Zizek on GTAA Episode 19
Talk · zizekpodcast.com ·
2020-12-22 · 1:21:17 · 11,929 words
communism-socialismcapitalismideologyliberalism-political-correctnessdemocracyecology-climatetechnology-ai-cyberspacerevolution-violencefascism-populismgeopolitics-wareveryday-lifephilosophy-general
In this wide-ranging conversation (recorded during the COVID-19 pandemic, late 2020), Žižek argues that the pandemic reveals a structural tendency toward communism, understood as global solidarity and social control over the economy, that even capitalist elites implicitly acknowledge. He critiques the 'great reset' philanthrocapitalism of figures like Bill Gates as capitalism with a human face, distinguishes this from genuine systemic change, and defends the provocative use of the term 'communism' as a marker of radical rupture. The conversation also covers Trump's novel form of authority (obscene rather than dignified), the failures of hashtag activism and ethical consumerism as substitutes for real political organization, and the importance of local initiative alongside international coordination.
every located moment in this recording, click one to read it
The ideas in it 16
in the order they first come up; click a row for what he does with the idea here
as “tendency (Marxist dialectical category)”
Žižek invokes Marx's concept of tendency, e.g. the tendential fall of the rate of profit, to argue that even the opposite of a tendency can be its effect, and that COVID reveals a tendency toward communism even if full communism does not arrive.
as “rent vs. profit”
Žižek argues that the new tech billionaires (Gates, Bezos, Zuckerberg) derive their wealth not from classical profit through labor exploitation but from rent, privatizing the digital commons, marking a return to a pre-capitalist form of extraction.
Žižek's ironic inversion of 'socialism with a human face': the philanthrocapitalist great reset that Bill Gates represents, which adopts the language of social responsibility while leaving the system's structural inequalities intact.
Žižek uses 'war communism' not to describe the Bolshevik policy literally but as a shorthand for the emergency suspension of market logic that the pandemic demands, implying that harsh collective coordination, not utopian abundance, lies ahead.
as “effective critique of ideology”
Žižek distinguishes effective ideological critique, one that re-channels felt outrage toward structural targets, from moralistic political correctness, which mistakes individual shaming for structural change.
Žižek's ironic term for the practice of appointing a few women to top corporate positions while leaving the system that produces inequality entirely unchanged, deployed as an example of false ideological radicalism.
Žižek alludes to Marx's vision of communist society as polymorphous almost-perversity, free self-realization, only to contrast it with the harsh emergency coordination ('war communism') he thinks is actually ahead.
Žižek coins this term for the paradox by which leaders like Trump strip away the dignified mask of authority, proudly displaying obscenity, yet paradoxically retain or even strengthen their executive power.
as “authentic master”
Žižek's notion of a political leader who does not tell followers what to do but inspires them to discover what they really want, exemplified positively by Mandela and Gandhi, negatively parodied by Trump.
Term coined in conversation (credited to Ambrose) for the attitude of desperate pleasure-seeking when the future seems closed off, Žižek endorses the phrase as capturing the perverse enjoyment of pandemic despair.
Drawing on a French linguistic distinction, Žižek contrasts futur (what will come, possibly the same) with avenir (what is to come, genuine novelty and change), arguing that genuine left politics must aim at avenir, not just futur.
as “jouissance / enjoyment in pain”
Žižek invokes Lacan's concept that enjoyment is pleasure in pain (not direct pleasure) to explain how pandemic catastrophists derive a perverse enjoyment from the crisis while consciously experiencing it as suffering.
Žižek insists the pandemic imposes bodily distancing, not genuine social distancing: digital media has made us more socially connected and surveilled than ever while removing authentic intimacy.
as “obsessional neurotic paradise”
Žižek half-jokingly notes that pandemic social protocols, where every greeting and movement is preset, constitute a paradise for obsessional neurotics who are relieved of the anxiety of improvised social interaction.
Žižek's term for capitalism's move, exemplified by Starbucks, of including one's ethical obligation to others in the price of a consumer product, so that buying a commodity doubles as fulfilling one's moral duty.
Discussed critically: online activism that generates more activism but no institutional power, substituting moral self-expression for structural political change.
Stories he reaches for 1
Žižek describes how Starbucks raised its coffee price slightly with the message that the extra amount goes to save Guatemalan children, collapsing the distinction between consuming and doing moral good into a single transaction.
