good mother taking care only we humans destroyed it nature is in itself a big catastrophe are we aware that our main sources of energy oil coal are the outcome of mega natural catastrophes before we were here Even war. Why war? Is war imminent to our society? Why do we secretly even enjoy wars? These are philosophical questions because you know what philosophy does. It doesn't just solve problems. It permits us to see where. The way we formulate a problem is in itself problematic. It's part of the problem. For example, if you say artificial intelligence, excellent, we don't have to do anything, machines will do everything to us, it will be new welfare, will it be, how will it be manipulated, and so on. These are not technical questions. So again, precisely because we live in an era where, to be blunt, old traditional ethical models, religious and traditional enlightenment, no longer work. They don't allow us to find new orientation. Only philosophy can do it. Look at abortion. It's a problem when is a human being already a human being and so on. You must make decisions which are philosophical, basically. So I think today, if the 20th century was the time for science and industrial and social development, now it's the time for philosophy. Or as a leftist, I'll say what we have to do to annoy other leftists. You know, this Marxist thesis 11 on Feuerbach, people only, philosophers only interpreted the world, we have to change it. I think that maybe the lesson of the 20th century is that we tried to change the world too fast without really understanding it. The time is now to interpret the world again.
We need today philosophy more than ever. Because we live in a critical time where we don't have just to solve problems. We even don't know how to define these problems. Look at some of these problems. Artificial intelligence. We don't know what it is, how it will affect our being human. What can artificial intelligence do? What it cannot do? These are philosophical problems. look at look at environmental crisis it confronts us with basic problems it's not just let's analyze nature how not to hurt it and so on we have to rethink things what is nature the first thing to do is sorry it's okay I go I will begin this sentence against is this me it's not me for sure yes I don't have a page right sorry it's glucose is too low no problem let's go on what is nature we should the first step towards serious ecology I think ecological politics is to get rid of nature as a good mother taking care only we humans destroyed it nature is in itself a big catastrophe are we aware that our main sources of energy oil coal are the outcome of mega natural catastrophes before we were here Even war. Why war? Is war imminent to our society? Why do we secretly even enjoy wars? These are philosophical questions because you know what philosophy does. It doesn't just solve problems. It permits us to see where. The way we formulate a problem is in itself problematic. It's part of the problem. For example, if you say artificial intelligence, excellent, we don't have to do anything, machines will do everything to us, it will be new welfare, will it be, how will it be manipulated, and so on. These are not technical questions. So again, precisely because we live in an era where, to be blunt, old traditional ethical models, religious and traditional enlightenment, no longer work. They don't allow us to find new orientation. Only philosophy can do it. Look at abortion. It's a problem when is a human being already a human being and so on. You must make decisions which are philosophical, basically. So I think today, if the 20th century was the time for science and industrial and social development, now it's the time for philosophy. Or as a leftist, I'll say what we have to do to annoy other leftists. You know, this Marxist thesis 11 on Feuerbach, people only, philosophers only interpreted the world, we have to change it. I think that maybe the lesson of the 20th century is that we tried to change the world too fast without really understanding it. The time is now to interpret the world again.
Interviewer (Canal9)
You write books, you do that, and you always have time to come here to Saas-Fee. Why is it so important to teach here in Saas-Fee?
You write books, you do that, and you always have time to come here to Saas-Fee. Why is it so important to teach here in Saas-Fee?
