Žižek Interview on Singularity, China & the Limits of Capital
Interview · ŽIŽEK & SO ON PODCAST ·
published 2023-06-03 · 1:08:39 · 10,358 words
with Cathy Newman
the date above is when the video was uploaded, no recording date was found
technology-ai-cyberspaceideologyfascism-populismdemocracyecology-climatesubjectivitycommunism-socialismliberalism-political-correctnessgeopolitics-warrevolution-violencecapitalismcinema-art-culturehistory
Žižek analyzes the existential threat of AI and biotechnology to human subjectivity, arguing that direct brain-machine interfaces erase the gap between inner thought and external reality, leading to a loss of individuality and freedom. He then shifts to contemporary politics, critiquing the normalization of ecological catastrophe and the Trump presidency, positing Trump as a symptom of liberal elite failure rather than the cause, and advocating for concrete, modest political measures over abstract moralizing. Žižek opens by defending his dual opposition to right-wing European nationalism and naïve leftist universalism on the refugee crisis, insisting geopolitical causes, Gulf-state complicity, and integration limits must be discussed openly. He then diagnoses the broader crisis of the traditional left, its loss of the working class to nationalist populism (Le Pen, Trump, PiS Poland), the tragedy of Syriza, and the absence of any positive alternative program, and calls for a new leftist international rather than a retreat to the nation-state. The excerpt develops his typology of violence (subjective vs. objective/anonymous), critiques the post-truth public sphere while rejecting nostalgia for a pre-existing authentic one, and proposes disorder as political opportunity. It closes with personal reflections on Chinese cinema (Zhang Yimou), Liu Cixin's Three-Body Problem as a Maoist order/disorder allegory, and the cultural importance of detective novels and popular commercial film.
every located moment in this recording, click one to read it
The ideas in it 21
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
as “gap between inside and outside”
The fundamental structure of human subjectivity where thoughts remain internal and uncontrollable; Žižek argues AI/brain-computer interfaces are destroying this last point of resistance.
as “buying your conscience”
The ideological function of 'ethical consumption' (e.g., cappuccino with charity proceeds) where one buys not just a product but their own ecological and humanitarian clear conscience.
The ideological mechanism by which a catastrophe (like war or ecological crisis) is talked about constantly but stripped of its traumatic reality, making it seem normal or even beneficial.
as “solidarity through catastrophe”
The tragic insight from catastrophe films (like Independence Day) that the only way to produce social solidarity in current society is through the threat of total annihilation.
as “false populist idea”
The populist fantasy that ordinary people can spontaneously distinguish between 'creative capitalists' and a 'corrupted establishment,' ignoring that they often desire to join the establishment.
as “symptomal healing”
A medical metaphor for political criticism that eases the pain (criticizing Trump) without treating the underlying cause (the failure of the liberal-leftist elite).
The ideological bind that forces a choice between right-wing nationalist anti-refugee politics and uncritical leftist humanitarian open-borders universalism; title of Žižek's book on the refugee crisis.
Žižek's dismissive label for the uncritical reflex to welcome all refugees while refusing to engage with geopolitical and economic root causes or the selective indifference of wealthy Arab states.
Žižek's satirical label for the absurd leftist fantasy of importing refugees as a substitute revolutionary proletariat to do the revolution that a 'corrupted' European working class will not perform.
as “proletariat / true proletarian”
Classical Marxist term invoked ironically: some leftists treat refugees as an imported revolutionary working class, which Žižek calls 'madness' akin to outsourcing the revolutionary subject.
His metaphor for the old stable polarity of moderate conservatives and moderate left alternating in power, now replaced by a new deadlock between establishment liberal multiculturalism and nationalist populism.
as “new leftist international”
His proposed alternative to both nationalist retreat and existing liberal globalism: a coordinated transnational left capable of confronting global capital at its own level.
as “the place of power is empty”
His formulation of the radical democratic principle that no one holds an automatic right to power; attributed here as Europe's key historical invention.
as “post-truth / post-factual era”
Oxford Dictionary's 2016 word of the year, which Žižek accepts as a real phenomenon but denies is historically novel, Cold War public spheres were equally distorted, warning against nostalgic fantasies of a prior authentic public discourse.
Direct, visible violence in which identifiable agents hurt other people, the only form ordinarily perceived in everyday experience.
as “objective anonymous violence”
Structural violence of capitalist crises, mass job losses, financial ruin, that shatters lives without a visible perpetrator, contrasted with subjective violence.
Violence aimed not at transforming the system but at preventing its disintegration; Žižek takes Hitler as the paradigm, extremely bloody but ultimately defensive of capitalist order.
Sloterdijk's figure, deployed by Žižek, for the protective bubble of developed-capitalist life, inside which external violence registers only as momentary shocking intrusions rather than daily reality.
Invoked to caution that political predictions can themselves shape the futures they describe, complicating claims to neutral forecasting.
as “interregnum / when the old is dying but the new is not yet born”
Gramsci's Prison Notebooks formula for a transitional period of political instability in which morbid symptoms and monstrous entities fill the gap; Žižek applies it to the current crisis of capitalism and the left.
His injunction not to fear disorder but to recognize in it a chance for authentic left reorganization, without claiming any Marxist certainty that good will result, illustrated by Trump's election as traumatic but potentially generative disruption.
Stories he reaches for 10
Žižek jokes he would sell his (already dead) mother into slavery to see a sequel to V for Vendetta, then pivots: what actually interests him is everyday life the morning after the revolution, not the heroic moment of uprising.
“I usually say that I'm ready to sell my mother into slavery, okay she is dead it's no great thing, to see a film called 'V for Vendetta Part [2]'.”
Žižek recounts a secret experiment where a rat's neurons controlling movement are connected to a remote controller, allowing the operator to direct the rat like a toy car, illustrating the horror of external control without subjective awareness.
“you press a button and the rat is attached to your remote controller and the rat becomes like a remote control toy car”
Žižek describes how Stephen Hawking’s brain is connected to electrodes to move his wheelchair by thought, illustrating the disappearance of the gap between thought and reality.
“Stephen Hawking... connect with some electrodes to a computer his brain and he just has to think strongly forward and his wheelchair moves forward”
Žižek repeatedly asked Occupy Wall Street protesters whether they wanted Keynesian capitalism, nationalizations, or self-management and received no coherent answer, illustrating the left's lack of a positive alternative program beyond critique.
“Do you want just a little bit more honest capitalism? Do you want some Keynesian state capitalism? Do you want radical nationalizations? Do you want some kind of a self-management?”
Syriza, once the hope of the European left, became the most faithful executor of brutal austerity policy once in government, demonstrating that the nation-state cannot withstand global capital alone and vindicating the call for a new leftist international.
“Syriza, the hope of the left, is now the most faithful executioner of the most brutal austerity policy.”
Liu Cixin's novel contrasts Earth's regular orbital rhythm (order) with the chaotic three-sun system (disorder); Žižek reads this as a science-fictional embodiment of the Maoist order/disorder dialectic and plans to open his next philosophical book with it.
“It's such a nice opposition Maoist order/disorder. Because our earth has regular rhythm order, that planet has disorder: three suns you don't know how.”
Žižek cites Gramsci's Prison Notebooks passage on the interregnum, when the old order is dying but the new is not yet born, morbid symptoms and monstrous entities fill the gap, and applies it directly to the current political moment.
“When the old is dying but the new is not yet born, this is the monster where horrible entities come. We are in that era.”
Žižek recalls the siege of Sarajevo, noting that people initially thought it couldn't happen in late 20th-century Europe, but once it did, it was 'instantly renormalized,' paralleling the normalization of ecological crisis.
“Sarajevo capital of Bosnia. They knew the war is coming... the moment it happened it was as you said it was instantly renormalized”
Žižek argues that Trump's vulgarities (like 'grabbing women by the pussies') helped him because ordinary people identified with his 'mistakes' as being 'one of us,' while liberal media attacks alienated them.
“Trump said something vulgar or false or stupid... ordinary people, many ordinary people felt that through Trump they were attacking them”
Hitler's massive bloodshed was paradoxically 'reactive', aimed at preserving the capitalist order from disintegration; Gandhi, wanting to break the system entirely, was in this structural sense more truly violent, even though non-bloody.
“I said Gandhi was more violent than Hitler. Because Hitler's violence was not real... it was a reactive violence. The goal of all his violence was to prevent the disintegration of capitalist order.”
Works invoked 14
V for Vendetta film
Used in a self-deprecating joke: Žižek would do anything to see a sequel, but his real philosophical interest is in the unglamorous everyday life after the revolt, not the heroic uprising itself.
Elysium film
Grouped with other catastrophe films that present a future where class distinction is connected with biogenetics, almost a race distinction.
The Hunger Games film
Cited as an example of a film showing a class society stronger than traditional capitalism, where the ruling class is genetically different, preparing the audience for a biogenetic future.
Violence book
Žižek's own book (referenced as 'a book which is even now selling very well... about violence' that 'some people attack as very problematic'); introduces the subjective / objective-anonymous violence distinction developed here. Identified as Violence: Six Sideways Reflections (2008).
Liu Cixin's science fiction novel; Žižek calls it 'fascinating' and plans to open his next philosophical book with it, reading the Earth/three-body system contrast as a Maoist order/disorder allegory.
Hero film
Zhang Yimou's 2002 wuxia epic; Žižek loves it as a 'half-Maoist' because the film is openly 'for the emperor', a visually stunning Shakespearean aristocratic drama.
Žižek's own book on the European refugee crisis; he references its title to encapsulate his dual opposition to right-wing nationalism and naïve leftist universalism.
WikiLeaks other
Supported by Žižek as a mechanism for open public debate and transparency regarding government defense agencies and AI research.
Independence Day film
Analyzed as a catastrophe film that brings a 'sad message' that solidarity is only produced through total catastrophe, and which lays the ground for biogenetic class distinctions.
Zhang Yimou's 2004 film; Žižek rates it below Hero and the early films, saying 'not so much.'
Obamacare other
Defended as a 'modest precise measure' and a concrete demand (healthcare) that achieved significant political change, contrasting with abstract leftist utopianism.
Zhang Yimou's 2006 film; ASR renders it 'Curse of the Yellow Flower.' Žižek calls it 'breathtaking.' Identified by context as the third Zhang Yimou blockbuster after Hero and House of the Flying Daggers.
The Great Wall film
Zhang Yimou's 2016 film; Žižek says it 'left me empty' and that Zhang 'lost his way.'
The Road Home film
Zhang Yimou's 1999 film; inferred from Žižek's description of 'a wonderful love story about a girl who... takes a train to visit her lover.' He misattributes the star to Gong Li (it was Zhang Ziyi). High-confidence inference based on plot and Zhang Yimou's early filmography.
People invoked 22
Franz Kafka positive
Named alongside Beckett and Platonov as one of the serious literary writers Žižek reads.
Liu Cixin positive
Žižek is immediately captivated by The Three-Body Problem and plans to open his next philosophical book with it, reading the Earth/three-body planet contrast through the Maoist order/disorder dialectic.
Mahatma Gandhi positive
Used as counterpoint to Hitler in the reactive-violence argument: Gandhi was paradoxically more 'violent' in the structural sense because he aimed to break the capitalist system rather than preserve it.
Marquis de Sade positive
Žižek paraphrases de Sade's injunction ('Frenchmen one step more if you want to be Republican') as a rhetorical template for his own exhortation that China needs a detective-novel tradition to be a real civilization.
Marine Le Pen negative
Paradigm case of the nationalist populism that addresses working-class concerns in a 'mystified' way; cited alongside Trump as proof that only the right currently speaks to ordinary people.
Named as the actress in Zhang Yimou's early love story about a girl taking a train to visit her lover; likely a memory error, that description fits The Road Home (1999), which starred Zhang Ziyi, not Gong Li.
John Oliver negative
Grouped with Stewart as political comedians whose critique of Trump is ideological and alienates ordinary people.
Stephen Hawking positive
Cited as an example of brain-computer interface technology connecting thought directly to external machines.
Jon Stewart negative
Admired professionally but criticized ideologically; Žižek argues their comedy is an 'outlet of brutal arrogance' that attacks ordinary people.
Donald Trump negative
Viewed not just as a political figure but as a 'symptom' of the failure of the liberal-leftist elite; his vulgarities are analyzed as identifying points for his voters.
Garry Kasparov positive
Used as an example of human expertise being surpassed by AI, leading to the devaluation of the activity (chess).
Andrei Platonov positive
Soviet Russian writer named alongside Beckett and Kafka as one of the serious literary authors Žižek reads. ASR transcribes the name as 'Platonov'; high-confidence identification as Andrei Platonov (1899–1951).
Fredric Jameson positive
Described as a 'good friend' and 'American Marxist' whose emphasis on catastrophe films bringing a 'sad message of solidarity' Žižek deeply agrees with.