“your social duty is already commodified it's included in the price so you can easily enjoy your coffee”
Works invoked 8
Communist Manifesto book
Referenced for Marx's earlier centralist position, strong state, nationalized banks, big industry, which Marx revised after the Paris Commune.
State and Revolution book
Lenin's text cited for its initially decentralized vision of soviets, which resonated with the Paris Commune model before Lenin changed course.
Naming and Necessity book
Saul Kripke's work, cited by Žižek as one of the analytic philosophy texts he genuinely admires, countering the assumption that Hegelians dismiss analytic philosophy.
Pandemic! book
Žižek's own book, then just published as print-on-demand; he mentions it contains analysis of the new forms of authority and the logic of dis-sublimation.
The Thin Blue Line film
Errol Morris documentary; Žižek cites the line that any prosecutor can condemn the guilty but it takes a truly skilled one to condemn the innocent, used as a meta-joke about misleading editorial framing.
Žižek confesses to watching it despite finding it a 'big lie', because Bannon correctly identifies real problems like corporate centralization, a case of ideology sustained by partial truth.
Logicomix book
Graphic novel about Bertrand Russell and Russell's Paradox; mentioned by the interviewer and discussed with Žižek in the context of the Barber Paradox and theories of types.
Myth and Mayhem book
Co-authored book (by the interviewers and others) for which Žižek wrote an introduction; he is reminded of his introduction's comment about Jordan Peterson, that Peterson is dangerous because part of what he says is true.
People invoked 28
Yuval Kremnitzer positive
Israeli friend cited for developing the argument that Trump never truly wanted to overthrow democracy but lived in an in-between zone of criticizing its corruption.
Mahatma Gandhi positive
Cited briefly alongside Mandela as an example of a genuine authentic master figure.
Robert Mugabe negative
Referenced as the negative example, the trap of blaming racial scapegoats while leaving the new ruling class untouched, which Žižek fears South Africa may fall into.
Vladimir Lenin positive
Mentioned as having initially embraced decentralized Paris Commune-style soviets in 'State and Revolution' and celebrated surpassing the Commune's duration; used to illustrate the tension between decentralization and state power.
Referenced as having warned Trump early in January about the deadly seriousness of COVID, with Žižek noting this as an instance of appropriate crisis response.
Theodor W. Adorno positive
Briefly cited as a half-Marxist who pointed out that 'tendency' is the crucial dialectical category in Marx.
Žižek confesses to watching Bannon's podcast, crediting him with correctly identifying facts about corporate centralization and rising inequality while sustaining a 'big lie' with partial truths and offering no real solutions.
Jacques Lacan positive
Invoked for the concept that enjoyment (jouissance) is pleasure in pain, not direct pleasure, used to explain the perverse enjoyment catastrophists draw from the pandemic.
Mentioned as the originator of 'end of history' thesis; noted with mild surprise that he may have since recanted and moved toward welfare-state positions.
Žižek analyzes Trump at length as a new, post-dignified form of authority that operates through obscene self-display rather than the dignified mask of classical leadership; argues he is not a fascist but a clownish comedy of a master with no real plan to overthrow democracy.
Étienne Balibar positive
Cited for having shown that Marx lacked a proper theory of political power and how it reproduces itself.
Jeremy Corbyn positive
Žižek mentions Corbyn sympathetically, calling his removal from Labour leadership a 'state coup' and describing it as 'horror'.
Saul Kripke positive
Žižek mentions Kripke's 'Naming and Necessity' as one of the analytic philosophy works he genuinely admires, countering the stereotype that he dismisses analytic philosophy.
Alain Badiou positive
Žižek cites Badiou twice: on the need for authentic master figures (defending their importance against the trend of distrust), and for the detail about Lenin dancing in the snow when Soviet power outlasted the Paris Commune.
Donald Davidson positive
Briefly mentioned alongside Kripke as an analytic philosopher Žižek finds worthwhile.
Referenced in the discussion of Russell's Paradox / Barber Paradox; Žižek does not accept Russell's solution (theory of types) as satisfactory.
Bernie Sanders positive
Žižek praises Sanders as a 'common decent person' who embodies authentic moral politics and effective critique of ideology, and credits him (along with AOC) with rehabilitating the word 'socialism' in American discourse.
Elizabeth Warren positive
Mentioned approvingly as having proposed a modest tax rise on the rich, which Gates immediately opposed, used to demonstrate philanthrocapitalists' true allegiance to the system.