Slavoj Žižek
This is a crucial question. Because I think the saddest thing that is happening today is that the official academic institutions, universities, are more and more getting, how should I call it, pragmatically oriented. You know, that's why the less and less authorities, even people like philosophy, pure humanity, say who needs that? We have concrete problems. We have problems to solve how to stop global warming and so on. Who needs philosophy? But the problem here is that those in power want to define the problem. And they want us, academics, just to propose solutions. But as I already said, our first duty is to see, are we even asking the right questions to redefine the problem? That's what those in power don't like. So I don't know how it is in Switzerland, but in my country, Slovenia, in United States, in England, there is a global hatred of philosophical thinking. where the problem is not only the way we usually defined it, the problem is how we perceive the problem should be changed our basic approach. And this is why institutions like this Saas-Fee seminar are crucial. A truly free thinking, not in an idealist way, you say whatever you want, but simply true thinking, thinking which reflects its own presupposition. I perceive a problem. What if the way I perceive a problem is part of the problem, not a way out? Only in institutions independent of the official academic set of institutions, only places like Saas-Fee are places of true thinking and they are more and more rare today. So be glad that you have in Switzerland, which I like as a land. I will tell you why. People think I meant this as a criticism of Switzerland, but I like it. Look, you are a land where maybe you know it, but we, other Europeans, who is your prime minister? Who is your minister? We don't know it. It's a wonderful model of power structure which just functions. But without any charismatic leaders, I'm not saying this is always good. I'm well aware that you have some half-anonymous committees or centers which really decide. But I think as a model, this more anonymous, efficient power, and at the same time reliance on referenda, what is the plural of referendums, is a model to follow because I'm very much a pessimist here. I think we are coming close to a time when radical, fast decisions will be necessary. Imagine just a new Fukushima or fires that are burning now. You don't have time to compare or make a contest within different options. You have to act now. I am afraid that for this traditional liberal democracy is not efficient enough. The only option we have today, it works, but up to a point is China, where they have the market, blah, blah, but if necessary, the state acts. But the problem with China is that it's nonetheless too authoritarian in the sense that they don't get feedback from the people. I think that's the big task today. How to organize a power which will be more global, Europe united. The problems that we approach today are not local. Take my God, take ecological catastrophe. It's not Spain. It's all around Europe, fires and so on. not to mention about warming storms and so on. Our problems are global. Take artificial intelligence. It doesn't matter what laws one state accepts, if the neighbor will do it then even more discreetly. We are, I believe, in a paradoxical coordination of stronger global power, but at the same time more local autonomy. And I think Switzerland and Europe as such shouldn't feel guilty. You know, it's fashionable today to say Eurocentrism is the origin of all evils. Let's think who is saying this. Trump and Putin both hate Europe. Africans hate Europe. We are guilty for everything. Latin America, Europe colonialism, Far East, Eurocentrism the worst. Isn't this suspicious? when even if they are opposing ideologies, they all focus on Europe. This is a clear sign that there is something in Europe which the existing global capitalism feels as a threat. I'm not a utopian.
This is a crucial question. Because I think the saddest thing that is happening today is that the official academic institutions, universities, are more and more getting, how should I call it, pragmatically oriented. You know, that's why the less and less authorities, even people like philosophy, pure humanity, say who needs that? We have concrete problems. We have problems to solve how to stop global warming and so on. Who needs philosophy? But the problem here is that those in power want to define the problem. And they want us, academics, just to propose solutions. But as I already said, our first duty is to see, are we even asking the right questions to redefine the problem? That's what those in power don't like. So I don't know how it is in Switzerland, but in my country, Slovenia, in United States, in England, there is a global hatred of philosophical thinking. where the problem is not only the way we usually defined it, the problem is how we perceive the problem should be changed our basic approach. And this is why institutions like this Saas-Fee seminar are crucial. A truly free thinking, not in an idealist way, you say whatever you want, but simply true thinking, thinking which reflects its own presupposition. I perceive a problem. What if the way I perceive a problem is part of the problem, not a way out? Only in institutions independent of the official academic set of institutions, only places like Saas-Fee are places of true thinking and they are more and more rare today. So be glad that you have in Switzerland, which I like as a land. I will tell you why. People think I meant this as a criticism of Switzerland, but I like it. Look, you are a land where maybe you know it, but we, other Europeans, who is your prime minister? Who is your minister? We don't know it. It's a wonderful model of power structure which just functions. But without any charismatic leaders, I'm not saying this is always good. I'm well aware that you have some half-anonymous committees or centers which really decide. But I think as a model, this more anonymous, efficient power, and at the same time reliance on referenda, what is the plural of referendums, is a model to follow because I'm very much a pessimist here. I think we are coming close to a time when radical, fast decisions will be necessary. Imagine just a new Fukushima or fires that are burning now. You don't have time to compare or make a contest within different options. You have to act now. I am afraid that for this traditional liberal democracy is not efficient enough. The only option we have today, it works, but up to a point is China, where they have the market, blah, blah, but if necessary, the state acts. But the problem with China is that it's nonetheless too authoritarian in the sense that they don't get feedback from the people. I think that's the big task today. How to organize a power which will be more global, Europe united. The problems that we approach today are not local. Take my God, take ecological catastrophe. It's not Spain. It's all around Europe, fires and so on. not to mention about warming storms and so on. Our problems are global. Take artificial intelligence. It doesn't matter what laws one state accepts, if the neighbor will do it then even more discreetly. We are, I believe, in a paradoxical coordination of stronger global power, but at the same time more local autonomy. And I think Switzerland and Europe as such shouldn't feel guilty. You know, it's fashionable today to say Eurocentrism is the origin of all evils. Let's think who is saying this. Trump and Putin both hate Europe. Africans hate Europe. We are guilty for everything. Latin America, Europe colonialism, Far East, Eurocentrism the worst. Isn't this suspicious? when even if they are opposing ideologies, they all focus on Europe. This is a clear sign that there is something in Europe which the existing global capitalism feels as a threat. I'm not a utopian.