Adolf Hitler negative
Paradigm of 'reactive violence': despite extreme bloodshed, his goal was to prevent the disintegration of the capitalist order, making his violence ultimately defensive rather than transformative.
Bernie Sanders positive
Praised for mobilizing ordinary people with anxieties who were not addressed by the multicultural liberal left; seen as important for awakening an authentic left.
Julian Assange positive
Žižek explicitly supports Assange's Wikileaks as a means to ensure public debate and transparency regarding dangerous technologies.
Samuel Beckett positive
Named as one of the few serious literary writers Žižek reads and admires, alongside Kafka and Platonov.
Peter Sloterdijk positive
Žižek praises 'a wonderful book' in which Sloterdijk describes developed-capitalist life as a protective 'cupola'; deploys the concept to explain why Western audiences experience external violence only as exceptional shocks.
Zhang Yimou positive
Žižek praises his early modest love-story films and Hero (as a 'half-Maoist' political spectacle); is lukewarm on House of the Flying Daggers; admires the visual beauty of Curse of the Golden Flower; finds The Great Wall emotionally empty and thinks Zhang 'lost his way' in his later big-budget work.
Barack Obama positive
Defended against leftist disappointment; his Obamacare is cited as a 'modest precise measure' that achieved something almost unacceptable for the right-wing establishment.
Antonio Gramsci positive
Žižek quotes the famous Prison Notebooks interregnum passage ('when the old is dying but the new is not yet born, monsters emerge') to frame the current political crisis.
Immanuel Kant positive
Cited as the original theorist of the public sphere; Žižek aligns himself with this tradition, calling himself 'an old-fashioned European metaphysician.'
Transcript 127 turns
unknown
大家好，我是财新世界说驻欧洲的记者宁卉。我今天在中欧国家斯洛文尼亚，在当代最活跃的公共知识分子，被称为西方最危险的哲学家齐泽克的家里。接下来一个多小时的时间里，我会试着跟齐泽克聊会天，聊天的内容将会包括雾霾、难民、消费主义、当下的欧洲的意识形态、特朗普、暴力等等看起来天马行空的话题，但我相信他的观点会让你觉得耳目一新。Thanks Mr. Žižek to take the time with us. Let's start by talking about artificial intelligence. Since these movies and books have threatened us for too long that human will no longer be on the top of the food chain. There's a recent case, a Google developed computer program AlphaGo secretly beaten up the world top human players online. Go is considered traditionally quite difficult board game for AI to master. It's a sign for AI to soon outsmart human. A very related discussion is the immortality, the idea that genetic engineering, you know, regenerative medicine, nanotechnology will speed up the evolution of human race, but just for the very few people. So the idea is that future will not be in the hands of human as we know, but in the hands of a thinking machine or a mutant human race or elites. What is your take on that? Do you think that's really going to happen? I think
大家好，我是财新世界说驻欧洲的记者宁卉。我今天在中欧国家斯洛文尼亚，在当代最活跃的公共知识分子，被称为西方最危险的哲学家齐泽克的家里。接下来一个多小时的时间里，我会试着跟齐泽克聊会天，聊天的内容将会包括雾霾、难民、消费主义、当下的欧洲的意识形态、特朗普、暴力等等看起来天马行空的话题，但我相信他的观点会让你觉得耳目一新。Thanks Mr. Žižek to take the time with us. Let's start by talking about artificial intelligence. Since these movies and books have threatened us for too long that human will no longer be on the top of the food chain. There's a recent case, a Google developed computer program AlphaGo secretly beaten up the world top human players online. Go is considered traditionally quite difficult board game for AI to master. It's a sign for AI to soon outsmart human. A very related discussion is the immortality, the idea that genetic engineering, you know, regenerative medicine, nanotechnology will speed up the evolution of human race, but just for the very few people. So the idea is that future will not be in the hands of human as we know, but in the hands of a thinking machine or a mutant human race or elites. What is your take on that? Do you think that's really going to happen? I think
Slavoj Žižek
that although often researchers, not real researchers, but popularizers of artificial intelligence exaggerate, but I think that something extremely important is happening here. Incidentally in Europe, the same thing happened over a decade ago. Maybe some of our listeners remember this. You know when a computer beat in chess Garry Kasparov, it was over. Chess is now no longer as popular as... for example years ago, when I was younger I remember in our newspapers the sports section says sports and chess. It was regularly reported and so on. Now chess is out.
that although often researchers, not real researchers, but popularizers of artificial intelligence exaggerate, but I think that something extremely important is happening here. Incidentally in Europe, the same thing happened over a decade ago. Maybe some of our listeners remember this. You know when a computer beat in chess Garry Kasparov, it was over. Chess is now no longer as popular as... for example years ago, when I was younger I remember in our newspapers the sports section says sports and chess. It was regularly reported and so on. Now chess is out.
unknown
So we reject a game that AI could master? Yeah. But why is that? Yeah,
So we reject a game that AI could master? Yeah. But why is that? Yeah,
Slavoj Žižek
because you are somehow aware that you are playing a second violin. That machine beats...
because you are somehow aware that you are playing a second violin. That machine beats...
unknown
But then if machine beats us on everything, would us then become an inferior class? This
But then if machine beats us on everything, would us then become an inferior class? This
Slavoj Žižek
is a big question. You
is a big question. You
unknown
know which problems
know which problems
Slavoj Žižek
I see if I may a little bit go a little bit more into theoretical water. First, you said very well "for some people" who will become immortal. So my fear is not simply we humans will become immortal or some will, some will not. It will affect all of us. But what I fear is that it will affect in a different way different classes. The rich one will build themselves into super-beings, privileged, while they will also begin to genetically modify ordinary people to be ideal workers and
I see if I may a little bit go a little bit more into theoretical water. First, you said very well "for some people" who will become immortal. So my fear is not simply we humans will become immortal or some will, some will not. It will affect all of us. But what I fear is that it will affect in a different way different classes. The rich one will build themselves into super-beings, privileged, while they will also begin to genetically modify ordinary people to be ideal workers and
unknown
so on. I think that's the...
so on. I think that's the...
Slavoj Žižek
you know, is that some people will control, the other will be controlled. And it's already happening, it's very... you know what I especially fear? And with my connections I know some people who know people who work for these mysterious government defense agencies... even military strategy is moving in that direction. It's no longer just atomic bombs and chemical weapons. It's different ways to manipulate this. But okay, let's go, sorry, let's go to basic problems. The problems I see are this one. I think that even philosophically, by philosophically I mean at the basic level what is happening with the human being today. This is a profound change. You know at what level? What is the very base of our sense of individual responsibility and freedom? That you are free in your thoughts. My thoughts are here, reality is out there. You can beat me, you can torture me whatever, but you cannot control what I think. Humanity is here. Yeah, yeah. Not there. Yeah, it's not only here, but this is the last point of resistance. But what we know it's happening now is that this gap that separates inside from outside is slowly disappearing. Sorry, for example I have some friends who are doing this brain science research and they told me you know to what extent they can already directly connect our brains, what we think, to external machines. For example you know Stephen Hawking, crippled. He no longer even has to move his finger. They already can connect with some electrodes to a computer his brain and he just has to think strongly forward and his wheelchair moves forward. So it is happening. It is happening, but you know what's the danger? Now this sounds wonderful. We are becoming like gods. I think about something, it happens in reality. Usually we think only God can do things, he thinks it happens. But you know what goes out goes in. This means that in the other direction you can also do it. That you can... and I was told that it's... they don't even want to make it public but it's tremendous progress here. For example a friend of mine, neuronal biologist, showed me some terrifying movies. You know that they already can do this with a rat? They connect her neurons which control movement and then the rat runs around in a big cage. Then you press a button and the rat is attached to your remote controller and the rat becomes like a remote control toy car. Oh really? You direct it and it runs. Sure enough. And now comes the big question. They don't want to make it public, they're very discreet. The big problem for them is this one. Let's imagine that we do this to a human being. I am here in this apartment, I walk around freely and then all of a sudden somebody presses the button and can direct me. How will I experience it? Will I experience it as if oh my god I'm no longer myself? Would you want to experience, would you
you know, is that some people will control, the other will be controlled. And it's already happening, it's very... you know what I especially fear? And with my connections I know some people who know people who work for these mysterious government defense agencies... even military strategy is moving in that direction. It's no longer just atomic bombs and chemical weapons. It's different ways to manipulate this. But okay, let's go, sorry, let's go to basic problems. The problems I see are this one. I think that even philosophically, by philosophically I mean at the basic level what is happening with the human being today. This is a profound change. You know at what level? What is the very base of our sense of individual responsibility and freedom? That you are free in your thoughts. My thoughts are here, reality is out there. You can beat me, you can torture me whatever, but you cannot control what I think. Humanity is here. Yeah, yeah. Not there. Yeah, it's not only here, but this is the last point of resistance. But what we know it's happening now is that this gap that separates inside from outside is slowly disappearing. Sorry, for example I have some friends who are doing this brain science research and they told me you know to what extent they can already directly connect our brains, what we think, to external machines. For example you know Stephen Hawking, crippled. He no longer even has to move his finger. They already can connect with some electrodes to a computer his brain and he just has to think strongly forward and his wheelchair moves forward. So it is happening. It is happening, but you know what's the danger? Now this sounds wonderful. We are becoming like gods. I think about something, it happens in reality. Usually we think only God can do things, he thinks it happens. But you know what goes out goes in. This means that in the other direction you can also do it. That you can... and I was told that it's... they don't even want to make it public but it's tremendous progress here. For example a friend of mine, neuronal biologist, showed me some terrifying movies. You know that they already can do this with a rat? They connect her neurons which control movement and then the rat runs around in a big cage. Then you press a button and the rat is attached to your remote controller and the rat becomes like a remote control toy car. Oh really? You direct it and it runs. Sure enough. And now comes the big question. They don't want to make it public, they're very discreet. The big problem for them is this one. Let's imagine that we do this to a human being. I am here in this apartment, I walk around freely and then all of a sudden somebody presses the button and can direct me. How will I experience it? Will I experience it as if oh my god I'm no longer myself? Would you want to experience, would you
unknown
want to be the subject?
want to be the subject?