Angela Nagle positive
Cited for the correct observation that the new populist right behaves in the pseudo-subversive way that the radical left once did.
Darian Leader positive
British psychoanalyst friend cited for the observation that pandemic rules are a paradise for obsessional neurotics who enjoy having their social interactions preset.
Bill Gates negative
Žižek criticizes Gates as the emblematic figure of philanthrocapitalism, 'capitalism with a human face', noting that despite positioning himself as a quasi-socialist humanitarian, Gates immediately protested Elizabeth Warren's modest tax proposals as threatening capitalism.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez positive
Mentioned approvingly alongside Bernie Sanders for rehabilitating the term 'socialism' in American political discourse.
Jordan Peterson negative
Žižek reports that after their debate Peterson privately admitted he had no answer to Žižek's point: Peterson attacks postmodern relativism while Trump, Peterson's implicit ally, is the ultimate postmodernist.
Hillary Clinton negative
Cited as the negative example of obsession with occupying the center, contrasted unfavorably with Trump's willingness to alienate the establishment and with Bernie Sanders's more principled approach.
Nelson Mandela positive
Cited as a genuine example of an authentic master figure who inspired people to discover what they really wanted; Žižek also notes that Mandela had to make economic compromises and fears South Africa may slide toward a Mugabe-style trap.
Martin Luther King Jr. positive
Referenced by other speakers in the conversation: he was killed while supporting a combined black-and-white worker strike, and the March on Washington was 'for Jobs and Freedom', a labor dimension erased from popular memory.
Karl Marx positive
Žižek draws on Marx's dialectical concept of tendency, his analysis of rent vs. profit, and his vision of communism; also criticizes Marx for lacking a theory of political power and authority, and for leaving the future society too abstract, a gap Žižek links to Stalinism.
Thomas Piketty positive
Mentioned as having debated Bill Gates, with Žižek implying Piketty's critique of wealth concentration is correct and that Gates's partial agreement is disingenuous.
What it argues
COVID-19 as revealing a structural tendency toward communismphilanthrocapitalism and capitalism with a human facenew forms of authority — Trump's obscene post-dignified masterhashtag activism and ethical consumerism as substitutes for real politicsthe futur vs. avenir distinction — difference vs. mere continuationwar communism as emergency social coordinationlocal initiative vs. centralized state power
Dialectical moves 7
“Even if the tendential fall of the rate of profit doesn't materialize — profits actually go up — it's because the system reacts against this threat; the opposite of the tendency is already its effect.”
The apparent refutation of a Marxist tendency is itself the proof of the tendency, since the system's reactive compensation is evidence of the underlying force.
“It's not social distancing but bodily distancing — socially we are more connected, more controlled than ever.”
The apparent isolation of the pandemic conceals an intensification of social connectivity and surveillance, reversing the common understanding of 'social distancing'.
“Trump is not a master who wears a mask of dignity — he proudly displays his own nakedness, and the mystery is he nonetheless retains his authority.”
The classical logic of authority through dignified self-concealment is inverted: obscene self-exposure now produces authority rather than destroying it.
“We don't have socialism with a human face but capitalism with a human face — the great reset.”
The 1968 left reformist ideal of 'socialism with a human face' has been appropriated and inverted by capitalism, which now presents philanthrocapitalism as its own humanized face.
“My problem with political correctness is not its moralism — it's that it's a fake, false moralism.”
What appears as radical moral extremism is in fact a cover for ideological compromise with the system; the apparent excess of moral policing conceals an absence of genuine critique.
“The futur of Trump would be the same president — only the avenir, what is genuinely to come, marks real change.”
The distinction between mere temporal continuation (futur) and genuine rupture (avenir) shows that returning to 'normal' is itself a conservative ideological choice masquerading as neutrality.
“Populists are dangerous not when they lie but when they sustain their lies by partial truths.”
The greatest ideological danger is not pure falsehood but ideologically mobilized truth, partial facts that lend credibility to a fundamentally misleading narrative.