Slavoj Žižek
I don't... But my secret dream, if you ask me, is a provocation. Stalinism with a human face. My ideal city would be, and the tendency is, A small city, maybe a little bit bigger. No, just public transport and maybe taxis, small electric cars. What's so bad about this? I like the concept. How is it called? They have a term. 15-minute centers where everything you can reach in 15 minutes. Cinema, my priority. Bookstores, hospital is there and so on. and even nice big cities are organized like that. In New York, I usually stay around Washington Square. I stay there with a friend and I never even use a subway. Everything is there. Hospital is on 8th Street. Cinemas are there, Perth Multiplex on 10th Street, more artistic art cinemas to good stores. Everything is there. this is my idea I'm not saying you shouldn't travel I'm saying that it's nice to stay if it's a big city it should be composed of local townships as it were combination of local townships
I don't... But my secret dream, if you ask me, is a provocation. Stalinism with a human face. My ideal city would be, and the tendency is, A small city, maybe a little bit bigger. No, just public transport and maybe taxis, small electric cars. What's so bad about this? I like the concept. How is it called? They have a term. 15-minute centers where everything you can reach in 15 minutes. Cinema, my priority. Bookstores, hospital is there and so on. and even nice big cities are organized like that. In New York, I usually stay around Washington Square. I stay there with a friend and I never even use a subway. Everything is there. Hospital is on 8th Street. Cinemas are there, Perth Multiplex on 10th Street, more artistic art cinemas to good stores. Everything is there. this is my idea I'm not saying you shouldn't travel I'm saying that it's nice to stay if it's a big city it should be composed of local townships as it were combination of local townships
Interviewer (Canal9)
thank you very much for this interesting talk and we go I didn't want to go to the end I don't know how it works to say ah maybe are you still shooting
thank you very much for this interesting talk and we go I didn't want to go to the end I don't know how it works to say ah maybe are you still shooting
Slavoj Žižek
maybe a model for this in Switzerland would be don't you already play with this a little bit you where we are in in this how do you call it such a Valaiser Republic you know a kind of a local cultural identity not full self sufficiency but you feel here nonetheless a community you are not just drowned in Switzerland. You should be a model here.
maybe a model for this in Switzerland would be don't you already play with this a little bit you where we are in in this how do you call it such a Valaiser Republic you know a kind of a local cultural identity not full self sufficiency but you feel here nonetheless a community you are not just drowned in Switzerland. You should be a model here.
Interviewer (Canal9)
But you feel it also when you do the courses here or the summer school, it has an influence that you're here in the nature or not at all?
But you feel it also when you do the courses here or the summer school, it has an influence that you're here in the nature or not at all?
Slavoj Žižek
Well, here we enter my private perversions. You know what's my ideal? To be in a big fashionable city or tourist place and just don't, not visit the famous places. I was two years ago in my wife in Venedig, Venezia. We got some special offer, a nice hotel on Canal, and it was nice weather. We stayed almost all of the day in the hotel. She was watching movies on TV. I was reading and writing, and the idea was, you want to see Venice? Okay. Look through the window. You know. I like this. I was It was my best visit when the situation was not so tense some 15, 20 years ago in Jerusalem. Forget about that, whatever you call it, street of suffering for crime, blah, blah, all that. I like to see there are a couple of streets where now settlers are taking everything, even eastern Jerusalem. but at that I'm sure one side is Palestinian of the street, the other was Jewish. I just sat there in a cafeteria and observed the unwritten rules. How? Because they cannot just fight each other all the time. How they nonetheless somehow survive. You politely ignore each other and so on. This was, this everyday experience, sitting in a cafeteria, observing daily life, was for me much more interesting than all the big historical stuff, you know. That's how I also, for example, in Geneva, now this will be a treason to you, Deutschsprachigen. But I almost prefer as a city, I must say, unfortunately, Geneva to Zürich. Zürich is already a big city. Geneva, the center, Altstadt is very small and so on. And you can feel there like you are in a local community, you know. So here in Zürich, you can't walk. You look at the window. Yeah, but I still like nonetheless, because precisely there is nothing famous, you know. And I have very sadistic self-identification. Like, we don't see it here. You have, you know, those old houses preserved as a tourist attraction, probably wooden houses on just big sticks. And then there is just beneath the house a big stone flat. Why? Probably to prevent rats or animals to enter the house, no? I immediately identify myself as a rat. Oh, my God, bad for me. I wouldn't be able to enter the house. But you see, this is what I like to observe, this small everyday stuff. I like Swiss food, all this patsy or whatever stuff. You know what I like about it? What's your famous food where you just boil, boil, not boil, bake cheese with potato?