Slavoj Žižek
Yes absolutely, because this would have interested me. And they told me discreetly that they already did this experiment and that the result is very sad. Okay. You know what is the result? You don't know that you are controlled. You still think that you are freely wandering around and so on. So this development of the... when the distinction between inside and outside... also with all this genetic intervention and pharmacomeans, pills and so on which control your mental images. Are we aware that all our usual pedagogy is becoming obsolete? Let's say you are a good girl, good in the sense of diligent hard-working, and I am lazy. And we compete for a job some difficult examination. You work crazy day and night. What if I through some chemical means enhance my abilities and just somehow do it in a some, I don't know, you already can get some lessons through sleep I was told while you sleep your brain... and then I win over you without any effort. Are we aware what this means? All our pedagogy, even ethics. Like what if for example let's say you are not ethical. They are already developing pills which will sharpen your ethical... you know what they already have, I love this, they already have religious pills. The idea is that they locate where your religious experience happens and then... now you don't believe in God, no problem [unintelligible] and this is still not yet developed but basically we are already approaching this. So I am neither a pessimist here, I'm not saying this is the end of humanity. I'm also not crazy optimist
Yes absolutely, because this would have interested me. And they told me discreetly that they already did this experiment and that the result is very sad. Okay. You know what is the result? You don't know that you are controlled. You still think that you are freely wandering around and so on. So this development of the... when the distinction between inside and outside... also with all this genetic intervention and pharmacomeans, pills and so on which control your mental images. Are we aware that all our usual pedagogy is becoming obsolete? Let's say you are a good girl, good in the sense of diligent hard-working, and I am lazy. And we compete for a job some difficult examination. You work crazy day and night. What if I through some chemical means enhance my abilities and just somehow do it in a some, I don't know, you already can get some lessons through sleep I was told while you sleep your brain... and then I win over you without any effort. Are we aware what this means? All our pedagogy, even ethics. Like what if for example let's say you are not ethical. They are already developing pills which will sharpen your ethical... you know what they already have, I love this, they already have religious pills. The idea is that they locate where your religious experience happens and then... now you don't believe in God, no problem [unintelligible] and this is still not yet developed but basically we are already approaching this. So I am neither a pessimist here, I'm not saying this is the end of humanity. I'm also not crazy optimist
unknown
like Ray Kurzweil. But I'm saying something
like Ray Kurzweil. But I'm saying something
Slavoj Žižek
tremendous new is happening and we have to openly confront it. We are avoiding this problem. Either they both are idiots, this futurologist optimist or singularity new collective consciousness. But are they aware that if this singularity will happen we will lose our individuality? With this we will lose our critical thinking and so on. Yeah that's really... So it's a mega problem. I know that's why I want to start with a mega problem in the future and drag us back... Probably it is something that shouldn't be left neither to big corporations, capital, nor to state. This should be... the only rule here is this is why I support Julian Assange's Wikileaks. We have to be open public about it. We have to debate... Yeah I'm gonna bring up the next subject which I think is related somehow, which is the an emerging economic class in China, the middle class in China. Which a lot have been said about them, they're a lot of them. People disagree whether it's million or million... Some people even say million, but okay let's say. Yeah yeah. Well I want to point out one aspect of emerging class which is they play this role of furious consumers with very serious trust issues especially on food, baby product, or anything affect their bodies. So they really mistrust this kind of product. And instead they turn to Western brands for safety. So their milk powder for infants has to be from Netherlands or New Zealand... I know. And but do you think how does that work? They don't think this is a lifestyle issue, they think this is a very basic security issue. But is it really the case? Can we really trust brands... First I cannot judge about all I can tell you is that... now I don't have a deep philosophical answer just maybe two things that may interest your public. First, you know up to a point I wouldn't make fun of them, mock them. I understand them because you did have some big problems with milk powder and so on. There was a big scandal a couple of years ago when they discovered that the big Western especially milk chocolate product, even washing powder it was Nestlé, whatever, Persil, the big brand, they discovered that they are making a special lower quality product for our market
tremendous new is happening and we have to openly confront it. We are avoiding this problem. Either they both are idiots, this futurologist optimist or singularity new collective consciousness. But are they aware that if this singularity will happen we will lose our individuality? With this we will lose our critical thinking and so on. Yeah that's really... So it's a mega problem. I know that's why I want to start with a mega problem in the future and drag us back... Probably it is something that shouldn't be left neither to big corporations, capital, nor to state. This should be... the only rule here is this is why I support Julian Assange's Wikileaks. We have to be open public about it. We have to debate... Yeah I'm gonna bring up the next subject which I think is related somehow, which is the an emerging economic class in China, the middle class in China. Which a lot have been said about them, they're a lot of them. People disagree whether it's million or million... Some people even say million, but okay let's say. Yeah yeah. Well I want to point out one aspect of emerging class which is they play this role of furious consumers with very serious trust issues especially on food, baby product, or anything affect their bodies. So they really mistrust this kind of product. And instead they turn to Western brands for safety. So their milk powder for infants has to be from Netherlands or New Zealand... I know. And but do you think how does that work? They don't think this is a lifestyle issue, they think this is a very basic security issue. But is it really the case? Can we really trust brands... First I cannot judge about all I can tell you is that... now I don't have a deep philosophical answer just maybe two things that may interest your public. First, you know up to a point I wouldn't make fun of them, mock them. I understand them because you did have some big problems with milk powder and so on. There was a big scandal a couple of years ago when they discovered that the big Western especially milk chocolate product, even washing powder it was Nestlé, whatever, Persil, the big brand, they discovered that they are making a special lower quality product for our market
unknown
and they were not cheaper, they were even more expensive. Double
and they were not cheaper, they were even more expensive. Double
Slavoj Žižek
standards. So I would say don't trust Western companies here. They are very manipulative here. But do you think when people buying for safety they are not buying for lifestyle? Or... They are also, they are also. And I wrote a lot
standards. So I would say don't trust Western companies here. They are very manipulative here. But do you think when people buying for safety they are not buying for lifestyle? Or... They are also, they are also. And I wrote a lot
unknown
about it. Although I understand this panic when you have mass poisoning and so on. But safety and especially ecological awareness is, this is my old thesis, is to a large extent more a matter of ideology, lifestyle, than a matter of real quality. Why do people, this is my vulgar example, why do people like to buy organic apples? I doubt if they are really so much better. It makes you feel good. Maybe better. Maybe, but it makes you feel good, you know. Oh my god I'm doing something for Mother Nature, I'm part of a big unity of humanity, I'm doing something. Another field of this ideology is this false false support of charity. We live our rich lives and we think
about it. Although I understand this panic when you have mass poisoning and so on. But safety and especially ecological awareness is, this is my old thesis, is to a large extent more a matter of ideology, lifestyle, than a matter of real quality. Why do people, this is my vulgar example, why do people like to buy organic apples? I doubt if they are really so much better. It makes you feel good. Maybe better. Maybe, but it makes you feel good, you know. Oh my god I'm doing something for Mother Nature, I'm part of a big unity of humanity, I'm doing something. Another field of this ideology is this false false support of charity. We live our rich lives and we think
Slavoj Žižek
that if we give one percent to charity we are doing something,
that if we give one percent to charity we are doing something,
unknown
that's why something great. That's why I read, I wrote, I don't know if you have them in China... you have in China everywhere I saw them those Up or what those stores... Yeah yeah Up. But you don't do you already have in China Starbucks?
that's why something great. That's why I read, I wrote, I don't know if you have them in China... you have in China everywhere I saw them those Up or what those stores... Yeah yeah Up. But you don't do you already have in China Starbucks?
Slavoj Žižek
Yes yes lots of them. But I don't know how they work in China. But in the West they are full of this false charitable activity. You know they tell you our cappuccino is a little bit more expensive but one percent goes for Guatemala children, the other one percent goes to... and I think it's all ideology. They and they want you what you buy there it's a wonderful ultimate form of capitalism where you don't just buy you are not just a consumer in the sense of buying a product you also buy your ecological and humanitarian clear conscience. You know you pay more like... that's what I find that your ecological awareness, your humanitarian attitude also become a commodity that you buy. Exactly. You buy a little bit more for cappuccino and you can say you see I'm a good humanitarian I help the underdeveloped and so on and so on. In China
Yes yes lots of them. But I don't know how they work in China. But in the West they are full of this false charitable activity. You know they tell you our cappuccino is a little bit more expensive but one percent goes for Guatemala children, the other one percent goes to... and I think it's all ideology. They and they want you what you buy there it's a wonderful ultimate form of capitalism where you don't just buy you are not just a consumer in the sense of buying a product you also buy your ecological and humanitarian clear conscience. You know you pay more like... that's what I find that your ecological awareness, your humanitarian attitude also become a commodity that you buy. Exactly. You buy a little bit more for cappuccino and you can say you see I'm a good humanitarian I help the underdeveloped and so on and so on. In China
unknown
it's also food safety and there is one more thing: air. So
it's also food safety and there is one more thing: air. So
Slavoj Žižek
there's you know something as basic as food but for Chinese maybe difficult to buy from a foreign brand. I want to ask on that. Cause the discussion on air pollution has been heated for years and I think people slowly come to realization that it won't just simply quickly go away. And a very popular opinion nowadays is that consumerism is to be blamed. The middle class who live in the city in China should buy less, waste less and not live like their American peer, big houses and several cars. But part of the reason is that capital and the state shouldn't sacrifice economic development. That would have mean us the middle class leave the poor remain poor and not letting China come... Yeah but I have here another a couple of points to say. The first one is you know like but why should then Americans be allowed to consume and you don't? I mean this is again an argument for communism. We have to not to say like China is always accused of polluting and so on and so on but no United States are still polluting more. So first let's not blame
there's you know something as basic as food but for Chinese maybe difficult to buy from a foreign brand. I want to ask on that. Cause the discussion on air pollution has been heated for years and I think people slowly come to realization that it won't just simply quickly go away. And a very popular opinion nowadays is that consumerism is to be blamed. The middle class who live in the city in China should buy less, waste less and not live like their American peer, big houses and several cars. But part of the reason is that capital and the state shouldn't sacrifice economic development. That would have mean us the middle class leave the poor remain poor and not letting China come... Yeah but I have here another a couple of points to say. The first one is you know like but why should then Americans be allowed to consume and you don't? I mean this is again an argument for communism. We have to not to say like China is always accused of polluting and so on and so on but no United States are still polluting more. So first let's not blame
unknown
some countries
some countries
Slavoj Žižek
and so on. Second thing, I think that the result is this one. Okay you should use market as far as it works and it does work up to a point. If certain products pollute more the environment you tax them more etc and so on. That's okay. But nonetheless I think the clear thing here is that neither the market nor the state can do it alone. I think again awakened public. People should be told the truth: these are the consequences, what to do. What do you suggest them to do? I mean besides buying air cleaner. Every person in Beijing buys the air cleaner. They go out wearing masks. But they wonder what what else can they do right? In that case. Yeah on the other on the one hand I think that nonetheless this don't fall into this game which is a typical capitalist game of blaming poor ordinary people. People have the right to live with certain consumerism and so on and so on. Here simply the only
and so on. Second thing, I think that the result is this one. Okay you should use market as far as it works and it does work up to a point. If certain products pollute more the environment you tax them more etc and so on. That's okay. But nonetheless I think the clear thing here is that neither the market nor the state can do it alone. I think again awakened public. People should be told the truth: these are the consequences, what to do. What do you suggest them to do? I mean besides buying air cleaner. Every person in Beijing buys the air cleaner. They go out wearing masks. But they wonder what what else can they do right? In that case. Yeah on the other on the one hand I think that nonetheless this don't fall into this game which is a typical capitalist game of blaming poor ordinary people. People have the right to live with certain consumerism and so on and so on. Here simply the only
unknown
thing that can save us I think is a collaboration of state regulation but not state apart from public opinion. State and the awakened public opinion. And they should impose regulations. This is the problem of our commons. We all are breathing air and so on. And this is another limit of capital. One limit is we already
thing that can save us I think is a collaboration of state regulation but not state apart from public opinion. State and the awakened public opinion. And they should impose regulations. This is the problem of our commons. We all are breathing air and so on. And this is another limit of capital. One limit is we already
Slavoj Žižek
mentioned it,
mentioned it,
unknown
one limit is biogenetics and so on. Tremendous thing are happening. People should be aware what is happening and so on. It concerns us all. The other problem is again ecology. I don't think that the state alone in some dark way will be able to regulate it. Markets have to be controlled, limited, but people ordinary people should be made subjects. I think in China for example the big problem of China from what I know was that Three Gorges Dam, you know. Yeah yeah. And I don't know what is the state of things now, how many problems, but when you engage in project
one limit is biogenetics and so on. Tremendous thing are happening. People should be aware what is happening and so on. It concerns us all. The other problem is again ecology. I don't think that the state alone in some dark way will be able to regulate it. Markets have to be controlled, limited, but people ordinary people should be made subjects. I think in China for example the big problem of China from what I know was that Three Gorges Dam, you know. Yeah yeah. And I don't know what is the state of things now, how many problems, but when you engage in project
Slavoj Žižek
like that you should have a big public debate. That's the only solution. This is my only trust although I am otherwise very skeptical about democracy. I don't I'm not saying that democracy always works. Look in Europe now. If you were to have pure democracy it would be racism, refugees would... but with ecology democracy works. I want to talk about the concept of agents by bringing the concept of catastrophe. You talk about air pollution but then it's so heavy but it's soon normalized. But then people still talk about the idea of very severe future disaster like a catastrophe. But you know what for... this is the strength of ideology in everyday life. That one way not to confront a catastrophe is to talk all the time about it but in the way we are talking it not really taking it seriously. And because then on the one hand you paint it as a catastrophe