Claims 14
asserts
The COVID-19 pandemic reveals a structural Marxian tendency toward something like communism — global healthcare coordination, market limitation, and social control over the economy — which even capitalist elites are forced to admit.COVID-19 and the tendency toward communism
rejects
The 'great reset' philanthrocapitalism of Bill Gates and similar figures is the most dangerous form of capitalism today, presenting itself as humane while the concentration of wealth continues to grow.great reset / philanthrocapitalism
asserts
The new tech billionaires (Gates, Bezos, Zuckerberg) derive their wealth not from classical profit but from rent — the privatization of digital commons — marking a structural shift in capitalism.platform capitalism and rent extraction
asserts
Successful COVID responses (China, Cuba, Vietnam, Taiwan) demonstrate that social control over the market is possible and effective, and the argument that it requires authoritarianism is undermined by non-communist examples like Taiwan.COVID policy and social control
asserts
Marx's failure to develop a proper theory of political power and authority is not merely an oversight but explains why communist experiments degenerated into Stalinism, and we need concrete 'recipes for the cookshops of the future'.Marx's theoretical limitations
rejects
Trump is not a fascist but a new, post-dignified type of authority that operates through obscenity and self-ridicule rather than through the dignified mask of classical leadership, and conflating him with fascism misunderstands his structural novelty.Trump as fascist
rejects
Political correctness is not genuine moralism but fake moralism — a cover for complicity with the system, exemplified by corporations firing minor executives for racial slurs while the underlying structure remains unchanged.political correctness as genuine critique
asserts
The populist right (Bannon, Trump) is dangerous not because it lies but because it sustains its lies by partial truths — correctly identifying problems like corporate centralization and rising inequality while offering false solutions.right-wing populism and ideology
reframes
What is called 'social distancing' is in fact only bodily distancing; socially and digitally we are more connected and controlled than ever, a situation Žižek regards as more alarming than genuine isolation.social distancing
rejects
Mass street protests and hashtag movements (Arab Spring, Occupy, Syntagma Square) fail to produce real change for ordinary people — the morning after, their conditions are unchanged or worse — so the left must focus on building institutional power.spontaneous protest movements as sufficient politics
asserts
Starbucks-style ethical consumerism is the supreme ideological move of contemporary capitalism: it commodifies social duty, collapsing the distinction between consuming and doing good, thereby neutralizing any structural critique.ethical consumerism and ideology
rejects
A certain amount of trauma is not only unavoidable but necessary for genuine thinking and creativity; the obsession with protecting people from discomfort in educational institutions will produce greater trauma when they encounter real life.safe spaces and well-being culture in academia
asserts
The left should not cede the language of morality to the right but should address the 'silent moral majority' and show that Trump and the new right are the true nihilistic postmodern decadents.left strategy and moral language
asserts
Cuba's use of neighborhood Committees for the Defense of the Revolution for COVID welfare monitoring shows that effective crisis response requires local community initiative, not just centralized state power.local vs. centralized crisis management
Quotes 12
“your social duty is already commodified it's included in the price so you can easily enjoy your coffee”Slavoj Žižek · commodified social duty / Starbucks ideology
“it's not when they lie, it's when they sustain their lie by partial truth”Slavoj Žižek · ideology as partial truth / right-wing populism
“we didn't fight just for this we fought for dignity and work”Slavoj Žižek · limits of liberal political freedom without economic dignity
“Trump is the absolute postmodern historicist relativist president that you have”Slavoj Žižek · Trump as postmodern / refutation of Peterson
“Now we are getting capitalism with a human face. Bill Gates the greatest humanitarian.”Slavoj Žižek · capitalism with a human face / philanthrocapitalism
“not social distancing but bodily distancing — socially through digital media we are more connected more controlled than ever”Slavoj Žižek · bodily vs. social distancing
“for Lacan enjoyment is pleasure in pain not direct pleasure”Slavoj Žižek · jouissance / Lacanian enjoyment
“No it's not the end of the world but we want a different better end of the world you know.”Slavoj Žižek · political rupture without apocalypticism
“futur means just what will come but avenir is to come, what will come after — a change”Slavoj Žižek · futur vs. avenir / genuine political change
“there is no thinking real thinking without at least as you put it nicely a moderate trauma”Slavoj Žižek · productive role of trauma in thinking and creativity
“Trump proudly displays his own nakedness. And the mystery is nonetheless he retains his authority.”Slavoj Žižek · Trump's obscene authority / dis-sublimation of power
“you remember COVID is not just COVID, crisis will go on, something for which I like to use the term communism”Slavoj Žižek · communism as name for necessary global solidarity
Transcript 134 turns
unknown
Michael Brooks back in the spring and you made a kind of maybe half joking comment about how the way that governments had to coordinate and societies had to respond to it was with war communism. It wasn't a total joke. It