Well, here we enter my private perversions. You know what's my ideal? To be in a big fashionable city or tourist place and just don't, not visit the famous places. I was two years ago in my wife in Venedig, Venezia. We got some special offer, a nice hotel on Canal, and it was nice weather. We stayed almost all of the day in the hotel. She was watching movies on TV. I was reading and writing, and the idea was, you want to see Venice? Okay. Look through the window. You know. I like this. I was It was my best visit when the situation was not so tense some 15, 20 years ago in Jerusalem. Forget about that, whatever you call it, street of suffering for crime, blah, blah, all that. I like to see there are a couple of streets where now settlers are taking everything, even eastern Jerusalem. but at that I'm sure one side is Palestinian of the street, the other was Jewish. I just sat there in a cafeteria and observed the unwritten rules. How? Because they cannot just fight each other all the time. How they nonetheless somehow survive. You politely ignore each other and so on. This was, this everyday experience, sitting in a cafeteria, observing daily life, was for me much more interesting than all the big historical stuff, you know. That's how I also, for example, in Geneva, now this will be a treason to you, Deutschsprachigen. But I almost prefer as a city, I must say, unfortunately, Geneva to Zürich. Zürich is already a big city. Geneva, the center, Altstadt is very small and so on. And you can feel there like you are in a local community, you know. So here in Zürich, you can't walk. You look at the window. Yeah, but I still like nonetheless, because precisely there is nothing famous, you know. And I have very sadistic self-identification. Like, we don't see it here. You have, you know, those old houses preserved as a tourist attraction, probably wooden houses on just big sticks. And then there is just beneath the house a big stone flat. Why? Probably to prevent rats or animals to enter the house, no? I immediately identify myself as a rat. Oh, my God, bad for me. I wouldn't be able to enter the house. But you see, this is what I like to observe, this small everyday stuff. I like Swiss food, all this patsy or whatever stuff. You know what I like about it? What's your famous food where you just boil, boil, not boil, bake cheese with potato?
Interviewer (Canal9)
Chocolate. Hello, sir? Chocolate. Yeah.
Chocolate. Hello, sir? Chocolate. Yeah.
Slavoj Žižek
You know what is so obvious? This was obviously originally poor people's food. but you know how to repackage it and send it, sell it as an exclusive food. I like this. All the good foods are for me, they have the origin in poor people's food. Like why was, now it's beaten by Italian food, why was French food so famous? Because of its sauces. You know why there was sauce and not in England? because French were historically poorer and to mask up that quality of the meat to cover it up you had all these spicy sauces strictly that was the function you know because you know what's the best definition of a Swiss friend gave it to me of you Swiss you are not rich you are poor people with a lot of money but your attitude remains that of a poor guy That's maybe a formula for today. Even if you have money, we have to act like poor people with money. You do whatever you want.
You know what is so obvious? This was obviously originally poor people's food. but you know how to repackage it and send it, sell it as an exclusive food. I like this. All the good foods are for me, they have the origin in poor people's food. Like why was, now it's beaten by Italian food, why was French food so famous? Because of its sauces. You know why there was sauce and not in England? because French were historically poorer and to mask up that quality of the meat to cover it up you had all these spicy sauces strictly that was the function you know because you know what's the best definition of a Swiss friend gave it to me of you Swiss you are not rich you are poor people with a lot of money but your attitude remains that of a poor guy That's maybe a formula for today. Even if you have money, we have to act like poor people with money. You do whatever you want.
Interviewer (Canal9)
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.