like that you should have a big public debate. That's the only solution. This is my only trust although I am otherwise very skeptical about democracy. I don't I'm not saying that democracy always works. Look in Europe now. If you were to have pure democracy it would be racism, refugees would... but with ecology democracy works. I want to talk about the concept of agents by bringing the concept of catastrophe. You talk about air pollution but then it's so heavy but it's soon normalized. But then people still talk about the idea of very severe future disaster like a catastrophe. But you know what for... this is the strength of ideology in everyday life. That one way not to confront a catastrophe is to talk all the time about it but in the way we are talking it not really taking it seriously. And because then on the one hand you paint it as a catastrophe
unknown
but when it happens you are ready immediately to renormalize. I agree with you this concept of renormalization is crucial and I know it from my past for example you know in ex-Yugoslavia we had the terrible civil war in the early 90s and I had many friends in
but when it happens you are ready immediately to renormalize. I agree with you this concept of renormalization is crucial and I know it from my past for example you know in ex-Yugoslavia we had the terrible civil war in the early 90s and I had many friends in
Slavoj Žižek
Sarajevo capital of Bosnia. They knew the war is coming. But up to a point they just thought it cannot really happen. We are in the middle of Europe, late 20th century, we cannot have like in medieval times a big city under siege. It happened but the moment it happened it was as you said it was instantly renormalized. And now it's horrible to read how globally, I'm not talking about China, the ecological crisis is renormalized. For example now it's a catastrophe how Greenland Greenland is getting warm. But you know what I read a couple of weeks ago how it's wonderful they are growing vegetables there already... Without seeing the rest of the world. Yeah, yeah. I mean it's this renormalization and what I fear, if I jump to another level, is how with Trump's presidency the same thing will happen. First liberals were totally shocked, Trump, Hitler in power, the end, and now slowly it will get unfortunately renormalized. Let's finish this catastrophe because I want to bring up Trump right after this. I wonder if you would agree that catastrophe provides a illusion that we will face it together as equals. Absolutely. This is you know where... but at the same time it's our way to imagine the end of the world because this is a big enigma I haven't yet found a good theory of it why so many Hollywood
Sarajevo capital of Bosnia. They knew the war is coming. But up to a point they just thought it cannot really happen. We are in the middle of Europe, late 20th century, we cannot have like in medieval times a big city under siege. It happened but the moment it happened it was as you said it was instantly renormalized. And now it's horrible to read how globally, I'm not talking about China, the ecological crisis is renormalized. For example now it's a catastrophe how Greenland Greenland is getting warm. But you know what I read a couple of weeks ago how it's wonderful they are growing vegetables there already... Without seeing the rest of the world. Yeah, yeah. I mean it's this renormalization and what I fear, if I jump to another level, is how with Trump's presidency the same thing will happen. First liberals were totally shocked, Trump, Hitler in power, the end, and now slowly it will get unfortunately renormalized. Let's finish this catastrophe because I want to bring up Trump right after this. I wonder if you would agree that catastrophe provides a illusion that we will face it together as equals. Absolutely. This is you know where... but at the same time it's our way to imagine the end of the world because this is a big enigma I haven't yet found a good theory of it why so many Hollywood
Cathy Newman
blockbusters now are about catastrophe, post-catastrophic world. And I think here we almost have some kind of Hollywood Marxism. I mean they predict all a future society with strict class divisions, there are those who are in, there are those... it's
blockbusters now are about catastrophe, post-catastrophic world. And I think here we almost have some kind of Hollywood Marxism. I mean they predict all a future society with strict class divisions, there are those who are in, there are those... it's
Slavoj Žižek
a you know films like I don't know like like like Elysium, like Hunger Games. This here a class society which is much stronger than the traditional capitalist class society. Because in traditional class society we are still member of the same people with same political rights just some of us are more rich than others. But here we have literally two different classes. I think that in future if we will not have some version of communism class distinction will become connected with biogenetics, also almost a race distinction. The ruling class will be better genetically equipped, will be literally a different race. We will be already prepared after all these Hollywood movies. Maybe when the scenario comes, who knows. Yeah this is why although some people think this Hollywood movies are progressive, warning, no I think they are very ambiguous because in the way they paint this future again they lay the ground for it. But I deeply agree with your point how... and it's not only this type of catastrophe. But you know all this mega movies like Independence Day where world is under threat but they are really about solidarity. Because the message is but when there will be this type of real danger we will all become solidarity, Arabs, Jews... Independence Day is Americans leader. Yeah but for example don't forget that in you Chinese build the ships. You know those gigantic ships. Oh yes, yeah. You know. Of course you have all those tricks that you mentioned. Right. But but what I'm saying
a you know films like I don't know like like like Elysium, like Hunger Games. This here a class society which is much stronger than the traditional capitalist class society. Because in traditional class society we are still member of the same people with same political rights just some of us are more rich than others. But here we have literally two different classes. I think that in future if we will not have some version of communism class distinction will become connected with biogenetics, also almost a race distinction. The ruling class will be better genetically equipped, will be literally a different race. We will be already prepared after all these Hollywood movies. Maybe when the scenario comes, who knows. Yeah this is why although some people think this Hollywood movies are progressive, warning, no I think they are very ambiguous because in the way they paint this future again they lay the ground for it. But I deeply agree with your point how... and it's not only this type of catastrophe. But you know all this mega movies like Independence Day where world is under threat but they are really about solidarity. Because the message is but when there will be this type of real danger we will all become solidarity, Arabs, Jews... Independence Day is Americans leader. Yeah but for example don't forget that in you Chinese build the ships. You know those gigantic ships. Oh yes, yeah. You know. Of course you have all those tricks that you mentioned. Right. But but what I'm saying
Cathy Newman
is that my
is that my
Slavoj Žižek
good friend American Marxist Fredric Jameson always emphasize this how catastrophe films are bring a message of solidarity but a very sad message that the only way in our society is to produce solidarity is through a total catastrophe. Now we just talking about the catastrophe I have to bring up the Trump at this point. I mean he is in the administration just right now. I wonder if we analyze the voters mentality a bit. Do you think it's
good friend American Marxist Fredric Jameson always emphasize this how catastrophe films are bring a message of solidarity but a very sad message that the only way in our society is to produce solidarity is through a total catastrophe. Now we just talking about the catastrophe I have to bring up the Trump at this point. I mean he is in the administration just right now. I wonder if we analyze the voters mentality a bit. Do you think it's
Cathy Newman
possible that American voters cherish Trump because he is so flawed, because his vulnerability and they they want him to come back... Absolutely. You know what happens here the psych-analysis... yeah not even tennis. I think that the point is this, you know what was for me an
possible that American voters cherish Trump because he is so flawed, because his vulnerability and they they want him to come back... Absolutely. You know what happens here the psych-analysis... yeah not even tennis. I think that the point is this, you know what was for me an
Slavoj Žižek
important point. You remember weeks before the elections when Trump said something vulgar or false or stupid. Liberal media said "oh now he committed public suicide". No it helped him, yeah. And we in psychoanalysis we know this. This is how you identify with a leader: through his or her mistakes, stupidities. And the liberal media by attacking Trump in this brutal way they were ordinary people, many ordinary people felt that through Trump they were attacking them. For them these weaknesses, even vulgar stupidities of Trump... I mean most of white male people find secretly they would not admit it attractive this idea oh I can grab women by the pussies and so on. They said wonderful you see he is like one of us and so on. But so then in a way they must know he is part of the establishment. So in a way these voters don't hate establishment they just want become one or... No they here comes this false populist idea. Ordinary people distinguish spontaneously this creative capitalists from this corrupted establishment. You know that's the trick, that's the trick. As if there is some
important point. You remember weeks before the elections when Trump said something vulgar or false or stupid. Liberal media said "oh now he committed public suicide". No it helped him, yeah. And we in psychoanalysis we know this. This is how you identify with a leader: through his or her mistakes, stupidities. And the liberal media by attacking Trump in this brutal way they were ordinary people, many ordinary people felt that through Trump they were attacking them. For them these weaknesses, even vulgar stupidities of Trump... I mean most of white male people find secretly they would not admit it attractive this idea oh I can grab women by the pussies and so on. They said wonderful you see he is like one of us and so on. But so then in a way they must know he is part of the establishment. So in a way these voters don't hate establishment they just want become one or... No they here comes this false populist idea. Ordinary people distinguish spontaneously this creative capitalists from this corrupted establishment. You know that's the trick, that's the trick. As if there is some
unknown
honest capitalist class against the false corrupted establishment and so on and so on. And but but let me return
honest capitalist class against the false corrupted establishment and so on and so on. And but but let me return
Slavoj Žižek
to your previous point about how this is why and this created so much hatred against me when people asked me okay who is now which is now the predominant form of liberal ideology in United States. And I said that although I admire them you know these political comedians like John Stewart, John Oliver, I claim although I mean it's very professionally done they are mostly right but they are ideology because it's just an outlet of this brutal arrogance against Trump and through them against the ordinary people. You know it's the worst... do you know
to your previous point about how this is why and this created so much hatred against me when people asked me okay who is now which is now the predominant form of liberal ideology in United States. And I said that although I admire them you know these political comedians like John Stewart, John Oliver, I claim although I mean it's very professionally done they are mostly right but they are ideology because it's just an outlet of this brutal arrogance against Trump and through them against the ordinary people. You know it's the worst... do you know
unknown
what they avoid? The true
what they avoid? The true
Slavoj Žižek
problem with Trump is for me that he is basically a symptom. And all this criticism of Trump is for me is as in medicine,
problem with Trump is for me that he is basically a symptom. And all this criticism of Trump is for me is as in medicine,
unknown
you
you
Slavoj Žižek
know. We call something just symptom-al healing. Like you just ease the pain but it doesn't treat the causes. So you don't think it would be enough to criticize them on... No, no. Trump is just the... Exactly. Trump is just... the key point is this one: the failure of the liberal-leftist elite. They, we all know this, they lost contact with ordinary people and so on and so on. And they
know. We call something just symptom-al healing. Like you just ease the pain but it doesn't treat the causes. So you don't think it would be enough to criticize them on... No, no. Trump is just the... Exactly. Trump is just... the key point is this one: the failure of the liberal-leftist elite. They, we all know this, they lost contact with ordinary people and so on and so on. And they
unknown
went into this LGBT political correctness and so on. So I claim that's why I said something which of course I didn't mean it literally but my hope was that if Trump is elected it will maybe awaken the left. Do you still think so now? I mean... Yes, give it time. My god people told me you see you were wrong. Wait a minute the guy
went into this LGBT political correctness and so on. So I claim that's why I said something which of course I didn't mean it literally but my hope was that if Trump is elected it will maybe awaken the left. Do you still think so now? I mean... Yes, give it time. My god people told me you see you were wrong. Wait a minute the guy
Slavoj Žižek
is in power not even one week. I'm not talking I'm talking about months maybe even years. I'm talking and I think that then we are really lost. My hope is not a new communist party... But isn't it much easier for powerful people from whatever side they are to just be part of the power instead of transforming or try to, you know, have a structural change etc. Yeah but the problem is not this one. The problem is this one: to awaken a more authentic left also among ordinary people. And that's why I think Bernie Sanders is so important. He has his limitations. But you know what's the point? Till Bernie Sanders American left was mostly this multicultural single issue groups, sexual liberation, LGBT, anti-racism and so on. But Trump mobilized precisely those who did not feel addressed by American liberal left: ordinary people with their anxieties and so on and so on. And that's the only chance. Because most of the people who
is in power not even one week. I'm not talking I'm talking about months maybe even years. I'm talking and I think that then we are really lost. My hope is not a new communist party... But isn't it much easier for powerful people from whatever side they are to just be part of the power instead of transforming or try to, you know, have a structural change etc. Yeah but the problem is not this one. The problem is this one: to awaken a more authentic left also among ordinary people. And that's why I think Bernie Sanders is so important. He has his limitations. But you know what's the point? Till Bernie Sanders American left was mostly this multicultural single issue groups, sexual liberation, LGBT, anti-racism and so on. But Trump mobilized precisely those who did not feel addressed by American liberal left: ordinary people with their anxieties and so on and so on. And that's the only chance. Because most of the people who
unknown
voted for in preliminary for Sanders are people who otherwise would have voted
voted for in preliminary for Sanders are people who otherwise would have voted
unknown
for Trump, for the rightist populism. And I think that's why Hillary lost. Because many of Trump's of Sanders' voters were so disappointed by how Hillary smashed Sanders that they if
for Trump, for the rightist populism. And I think that's why Hillary lost. Because many of Trump's of Sanders' voters were so disappointed by how Hillary smashed Sanders that they if
Slavoj Žižek
not voting for Trump they abstained. They stayed at home. Do you think the recent Women's March is a way for ordinary people to express their... Not only it's not enough. It's very good thing. What I also like is that they didn't just do some abstract statements like women's rights blah blah. They made concrete demands: healthcare and so on and so on. So yes I am not a communist utopian. I'm not saying let's wait for the big revolution. No we have to begin with modest precise measures. That's why even with Obama many leftists were stupidly disappointed him. What did they expect? That Obama will introduce socialism in United... But for example remember Obamacare healthcare. Although it was a compromise but he did something which was almost unacceptable for American right-wing at least establishment opinion. They dragged him to supreme... We need more things like this: women's rights, healthcare and so on and so on, ecology and so on. Let's talk about practical measures and then bring it back to Europe on refugees. A lot of people talk about the refugees as a male issue because of the disproportion of gender among refugees. And in article you wrote last year on the Cologne attack you concluded that those young men who assaulted the women that night knows very well what they were doing and they are doing it precisely... No I even corrected my statement there. This should be interesting. You know they were talking so much about what that meant but nobody even I because I didn't
