Why Radical Politics Needs Philosophy? A Masterclass With Slavoj Zizek. Day 2

Žižek opens by mocking the German state's official denial of antisemitism, contrasting it with the more subtle, rumor-based antisemitism in other contexts. He highlights the absurdity of blaming immigrants for antisemitic sentiments when such sentiments are embedded in official state policy, framing this as a key example of ideological hypocrisy. Žižek critiques the liberal notion that totalitarian figures are 'heroes' who do the 'dirty work' so others can sleep peacefully, using examples from A Few Good Men, the Holocaust, and Trujillo’s massacre of Haitians. He argues that these figures are not ethical heroes but are driven by an inability to confront the 'Real' of social antagonism. He further analyzes Heidegger’s antisemitism through the Black Notebooks, arguing that Heidegger’s philosophy inherently excludes Jews as 'homeless' calculators who disrupt authentic rootedness. Žižek analyzes Martin Heidegger’s antisemitism, arguing that Heidegger conflates the metaphysical stance of modern technological nihilism with the Jewish people, while positing Germans as the only authentic metaphysical people. He critiques attempts to save Heidegger by appealing to his ontological distinction, showing how Heidegger views the Holocaust as the Jews’ self-annihilation via their own technological logic. Žižek contrasts this with the actual horror of extermination camps and explores the deep spirituality of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions, concluding that modern global capitalism merges technological exploitation with rooted cultural identity, rendering any search for unspoiled origins (like the Nazis’ Tibet expeditions) futile. Žižek analyzes the theological-political logic of 'Next year in Jerusalem,' contrasting empirical and transcendental interpretations to warn against the 'founding crime' of ethnic cleansing. He critiques Habermasian universal ethics, Derrida’s 'democracy to come,' and deep ecology’s spiritualization of nature, arguing instead for nature’s absolute indifference. He concludes by reinterpreting Wittgenstein’s Tractatus to argue that ethical truths (like dignity) must be shown, not spoken, via a spontaneous act that bypasses the Big Other. Žižek responds to questions on cancel culture, AI, shame, and Chinese politics. He argues cancel culture is exclusionary despite its inclusive rhetoric, using the enunciation/enunciated distinction. He posits that human speech uniquely displays meaning through failure, contrasting this with AI's error-correction. He redefines shame as 'too much' (vulgar/traumatic) rather than lack, citing Pfaller. Finally, he critiques Chinese political transparency, praising the opaque, non-elite selection of leaders as a necessary democratic feature, referencing Hegel's monarch and the jury.