not voting for Trump they abstained. They stayed at home. Do you think the recent Women's March is a way for ordinary people to express their... Not only it's not enough. It's very good thing. What I also like is that they didn't just do some abstract statements like women's rights blah blah. They made concrete demands: healthcare and so on and so on. So yes I am not a communist utopian. I'm not saying let's wait for the big revolution. No we have to begin with modest precise measures. That's why even with Obama many leftists were stupidly disappointed him. What did they expect? That Obama will introduce socialism in United... But for example remember Obamacare healthcare. Although it was a compromise but he did something which was almost unacceptable for American right-wing at least establishment opinion. They dragged him to supreme... We need more things like this: women's rights, healthcare and so on and so on, ecology and so on. Let's talk about practical measures and then bring it back to Europe on refugees. A lot of people talk about the refugees as a male issue because of the disproportion of gender among refugees. And in article you wrote last year on the Cologne attack you concluded that those young men who assaulted the women that night knows very well what they were doing and they are doing it precisely... No I even corrected my statement there. This should be interesting. You know they were talking so much about what that meant but nobody even I because I didn't
unknown
know it either took
know it either took
Slavoj Žižek
care to look at it from their position. What does this mean? And my friends from Egypt, from when I was in Ramallah, Palestine, told me "but this is their common ritual there". That men gather in the evening on the market and it's not rape. They almost never fully rape women. But you know play with women like this in a sexist way. They just stage there a pretty common lower class collective ritual. It's part of
care to look at it from their position. What does this mean? And my friends from Egypt, from when I was in Ramallah, Palestine, told me "but this is their common ritual there". That men gather in the evening on the market and it's not rape. They almost never fully rape women. But you know play with women like this in a sexist way. They just stage there a pretty common lower class collective ritual. It's part of
unknown
their common
their common
Slavoj Žižek
life. So but what I opposed is that's why the title of my book on this is "Against the Double Blackmail". On the one hand of course I'm against this racist right-wing European nationalism. But I'm also opposed to this simplistic leftist view who
life. So but what I opposed is that's why the title of my book on this is "Against the Double Blackmail". On the one hand of course I'm against this racist right-wing European nationalism. But I'm also opposed to this simplistic leftist view who
unknown
claim that any problems with refugees are just a result of European racism and so on. But isn't it really true that
claim that any problems with refugees are just a result of European racism and so on. But isn't it really true that
Slavoj Žižek
Europe is racist? I I don't know enough but in principle in principle I would agree with it. But you know what's important for me? That's good about Canada although I don't idealize Canada. They have other problems. The way they treat their own minorities, Native Americans, Indians and Eskimos, it's horrid. But satisfaction so let's try to practically solve it. You see we should talk about all this openly. Also this is an open problem I always emphasized it that on the one hand to integrate them. But you just told me a very beautiful thing about Calais. Yeah, it's much easier and it's safer for them to stay together. Yeah but I don't think they really many of them want to be integrated. They want they want European welfare but their own way of life. Which is why it's deeply instructive if you followed this latest so-called terror attacks: Belgium, Paris. Most of the attackers were not refugees, they were second generation refugees. Their parents were already very nicely integrated there. So you see we should openly talk and
Europe is racist? I I don't know enough but in principle in principle I would agree with it. But you know what's important for me? That's good about Canada although I don't idealize Canada. They have other problems. The way they treat their own minorities, Native Americans, Indians and Eskimos, it's horrid. But satisfaction so let's try to practically solve it. You see we should talk about all this openly. Also this is an open problem I always emphasized it that on the one hand to integrate them. But you just told me a very beautiful thing about Calais. Yeah, it's much easier and it's safer for them to stay together. Yeah but I don't think they really many of them want to be integrated. They want they want European welfare but their own way of life. Which is why it's deeply instructive if you followed this latest so-called terror attacks: Belgium, Paris. Most of the attackers were not refugees, they were second generation refugees. Their parents were already very nicely integrated there. So you see we should openly talk and
unknown
rethink. Then there is another problem. It's easy to say "we Europeans should
rethink. Then there is another problem. It's easy to say "we Europeans should
Slavoj Žižek
not impose our values, we should tolerate their way of life". Okay but for example with women's right: where will you draw a line of the distinction? If you have a certain community and you have them where it's part of their way of life that in marriages still marriages are decided by parents for their girl and where things are becoming aggressive... For example I know examples from Sweden, from Netherlands, from Germany where immigrants began to attack gay parade, pride parades and so on and so on. Oh okay. Here I think we should establish some rules, you know. Because you cannot say each group its own way of life. You have to set a certain limit concerning women's rights, tolerance of other ways... and we should
not impose our values, we should tolerate their way of life". Okay but for example with women's right: where will you draw a line of the distinction? If you have a certain community and you have them where it's part of their way of life that in marriages still marriages are decided by parents for their girl and where things are becoming aggressive... For example I know examples from Sweden, from Netherlands, from Germany where immigrants began to attack gay parade, pride parades and so on and so on. Oh okay. Here I think we should establish some rules, you know. Because you cannot say each group its own way of life. You have to set a certain limit concerning women's rights, tolerance of other ways... and we should
unknown
talk about all of this openly. Yeah you know all this time when people talk about refugees as male issue I wonder... That's a very good point: where are the women? Exactly. Because they are not able to get all the way to Europe. Their mothers, their sisters will not be encouraged to get out of the extreme poverty to look for the welfare. And that's the other tragedy. Are we aware that when you get refugees usually the most active group, active also in the sense of creative
talk about all of this openly. Yeah you know all this time when people talk about refugees as male issue I wonder... That's a very good point: where are the women? Exactly. Because they are not able to get all the way to Europe. Their mothers, their sisters will not be encouraged to get out of the extreme poverty to look for the welfare. And that's the other tragedy. Are we aware that when you get refugees usually the most active group, active also in the sense of creative
Slavoj Žižek
business-oriented, escapes? It's the same paradox like I was told in the United States. You know that American Cubans, immigrants from Cuba, are now on average more wealthy than Jews. Yeah. But you know why? Because of course those more creative escape from Cuba. Okay so what will then happen? All the creative people will escape from Syria, Iraq and so on and what we will have there... so the second thing also we should talk openly about it. Look this mega shame. We have a group of when refugees their first point of escape are usually the poor Arab countries. Relatively poor: Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon. But wait a minute: just below the area of war we have a couple of mega-rich Arab countries. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Emirates. Their policy is "no refugees". Although most of the refugees are not Shia but Sunni. So they are their own. So why is this happening and so on? I mean you see what I mean. We should openly talk about all of this, not just this humanitarian mantra millions want to come to Europe and so on and why don't we receive them. I think that if we we should look at it as a geopolitical and economic problem. And solve problems at this level. What I'm most opposed to is some crazy European
business-oriented, escapes? It's the same paradox like I was told in the United States. You know that American Cubans, immigrants from Cuba, are now on average more wealthy than Jews. Yeah. But you know why? Because of course those more creative escape from Cuba. Okay so what will then happen? All the creative people will escape from Syria, Iraq and so on and what we will have there... so the second thing also we should talk openly about it. Look this mega shame. We have a group of when refugees their first point of escape are usually the poor Arab countries. Relatively poor: Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon. But wait a minute: just below the area of war we have a couple of mega-rich Arab countries. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Emirates. Their policy is "no refugees". Although most of the refugees are not Shia but Sunni. So they are their own. So why is this happening and so on? I mean you see what I mean. We should openly talk about all of this, not just this humanitarian mantra millions want to come to Europe and so on and why don't we receive them. I think that if we we should look at it as a geopolitical and economic problem. And solve problems at this level. What I'm most opposed to is some crazy European
unknown
leftists, I'm not joking, have this vision: in
leftists, I'm not joking, have this vision: in
Slavoj Žižek
Europe we need a revolution. But European working class is too corrupted, they will not do it. So with refugees we will import the true proletarian as if you know it's a crazy idea like outsourcing the revolutionary
Europe we need a revolution. But European working class is too corrupted, they will not do it. So with refugees we will import the true proletarian as if you know it's a crazy idea like outsourcing the revolutionary
unknown
agent. No "we
agent. No "we
Slavoj Žižek
want a revolution, you import the working class to do the revolution". It's madness. If this policy goes on the nationalists like Marine Le Pen and so on will... and so the key problem behind all of this I think is，and it's a tragic problem there is no easy solution. It's clear that the big loser in the last years is standard left liberal establishment. They promised welfare with justice and so on, gay rights all that, that's good. But they lost contact with this silent working class majority. And then the choice here is clear: either populism as you already said and as if you listen to Marine Le Pen or to Trump sometimes he sounds almost like radicalized Sanders. They are the only ones who openly address, of course in a mystified way, working class. I think that the tragedy is that only a more radical left, the left which openly confronts the problem of working class and so on and at the same time it should be internationalist. But then don't you think the majority of the voters are actually those who are so discontent of the situation that they will no longer be on the top of the magical mountain, they have to get out from their privileges? That's sort of their fear toward globalization. Yeah but but the good thing is that nonetheless many of them are gradually losing these privileges. And that's the miracle of Bernie Sanders. He did he Bernie Sanders is a proof that also a leftist
want a revolution, you import the working class to do the revolution". It's madness. If this policy goes on the nationalists like Marine Le Pen and so on will... and so the key problem behind all of this I think is，and it's a tragic problem there is no easy solution. It's clear that the big loser in the last years is standard left liberal establishment. They promised welfare with justice and so on, gay rights all that, that's good. But they lost contact with this silent working class majority. And then the choice here is clear: either populism as you already said and as if you listen to Marine Le Pen or to Trump sometimes he sounds almost like radicalized Sanders. They are the only ones who openly address, of course in a mystified way, working class. I think that the tragedy is that only a more radical left, the left which openly confronts the problem of working class and so on and at the same time it should be internationalist. But then don't you think the majority of the voters are actually those who are so discontent of the situation that they will no longer be on the top of the magical mountain, they have to get out from their privileges? That's sort of their fear toward globalization. Yeah but but the good thing is that nonetheless many of them are gradually losing these privileges. And that's the miracle of Bernie Sanders. He did he Bernie Sanders is a proof that also a leftist
unknown
vision can mobilize these ordinary... How would you describe today's Europe's ideology though? How would you define
vision can mobilize these ordinary... How would you describe today's Europe's ideology though? How would you define
Slavoj Žižek
it? You defined a while ago
it? You defined a while ago
unknown
that there's two realities, one at wanting to be the... No I think the tragic thing is this one. Till now, till years ago, even a little bit more, European politics had this basic almost like
that there's two realities, one at wanting to be the... No I think the tragic thing is this one. Till now, till years ago, even a little bit more, European politics had this basic almost like
Slavoj Žižek
yin-yang oscillation. You know you have moderate conservatives, moderate left, and they were replacing each other in power. Something started to happen some years ago. We have a new polarity. The big establishment capitalist party which is usually even in cultural matters left-liberal multiculturalist and this nationalist populist right. And in so far as we will be caught in this deadlock I'm a radical pessimist. Gradually because only the nationalist right is addressing the working class. This is the craziest thing of Europe now. Look. You know who at this moment is is is is enforcing measures which amount to a big transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor? Poland, the extreme right-wing government. They now they now accepted the whole set of laws: they lowered retirement they put higher they they sorry lowered the retirement age, they elevated retirement pensions how much you get, better healthcare and so on. It's incredible. No moderate left government dares to do that. On the other hand, this is the European tragedy. If you go to the south from Poland, Syriza. And this was an ingenious thing how Europe dealt with Greece. Syriza, the hope of the left, is now the most faithful executioner of the most brutal austerity policy. If we don't and you know what's the danger here? The danger is that's why part of British left was also for Brexit. The danger is some of the left thinks since European Union and international capital are global, the only way is strong nation state. I radically don't believe in it. I think this is a path to catastrophe. Because today nation state cannot survive alone, you are even more exposed, even more helpless in the face of global capital. I think the only solution to global capital is not stronger nation state but a new leftist international. For example I believe that if Sanders gets stronger in the United States, if there will be, but maybe it will not be, a stronger European moderate left, then it can be done something but it can't be done at least in all the developed countries more at a global level. Otherwise it's quite possible that we will be that Europe will become... you know now it's the moment of truth for Europe. The biggest loser of American elections is Europe. Because Trump's message when he said "America first" was "I can make a deal with Putin, maybe even with China, with Africans, Europe is out". I'm very curious on how that message is passing along to my generation, a younger generation. So you said quite early that people often don't know what they want or want the wrong thing or don't... Yeah yeah but the problem is that in Europe elites also don't know what they want. But you know as a young person I find that really familiar. My parents tell me that, my seniors tell me that, "Lulu you want wrong thing". But you know... it's okay I want the wrong thing, right? It's not that horrible. But if you tell me that the majority of the population could be flawed and wanting the wrong thing... Absolutely. Then what does we do as a young
yin-yang oscillation. You know you have moderate conservatives, moderate left, and they were replacing each other in power. Something started to happen some years ago. We have a new polarity. The big establishment capitalist party which is usually even in cultural matters left-liberal multiculturalist and this nationalist populist right. And in so far as we will be caught in this deadlock I'm a radical pessimist. Gradually because only the nationalist right is addressing the working class. This is the craziest thing of Europe now. Look. You know who at this moment is is is is enforcing measures which amount to a big transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor? Poland, the extreme right-wing government. They now they now accepted the whole set of laws: they lowered retirement they put higher they they sorry lowered the retirement age, they elevated retirement pensions how much you get, better healthcare and so on. It's incredible. No moderate left government dares to do that. On the other hand, this is the European tragedy. If you go to the south from Poland, Syriza. And this was an ingenious thing how Europe dealt with Greece. Syriza, the hope of the left, is now the most faithful executioner of the most brutal austerity policy. If we don't and you know what's the danger here? The danger is that's why part of British left was also for Brexit. The danger is some of the left thinks since European Union and international capital are global, the only way is strong nation state. I radically don't believe in it. I think this is a path to catastrophe. Because today nation state cannot survive alone, you are even more exposed, even more helpless in the face of global capital. I think the only solution to global capital is not stronger nation state but a new leftist international. For example I believe that if Sanders gets stronger in the United States, if there will be, but maybe it will not be, a stronger European moderate left, then it can be done something but it can't be done at least in all the developed countries more at a global level. Otherwise it's quite possible that we will be that Europe will become... you know now it's the moment of truth for Europe. The biggest loser of American elections is Europe. Because Trump's message when he said "America first" was "I can make a deal with Putin, maybe even with China, with Africans, Europe is out". I'm very curious on how that message is passing along to my generation, a younger generation. So you said quite early that people often don't know what they want or want the wrong thing or don't... Yeah yeah but the problem is that in Europe elites also don't know what they want. But you know as a young person I find that really familiar. My parents tell me that, my seniors tell me that, "Lulu you want wrong thing". But you know... it's okay I want the wrong thing, right? It's not that horrible. But if you tell me that the majority of the population could be flawed and wanting the wrong thing... Absolutely. Then what does we do as a young
Cathy Newman
generation of voters already you see people's opinion are very... I would say like this: quite often you should boycott it, not don't vote. Because I think that I'm not absolutely skeptical about democracy. Government should be controlled and so on. But we have to accept a sad lesson
generation of voters already you see people's opinion are very... I would say like this: quite often you should boycott it, not don't vote. Because I think that I'm not absolutely skeptical about democracy. Government should be controlled and so on. But we have to accept a sad lesson
Slavoj Žižek
that people, by people I mean simple numerical majority, are not always right. But if young people don't vote, don't you think when they become little bit older when they becoming needing a little bit more than the society they left behind... No, no, no. It's not... you know there are different ways of not voting. There is not voting in the sense I don't care, but there is but you can afford this when things still go relatively
that people, by people I mean simple numerical majority, are not always right. But if young people don't vote, don't you think when they become little bit older when they becoming needing a little bit more than the society they left behind... No, no, no. It's not... you know there are different ways of not voting. There is not voting in the sense I don't care, but there is but you can afford this when things still go relatively
Cathy Newman
well. You know the National Front in France, its majority supporters are people who are young, younger than years old. I expect this, yes. This nothing surprises me. But my point would have been that they the supporters from National Front with a good
well. You know the National Front in France, its majority supporters are people who are young, younger than years old. I expect this, yes. This nothing surprises me. But my point would have been that they the supporters from National Front with a good
Slavoj Žižek
politics they can be there are more of potential left supporters in National Front than in liberal center and so on. And this will be the battle the I see Europe as next big ideological battle. Europe I'm still fond of Europe. Europe did some great thing. It invented democracy in this radical sense of: the place of the power is empty, nobody has automatic right to be in power. It develops a radical notion of feminism, democracy, human rights and so on. But I think Europe is now in mega crisis. The old liberal model is losing. And again if Europe is confronting a big choice. Either left will become with a new global model, and Europe is almost the only place where this can come, or Europe will become a province of
politics they can be there are more of potential left supporters in National Front than in liberal center and so on. And this will be the battle the I see Europe as next big ideological battle. Europe I'm still fond of Europe. Europe did some great thing. It invented democracy in this radical sense of: the place of the power is empty, nobody has automatic right to be in power. It develops a radical notion of feminism, democracy, human rights and so on. But I think Europe is now in mega crisis. The old liberal model is losing. And again if Europe is confronting a big choice. Either left will become with a new global model, and Europe is almost the only place where this can come, or Europe will become a province of
Cathy Newman
primitive
primitive
Slavoj Žižek
nation states and so on and so on. I want to continue bring up the the idea of public sphere. And you know the word "post-truth" was selected as the word of by Oxford Dictionary. It's hardly a new thing you know, we always go to news to look for what we already wanting to hear. But today it seems that people are forming their imaginative communities and their own realities much faster. It is so empowering for people to say like "guess what: you're wrong and you're fake". No I agree. I here I'm an old-fashioned European metaphysician, the philosopher Immanuel Kant already emphasize this public sphere. And I but you know what's the problem here? First, let's just not exaggerate the state before this post-factual era. There also you know often it was also a very post-factual era. Like what... so let's not claim that before we had an authentic public sphere and now we are in some... no because the that's the tragedy this move on. So we have to fight here，there is no way back. I think that what we there is no way back to the old era. My god listen, the whole Cold War and afterwards, it was also a sphere of lies, systematic distortion of lies and so on and so on. Just look about all the topic of human rights. On the one hand it's good that this is some kind of a progress that now if we detect violation of human rights even in a foreign country we are worried. But at the same time you can see even in the Western so-called free media how selective is this worry. It's always some countries which are... for example if the concern for human rights would have been serious
nation states and so on and so on. I want to continue bring up the the idea of public sphere. And you know the word "post-truth" was selected as the word of by Oxford Dictionary. It's hardly a new thing you know, we always go to news to look for what we already wanting to hear. But today it seems that people are forming their imaginative communities and their own realities much faster. It is so empowering for people to say like "guess what: you're wrong and you're fake". No I agree. I here I'm an old-fashioned European metaphysician, the philosopher Immanuel Kant already emphasize this public sphere. And I but you know what's the problem here? First, let's just not exaggerate the state before this post-factual era. There also you know often it was also a very post-factual era. Like what... so let's not claim that before we had an authentic public sphere and now we are in some... no because the that's the tragedy this move on. So we have to fight here，there is no way back. I think that what we there is no way back to the old era. My god listen, the whole Cold War and afterwards, it was also a sphere of lies, systematic distortion of lies and so on and so on. Just look about all the topic of human rights. On the one hand it's good that this is some kind of a progress that now if we detect violation of human rights even in a foreign country we are worried. But at the same time you can see even in the Western so-called free media how selective is this worry. It's always some countries which are... for example if the concern for human rights would have been serious
unknown
then we should talk all the time about Congo. If people attacking at each other so publicly nowadays, do you think then the sort of order, the public morality... That's another
then we should talk all the time about Congo. If people attacking at each other so publicly nowadays, do you think then the sort of order, the public morality... That's another
Slavoj Žižek
problem which is not just
problem which is not just
unknown
this media. And this is for me the tragedy of Trump. Trump is not alone here. This decay, disintegration of what I call common decency,
this media. And this is for me the tragedy of Trump. Trump is not alone here. This decay, disintegration of what I call common decency,
Slavoj Žižek
morality
morality
unknown
and so on. Under Trump you can say publicly things, vulgarities and so on. I worry about this almost more than about post-factual aspect. How the way you are allowed to talk today and so on. It was unimaginable years, or years ago. Not only at the
and so on. Under Trump you can say publicly things, vulgarities and so on. I worry about this almost more than about post-factual aspect. How the way you are allowed to talk today and so on. It was unimaginable years, or years ago. Not only at the
Slavoj Žižek
level of content, like now it's legal to debate should we have torture or not, what kind of torture. But more again this vulgarity and so on. But my point is that this vulgarization of public space is for me the big defeat of political correctness. Because political correctness failed
level of content, like now it's legal to debate should we have torture or not, what kind of torture. But more again this vulgarity and so on. But my point is that this vulgarization of public space is for me the big defeat of political correctness. Because political correctness failed
unknown
here by trying to control it through this exact regulation what expressions you can use and so on and so on. I want to pick up the
here by trying to control it through this exact regulation what expressions you can use and so on and so on. I want to pick up the
Slavoj Žižek
political correctness because I want to ask about violence a bit. Like on a quite personal level. So like we ordinary readers will on our smartphone will be popping up a breaking news about a violent attack. And reading it
political correctness because I want to ask about violence a bit. Like on a quite personal level. So like we ordinary readers will on our smartphone will be popping up a breaking news about a violent attack. And reading it
unknown
you know it's complicated, it maybe legitimized it maybe not, it maybe happened here and there, there will be more soldiers etc. And you
you know it's complicated, it maybe legitimized it maybe not, it maybe happened here and there, there will be more soldiers etc. And you
Slavoj Žižek
know like and I would think, look, I know there's more domestic violence than these few people who died. But just how how does violence work and compassion and understanding... This is a very good question because I think that I wrote a book which is even now selling very well but some people attack it as very problematic about violence. Because I think that first we should define what is violence, where do we see violence. We should expand our notion of violence. First, in the experience of ordinary people we do not have only what I call subjective violence when some people are hurting other people. In capitalist economy, when there is a crisis like when millions lost all their fortune their jobs, this was for them a terribly violent event. So we have this what I call objective anonymous violence when your whole life is shattered and so on. Then you know we
know like and I would think, look, I know there's more domestic violence than these few people who died. But just how how does violence work and compassion and understanding... This is a very good question because I think that I wrote a book which is even now selling very well but some people attack it as very problematic about violence. Because I think that first we should define what is violence, where do we see violence. We should expand our notion of violence. First, in the experience of ordinary people we do not have only what I call subjective violence when some people are hurting other people. In capitalist economy, when there is a crisis like when millions lost all their fortune their jobs, this was for them a terribly violent event. So we have this what I call objective anonymous violence when your whole life is shattered and so on. Then you know we
unknown
always tend to confuse violence with change. That's why what I'm usually asked is but have has every does every change have to be violent. But never forget that there is a lot of violence necessary just to keep things the way they are. Yeah. So we should always widen our view. In this sense I'm not always against violence in this narrow sense of at least violent demo- I don't like violent demonstrations. But violence is also for example a big general strike. This is a form of violence because it breaks all social activity, breaks it, brings to a standstill
always tend to confuse violence with change. That's why what I'm usually asked is but have has every does every change have to be violent. But never forget that there is a lot of violence necessary just to keep things the way they are. Yeah. So we should always widen our view. In this sense I'm not always against violence in this narrow sense of at least violent demo- I don't like violent demonstrations. But violence is also for example a big general strike. This is a form of violence because it breaks all social activity, breaks it, brings to a standstill
Slavoj Žižek
and so on.
and so on.
unknown
My formula was for which I
My formula was for which I
Slavoj Žižek
was so much hated that the problem with Hitler was that he wasn't violent enough. And then I said Gandhi was more violent than Hitler. Because I think Hitler's violence was not real, okay it was real violence, it was pretty bloody, but it was a reactive violence. The goal of all his violence was to prevent the disintegration of capitalist order. He wanted to save the system. While Gandhi was in this sense more violent: he wanted not to save but to break the system. Look if this is a scenario when you have a dinner with your friend and suddenly there's attack in Brussels. What what should the one's immediate response to... Ah no oh I I tend not to be too horrified because you know I liked the reaction of a Syrian refugee, I quote it it's a well-known, when he was in Brussels. And you know what was his reaction? "You see: this is our daily reality. What is for you here a state of exception and so on, you know". So we should still my bear in mind what? My friend although
was so much hated that the problem with Hitler was that he wasn't violent enough. And then I said Gandhi was more violent than Hitler. Because I think Hitler's violence was not real, okay it was real violence, it was pretty bloody, but it was a reactive violence. The goal of all his violence was to prevent the disintegration of capitalist order. He wanted to save the system. While Gandhi was in this sense more violent: he wanted not to save but to break the system. Look if this is a scenario when you have a dinner with your friend and suddenly there's attack in Brussels. What what should the one's immediate response to... Ah no oh I I tend not to be too horrified because you know I liked the reaction of a Syrian refugee, I quote it it's a well-known, when he was in Brussels. And you know what was his reaction? "You see: this is our daily reality. What is for you here a state of exception and so on, you know". So we should still my bear in mind what? My friend although
unknown
he is a right-winger
he is a right-winger
Slavoj Žižek
the German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk wrote a wonderful book where he said that we in developed capitalism live in a kind of a cupola, protected. And for us violence is when those outside of cupola bomb us, try to... but these are just momentary shocks. And it's for people outside this horror is daily reality. Yeah yeah. Great. Like look at a country like Congo, Republic of Congo, where in the last years four, five million died of unnatural death. Where do you find that in our media? Almost nothing about it. Exactly. I told when I was in Ramallah, I told Palestinians "Are you aware that you in the West Bank occupied by Israel your state is still a paradise compared to Congo?". You know so there is so much brutal violence which is neglected. So if we seriously want to fight violence, let's
the German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk wrote a wonderful book where he said that we in developed capitalism live in a kind of a cupola, protected. And for us violence is when those outside of cupola bomb us, try to... but these are just momentary shocks. And it's for people outside this horror is daily reality. Yeah yeah. Great. Like look at a country like Congo, Republic of Congo, where in the last years four, five million died of unnatural death. Where do you find that in our media? Almost nothing about it. Exactly. I told when I was in Ramallah, I told Palestinians "Are you aware that you in the West Bank occupied by Israel your state is still a paradise compared to Congo?". You know so there is so much brutal violence which is neglected. So if we seriously want to fight violence, let's
unknown
bring it out. Again first this systemic violence. Second this violence which is part of the way things normally function. Look at a country like Mexico, it's an extreme case. Alright on the note of violence. I after I announced my interview with you I actually collect a few video from my audience who are curious as well and really wanting to send... I have one more question but I think it's better... Yeah yeah. Hear them first. First, how do you make a prediction? Second, whether the human prediction is a arrangement of God? Third, do you believe that the world can be recognized? Fourth, what is the meaning of so many people in the world? So first question was how do I make prediction? Prediction.
bring it out. Again first this systemic violence. Second this violence which is part of the way things normally function. Look at a country like Mexico, it's an extreme case. Alright on the note of violence. I after I announced my interview with you I actually collect a few video from my audience who are curious as well and really wanting to send... I have one more question but I think it's better... Yeah yeah. Hear them first. First, how do you make a prediction? Second, whether the human prediction is a arrangement of God? Third, do you believe that the world can be recognized? Fourth, what is the meaning of so many people in the world? So first question was how do I make prediction? Prediction.
Slavoj Žižek
Prediction, yeah. I think I have it here. So okay, I'll repeat it. So how do we make prediction? When we make prediction is it is it an arrangement of from the God? And do you think the world is recognizable? And what's the point of having so many people in the world? Maybe yeah something quickly like what's the point of having so many people in the world? Like why... Well well it's I here I'm a primitive Darwinian: there is no point in it, it's just evolution, but I agree with him that we should brutally regulate it. I always was for okay we can debate it should be done in a much more human way and so on. I think we don't know it. The problem with predictions is that they can be what people call self-fulfilling prophecies, you know. Mr. Žižek, I feel so lucky to ask a question. As we know, there is no working class party in the USA. So what do you think the American people can do to find hope after the vote? And do the left need to build a new party? Thank you. Okay, okay. The point the problem is a much more I agree with the question. It's even more tragic because the only one who although it's a pseudo working-class party, just ask yourself in developed Western countries who still appeals to the working class like "I speak for ordinary people"? Only the right-wingers do it. You know that's the tragedy. And I would say this: the problem is much deeper after the failure of communist regimes and so on where, and I don't mean this as a critical point, I always compare here China with Britain Great Britain where
Prediction, yeah. I think I have it here. So okay, I'll repeat it. So how do we make prediction? When we make prediction is it is it an arrangement of from the God? And do you think the world is recognizable? And what's the point of having so many people in the world? Maybe yeah something quickly like what's the point of having so many people in the world? Like why... Well well it's I here I'm a primitive Darwinian: there is no point in it, it's just evolution, but I agree with him that we should brutally regulate it. I always was for okay we can debate it should be done in a much more human way and so on. I think we don't know it. The problem with predictions is that they can be what people call self-fulfilling prophecies, you know. Mr. Žižek, I feel so lucky to ask a question. As we know, there is no working class party in the USA. So what do you think the American people can do to find hope after the vote? And do the left need to build a new party? Thank you. Okay, okay. The point the problem is a much more I agree with the question. It's even more tragic because the only one who although it's a pseudo working-class party, just ask yourself in developed Western countries who still appeals to the working class like "I speak for ordinary people"? Only the right-wingers do it. You know that's the tragedy. And I would say this: the problem is much deeper after the failure of communist regimes and so on where, and I don't mean this as a critical point, I always compare here China with Britain Great Britain where
unknown
Marx says that it was the genius of British bourgeoisie capitalists to keep aristocracy in power. The problem is but why is there no working-class party?
Marx says that it was the genius of British bourgeoisie capitalists to keep aristocracy in power. The problem is but why is there no working-class party?
Slavoj Žižek
The problem is simply: do we have a vision what should this working-class party stand for? I always ask again we are back to Wall Street Occupy Wall Street to protestors I was asking "but what do you want? Do you want just a little bit more honest capitalism? Do you want some Keynesian state capitalism? Do you want radical nationalizations? Do you want some kind of a self-management local communities want...". And the left doesn't have really a visible alternate model what to offer to the people. I think that here we are really I always like to quote the Italian, you must know that quote, Marxist Antonio Gramsci in the 20s. He wrote that famous passage where he says when the old is dying but the new is not yet born, this is the
The problem is simply: do we have a vision what should this working-class party stand for? I always ask again we are back to Wall Street Occupy Wall Street to protestors I was asking "but what do you want? Do you want just a little bit more honest capitalism? Do you want some Keynesian state capitalism? Do you want radical nationalizations? Do you want some kind of a self-management local communities want...". And the left doesn't have really a visible alternate model what to offer to the people. I think that here we are really I always like to quote the Italian, you must know that quote, Marxist Antonio Gramsci in the 20s. He wrote that famous passage where he says when the old is dying but the new is not yet born, this is the
unknown
age of
age of
Slavoj Žižek
monster where horrible entities come. We are in that era. Capitalism obviously is approaching a crisis. If you look at our financial crisis, ecology, refugees and so on. You mentioned Gramsci, I think the next question is gonna probably related to that because he mentioned he he talked about organic intellectuals, right? Next question actually criticize intellectuals, but I'll play it in Chinese. 由思想所造成的暴力和引起的危害，在东西方近现代历史上都层出不穷而且随处可见。并且最重要的一点是承受这些思想造成的苦难的都是普通的个人。但是如今齐泽克先生重新提起这些主张，是否是一种精英知识分子的傲慢和无知？谢谢。Clear. So he he he he sorry... yeah sorry. So he he talked he said that you advocate for disorder because that represent some kind of hope. And he said "isn't that...". Disorder under the heaven. Yeah like a structure
monster where horrible entities come. We are in that era. Capitalism obviously is approaching a crisis. If you look at our financial crisis, ecology, refugees and so on. You mentioned Gramsci, I think the next question is gonna probably related to that because he mentioned he he talked about organic intellectuals, right? Next question actually criticize intellectuals, but I'll play it in Chinese. 由思想所造成的暴力和引起的危害，在东西方近现代历史上都层出不穷而且随处可见。并且最重要的一点是承受这些思想造成的苦难的都是普通的个人。但是如今齐泽克先生重新提起这些主张，是否是一种精英知识分子的傲慢和无知？谢谢。Clear. So he he he he sorry... yeah sorry. So he he talked he said that you advocate for disorder because that represent some kind of hope. And he said "isn't that...". Disorder under the heaven. Yeah like a structure
unknown
like there's disorder under the heaven etc. Anyway but then he says that has happened in the history for multiple times. Ask whether that kind of thought is intellectual is exactly intellectuals being ignorant and arrogant. First I would say that you know it's
like there's disorder under the heaven etc. Anyway but then he says that has happened in the history for multiple times. Ask whether that kind of thought is intellectual is exactly intellectuals being ignorant and arrogant. First I would say that you know it's
unknown
not just ordinary people, intellectuals also suffer quite a lot, you know. The first great disorder, how you call him, the first emperor? Qin Shi Huang. Yeah. Didn't he call all Confucian philosophers and then he buried them alive? And he said "the debate is over" or he won, no. So no I would say this no wait a minute.
not just ordinary people, intellectuals also suffer quite a lot, you know. The first great disorder, how you call him, the first emperor? Qin Shi Huang. Yeah. Didn't he call all Confucian philosophers and then he buried them alive? And he said "the debate is over" or he won, no. So no I would say this no wait a minute.
Slavoj Žižek
First I
First I
unknown
deeply
deeply
Slavoj Žižek
agree with the underlying thought of this
agree with the underlying thought of this
unknown
nice person audience yes that like I don't like these big enthusiastic moments of you know we all European intellectuals so fascinated in Greece, Tahrir Square, or in Tahrir Square in Egypt, Syntagma Square, one million people gathered all together. No what interests me is as I call it "the morning after". What happens
nice person audience yes that like I don't like these big enthusiastic moments of you know we all European intellectuals so fascinated in Greece, Tahrir Square, or in Tahrir Square in Egypt, Syntagma Square, one million people gathered all together. No what interests me is as I call it "the morning after". What happens
Slavoj Žižek
when things return to normal? How do ordinary people feel experience the change? Did anything really change? And I think this is the failure of the left: the left always knows to organize big events, you know. This is why maybe your readers will like it or listeners. Was it popular in China among
when things return to normal? How do ordinary people feel experience the change? Did anything really change? And I think this is the failure of the left: the left always knows to organize big events, you know. This is why maybe your readers will like it or listeners. Was it popular in China among
unknown
intellectuals? Probably globally or was it shown there the film "V for Vendetta"? You saw it? Yeah of course. Okay you know what's my standard
intellectuals? Probably globally or was it shown there the film "V for Vendetta"? You saw it? Yeah of course. Okay you know what's my standard
Slavoj Žižek
joke. You
joke. You
unknown
know how the film ends? People win with the
know how the film ends? People win with the
Slavoj Žižek
masks. Okay okay. I usually say that I'm ready to sell my mother into slavery, okay she is dead it's no great thing, to see a film called "V for Vendetta Part But what happens then the next day? What measures does... you know I hate this enthusiastic moment what interests me is everyday life, how you... and here although it failed... I want to cut you there and bring you back to because our time is coming to... No but we have... no no sorry just to finish. What I'm saying is that no I am well aware of this cynical attitude of disorder and so on. But what I nonetheless want to say that disorder doesn't depend on us. I'm not saying, I'm not say this, I know what horror is disorder, that we should create a disorder. I'm saying just don't be afraid. Often there is a chance in disorder. Like look at today Trump. It's a I hope it will remain trauma, almost unimaginable thing happen. Isn't this at the same time a chance? A chance to build a more authentic left and really only a chance. I'm not saying there is any type of Marxist certainty or certainty whatever. No just my message is just don't be afraid. They are horrible thing but use disorder as an opportunity. Yeah great. I have one last question which I think fits right how you describe there is a monster time we live in. So we live in this monster time and where people who think who have watch movies, read news and we have a lot of monologue we think about ourselves. I wonder if you could as a end note provide a few provocative questions for us to ask ourselves in order to sort of like you know get out from the comfort zone, engage with people or somehow like understand who we are. You know what I will tell you I will really give you a provocative
masks. Okay okay. I usually say that I'm ready to sell my mother into slavery, okay she is dead it's no great thing, to see a film called "V for Vendetta Part But what happens then the next day? What measures does... you know I hate this enthusiastic moment what interests me is everyday life, how you... and here although it failed... I want to cut you there and bring you back to because our time is coming to... No but we have... no no sorry just to finish. What I'm saying is that no I am well aware of this cynical attitude of disorder and so on. But what I nonetheless want to say that disorder doesn't depend on us. I'm not saying, I'm not say this, I know what horror is disorder, that we should create a disorder. I'm saying just don't be afraid. Often there is a chance in disorder. Like look at today Trump. It's a I hope it will remain trauma, almost unimaginable thing happen. Isn't this at the same time a chance? A chance to build a more authentic left and really only a chance. I'm not saying there is any type of Marxist certainty or certainty whatever. No just my message is just don't be afraid. They are horrible thing but use disorder as an opportunity. Yeah great. I have one last question which I think fits right how you describe there is a monster time we live in. So we live in this monster time and where people who think who have watch movies, read news and we have a lot of monologue we think about ourselves. I wonder if you could as a end note provide a few provocative questions for us to ask ourselves in order to sort of like you know get out from the comfort zone, engage with people or somehow like understand who we are. You know what I will tell you I will really give you a provocative
Cathy Newman
point which is an interesting one. Monster times, okay, but some of my optimist friends are like the one who wrote that book on genetics, Matt Ridley. He is now member of what he calls a circle of rational optimists.
point which is an interesting one. Monster times, okay, but some of my optimist friends are like the one who wrote that book on genetics, Matt Ridley. He is now member of what he calls a circle of rational optimists.
unknown
And he claims "why do people talk today that we are in a crisis?". Even with terrorist attacks they are relatively minor. In most of the world, even in Africa, things are gradually picking up. Even in United States it's now better. Far East it's still progressing and so on. Like we have to laugh in Europe when we say "oh crisis in China this
And he claims "why do people talk today that we are in a crisis?". Even with terrorist attacks they are relatively minor. In most of the world, even in Africa, things are gradually picking up. Even in United States it's now better. Far East it's still progressing and so on. Like we have to laugh in Europe when we say "oh crisis in China this
Cathy Newman
year you have only a growth of percent". We would kill our parents to get that
year you have only a growth of percent". We would kill our parents to get that
Slavoj Žižek
growth here. So they claim never did in the world so many people
growth here. So they claim never did in the world so many people
Cathy Newman
live in such relatively good conditions. And they claim for example we live in the last decades in the first period in entire human history where overweight is more of a
live in such relatively good conditions. And they claim for example we live in the last decades in the first period in entire human history where overweight is more of a
unknown
problem than hunger. Exactly. So my provocative
problem than hunger. Exactly. So my provocative
Slavoj Žižek
question would be while all this is true, and for example when I talked about crisis in Korea before they had this problem now with their president whatever. When I said "crisis" they started to laugh at me and they say "we are doing well, China is doing well, United States under Obama was doing better".
question would be while all this is true, and for example when I talked about crisis in Korea before they had this problem now with their president whatever. When I said "crisis" they started to laugh at me and they say "we are doing well, China is doing well, United States under Obama was doing better".
unknown
And they told me even in
And they told me even in
Slavoj Žižek
Europe like Poland some country they said "you leftists want to be anti-Eurocentric and universal, but when you talk about crisis the only continent really in crisis is Europe". Incredible things are happening. Why do we still experience our time as a time of crisis? It's a it's something a little bit enigmatic. Why although people don't live so bad why do we have so much rage and so on and so on. No the first thing to do here is to be precise when there is progress. So this is a very sad lesson that you know. Yeah we should think about why we are still thinking about why... that it's not as simple as you cannot simply say things are horrible. No comparatively they are not so horrible. Why then do we still... and I think we are not wrong. We do live in extremely dangerous times. Especially because Trump this Trump's last manifesto, no. You know what's the best definition of Trump I think? You know when I was young ecologists liked this motto maybe you know it also in China: "Act locally, think globally". Yeah yeah. No Trump is the opposite: he thinks locally, "America first", but he still wants to act globally. He now threatens China because of those islands, he threatens Middle East or whatever. And what is happening one of the best definitions of Trump era was that basically his message was very anti-American and sad. His message was "America first" means look we are no longer the only global superpower, we should be just one among the states taking care of ourselves.
Europe like Poland some country they said "you leftists want to be anti-Eurocentric and universal, but when you talk about crisis the only continent really in crisis is Europe". Incredible things are happening. Why do we still experience our time as a time of crisis? It's a it's something a little bit enigmatic. Why although people don't live so bad why do we have so much rage and so on and so on. No the first thing to do here is to be precise when there is progress. So this is a very sad lesson that you know. Yeah we should think about why we are still thinking about why... that it's not as simple as you cannot simply say things are horrible. No comparatively they are not so horrible. Why then do we still... and I think we are not wrong. We do live in extremely dangerous times. Especially because Trump this Trump's last manifesto, no. You know what's the best definition of Trump I think? You know when I was young ecologists liked this motto maybe you know it also in China: "Act locally, think globally". Yeah yeah. No Trump is the opposite: he thinks locally, "America first", but he still wants to act globally. He now threatens China because of those islands, he threatens Middle East or whatever. And what is happening one of the best definitions of Trump era was that basically his message was very anti-American and sad. His message was "America first" means look we are no longer the only global superpower, we should be just one among the states taking care of ourselves.
unknown
Yeah but these moments are
Yeah but these moments are
Slavoj Žižek
always extremely dangerous if you ask me. Because you know in Cold War there were a certain
always extremely dangerous if you ask me. Because you know in Cold War there were a certain
unknown
unwritten rules how you act. We are searching for these rules today and always things can explode into... we're searching for problems now I suppose. Yeah but also for unwritten rules. Like for example what are the rules? And here although I also don't like too much I don't know what this means this Chinese politics now, but on the other hand I'm not totally opposed to it because you know it's a little bit irrational. I you know what that look if you look at United States military bases, the whole time China is surrounded from
unwritten rules how you act. We are searching for these rules today and always things can explode into... we're searching for problems now I suppose. Yeah but also for unwritten rules. Like for example what are the rules? And here although I also don't like too much I don't know what this means this Chinese politics now, but on the other hand I'm not totally opposed to it because you know it's a little bit irrational. I you know what that look if you look at United States military bases, the whole time China is surrounded from
Slavoj Žižek
Pakistan to there and then imagine China doing this: putting military bases with... yeah around United... So you know and we desperately need a new world order, not in this sense what it means today. But some I believe in good manners. Like old I believe the world needs... don't you have this wonderful old Chinese word "li" or what which means this customs, unwritten rules of what... Oh yeah, yeah "li". We need a "li" for the world, you know. Okay on that note. Yeah I think this comes to the end of the conversation and interestingly you're talking about the "li" which is one of the biggest festival in China is coming up, the Spring Festival. Everyone goes back home and gather with their family. At the very end of our conversation I wonder if you could congratulate our audience on the on the Chinese New Year using a Chinese word which is "Xinnian Hao". If you would... I want to pronounce it.
Pakistan to there and then imagine China doing this: putting military bases with... yeah around United... So you know and we desperately need a new world order, not in this sense what it means today. But some I believe in good manners. Like old I believe the world needs... don't you have this wonderful old Chinese word "li" or what which means this customs, unwritten rules of what... Oh yeah, yeah "li". We need a "li" for the world, you know. Okay on that note. Yeah I think this comes to the end of the conversation and interestingly you're talking about the "li" which is one of the biggest festival in China is coming up, the Spring Festival. Everyone goes back home and gather with their family. At the very end of our conversation I wonder if you could congratulate our audience on the on the Chinese New Year using a Chinese word which is "Xinnian Hao". If you would... I want to pronounce it.
unknown
Xinnian
Xinnian
Slavoj Žižek
Hao. "Shin"... like... "X-I-N", Xin. "Xin". "N-I-A-N", Nian. "Xin nian". "H-A-O", Hao. "Xin nian hao". Okay to all my Chinese listeners, "Xin nian hao". Happy New Year for you and I like it very much: you do it more intelligently than us. We stupid Europeans do it in the middle of winter. You know so happy new year and then bah you go out the same shit the same cold. Same for you at least it is it is getting better. Although I must say that my favorite time is winter because I like it cold but I like it staying inside and just looking out. It's out it's cold so inside it's hot and I can do what I like: read books. I must say that my happiest moment in China was my two sons went around in Shanghai and I was I was a snob in a nice wealthy hotel I got a special offer there in French concession.
Hao. "Shin"... like... "X-I-N", Xin. "Xin". "N-I-A-N", Nian. "Xin nian". "H-A-O", Hao. "Xin nian hao". Okay to all my Chinese listeners, "Xin nian hao". Happy New Year for you and I like it very much: you do it more intelligently than us. We stupid Europeans do it in the middle of winter. You know so happy new year and then bah you go out the same shit the same cold. Same for you at least it is it is getting better. Although I must say that my favorite time is winter because I like it cold but I like it staying inside and just looking out. It's out it's cold so inside it's hot and I can do what I like: read books. I must say that my happiest moment in China was my two sons went around in Shanghai and I was I was a snob in a nice wealthy hotel I got a special offer there in French concession.
unknown
And
And
Slavoj Žižek
I was this was my moment of happiness. It was hotel which has some special from Japanese wood bath. Close to the window, I was looking at Shanghai sitting in a hot water and watching on my tablet a good movie. That was my happiest moment. Did you go to Great Wall though in China? Yeah but it didn't particularly impress me. But you watch the movie did you watch the movie "Great Wall", the recent movie from Zhang Yimou? But I don't like my it's again it's emotionally it left me empty. Oh yeah. My my taste of Zhang Yimou are here pretty traditional. I like his early modest films like that wonderful love story about a girl who takes the young Gong Li I think who takes a train to visit her lover and all those films. I like those. Then as an amusement I love not so much the middle one House of the Flying Daggers but Hero. You know why I also like Hero as an old still half Maoist? Because that film is for the emperor, no? Yes yes problematic no for some. Yeah I know of course. And especially it's kind of a Shakespearean aristocratic drama but it's so beautifully shot Curse of the Yellow Flower or what the third one. It's breathtaking. I think that if you China proceed in that way you will be the next Hollywood,
I was this was my moment of happiness. It was hotel which has some special from Japanese wood bath. Close to the window, I was looking at Shanghai sitting in a hot water and watching on my tablet a good movie. That was my happiest moment. Did you go to Great Wall though in China? Yeah but it didn't particularly impress me. But you watch the movie did you watch the movie "Great Wall", the recent movie from Zhang Yimou? But I don't like my it's again it's emotionally it left me empty. Oh yeah. My my taste of Zhang Yimou are here pretty traditional. I like his early modest films like that wonderful love story about a girl who takes the young Gong Li I think who takes a train to visit her lover and all those films. I like those. Then as an amusement I love not so much the middle one House of the Flying Daggers but Hero. You know why I also like Hero as an old still half Maoist? Because that film is for the emperor, no? Yes yes problematic no for some. Yeah I know of course. And especially it's kind of a Shakespearean aristocratic drama but it's so beautifully shot Curse of the Yellow Flower or what the third one. It's breathtaking. I think that if you China proceed in that way you will be the next Hollywood,
unknown
you know. Let's hope that. Yeah but here I don't know what's the mistake something went so wrong there is not enough emotional tension or whatever you know. I wish him all but he must be in some kind of a crisis Zhang Yimou now. Because also the another movie he made recently taking place I don't know in Shanghai of the 20s
you know. Let's hope that. Yeah but here I don't know what's the mistake something went so wrong there is not enough emotional tension or whatever you know. I wish him all but he must be in some kind of a crisis Zhang Yimou now. Because also the another movie he made recently taking place I don't know in Shanghai of the 20s
Slavoj Žižek
some gangsters and so on. I also didn't like it. I think he he lost his way, no? But I still think that again your creativity, your science fiction novels, your visual art, your movies... Science fiction novels: which science fiction novels? Oh I mean of course that how is he called "The Three-Body Problem"? Ah Liu Cixin. It was fascinating immediately I will open my next philosophical book with that because you know it's such a nice opposition Maoist order/disorder. Because our earth has regular rhythm order, that planet has disorder: three suns you don't know how and all those problems of communication, it's really an
some gangsters and so on. I also didn't like it. I think he he lost his way, no? But I still think that again your creativity, your science fiction novels, your visual art, your movies... Science fiction novels: which science fiction novels? Oh I mean of course that how is he called "The Three-Body Problem"? Ah Liu Cixin. It was fascinating immediately I will open my next philosophical book with that because you know it's such a nice opposition Maoist order/disorder. Because our earth has regular rhythm order, that planet has disorder: three suns you don't know how and all those problems of communication, it's really an
unknown
intelligently written novel. And now I'm turning to other
intelligently written novel. And now I'm turning to other
Slavoj Žižek
because you know I cannot I have big problems with reading there are a couple of serious writers that I like like in Europe Samuel Beckett, Kafka, the Russian Platonov. But I like very much detective novels and science fiction, intelligent science fiction. So for example I saw we already mentioned this I saw that good Chinese detective novel taking place in the north some pollution corruption I just I think that for you Chinese that the sign of civilization today is to be a serious culture you need your own tradition of detective novels. That's you know as Marquis de Sade said in his propagation of
because you know I cannot I have big problems with reading there are a couple of serious writers that I like like in Europe Samuel Beckett, Kafka, the Russian Platonov. But I like very much detective novels and science fiction, intelligent science fiction. So for example I saw we already mentioned this I saw that good Chinese detective novel taking place in the north some pollution corruption I just I think that for you Chinese that the sign of civilization today is to be a serious culture you need your own tradition of detective novels. That's you know as Marquis de Sade said in his propagation of
unknown
universal orgy
universal orgy
Slavoj Žižek
"Frenchmen one step more if you want to be Republican". I say "Chinese one step more into detective novels if you want to be a real civilization". Detective novels and good commercial movies. Good ones. Ah but I'm not kidding here. You know I have a great respect for good popular commercial films. They speak to us, they affect us through them like I always say if you want to see what is really happening today in America look at Hollywood blockbusters, all the tendencies, the deepest trend you will you will find them there, you know.
"Frenchmen one step more if you want to be Republican". I say "Chinese one step more into detective novels if you want to be a real civilization". Detective novels and good commercial movies. Good ones. Ah but I'm not kidding here. You know I have a great respect for good popular commercial films. They speak to us, they affect us through them like I always say if you want to see what is really happening today in America look at Hollywood blockbusters, all the tendencies, the deepest trend you will you will find them there, you know.