Michael Brooks back in the spring and you made a kind of maybe half joking comment about how the way that governments had to coordinate and societies had to respond to it was with war communism. It wasn't a total joke. It
Slavoj Žižek
wasn't a joke in the sense that I simply mean it seriously. In what sense, can I go a little bit into half theory? Many Marxists or even half Marxists, Adorno, pointed out that the crucial dialectical category of Marx is tendency. Like when Marx speaks about tendential fall of profit, it doesn't mean profits will really fall, the rate of profit. It means this is the general tendency and even if what effectively happens is the opposite, profits go up and so on, it's because the system reacts against this threat. And in a similar way, I think that if there is a lesson from COVID is that even our enemies admit it, a tendency towards something like communism. For example, everybody admits it, we need to global, we need to universalize healthcare, we need to coordinate it internationally, internationally, we need to limit the market. This is why if I may improvise a little bit, sorry by my, yes, this is why I wonder if you would agree with me, please interrupt me any point you want. This is why I am getting sick and tired, although my model is not the Chinese one, of this whenever people mention that the Chinese did it, get under control the COVID,
wasn't a joke in the sense that I simply mean it seriously. In what sense, can I go a little bit into half theory? Many Marxists or even half Marxists, Adorno, pointed out that the crucial dialectical category of Marx is tendency. Like when Marx speaks about tendential fall of profit, it doesn't mean profits will really fall, the rate of profit. It means this is the general tendency and even if what effectively happens is the opposite, profits go up and so on, it's because the system reacts against this threat. And in a similar way, I think that if there is a lesson from COVID is that even our enemies admit it, a tendency towards something like communism. For example, everybody admits it, we need to global, we need to universalize healthcare, we need to coordinate it internationally, internationally, we need to limit the market. This is why if I may improvise a little bit, sorry by my, yes, this is why I wonder if you would agree with me, please interrupt me any point you want. This is why I am getting sick and tired, although my model is not the Chinese one, of this whenever people mention that the Chinese did it, get under control the COVID,
unknown
they add,
they add,
Slavoj Žižek
yeah, but what price they paid, you know, like limiting human freedoms, whatever. I agree, but nonetheless, the Chinese did it and the key factor was two things. First, as it is clear even, you remember when Trump recorded an interview with Bernstein or who, and he even said that the Chinese president Xi already in January or when, warned Trump that this is a deadly serious thing. So the Chinese took this crisis absolute after the first weeks of the usual communist in power oscillation, you try to cover it up, but then as they when it became obvious what is happening, they immediately took it extremely seriously, and, you know, they didn't say, but our economy cannot sustain this market and so on. My God, they put almost the entire country into a lockdown. They were not bluffing, how do you know, you remember all those satellite photos of how the air pollution, the clouds disappeared and so on and so on. Why did this happen? I don't want to repeat that form, but because nonetheless, Communist Party was strong enough to say, okay, market is nice, it works competition, but sorry guys now things are serious we should suspend it. And they did in this sense the right thing. They had a lockdown for what one month and so on and now they are reaping the reward. Yeah, people in Wuhan can go outside without masks and have parties and yeah. What I want to say is that we should do it the Chinese way. Exactly, it's not even necessary, take Taiwan which is definitely not communist. But let's look at the few success stories. I will not talk about New Zealand because they are lucky the guys there, they are an island and so on. But look at Vietnam, even Cuba, one has to admit it, you know, Taiwan, Chinese don't want to hear that. So what I mean is that it is possible, my God, to, and what I even read in some American Business Institute totally pro-capitalist, they said strike with full lockdown when the numbers are still low. Chinese numbers are ridiculous compared to our numbers now. My God, Chinese all in all had less numbers, much less than you in the United
yeah, but what price they paid, you know, like limiting human freedoms, whatever. I agree, but nonetheless, the Chinese did it and the key factor was two things. First, as it is clear even, you remember when Trump recorded an interview with Bernstein or who, and he even said that the Chinese president Xi already in January or when, warned Trump that this is a deadly serious thing. So the Chinese took this crisis absolute after the first weeks of the usual communist in power oscillation, you try to cover it up, but then as they when it became obvious what is happening, they immediately took it extremely seriously, and, you know, they didn't say, but our economy cannot sustain this market and so on. My God, they put almost the entire country into a lockdown. They were not bluffing, how do you know, you remember all those satellite photos of how the air pollution, the clouds disappeared and so on and so on. Why did this happen? I don't want to repeat that form, but because nonetheless, Communist Party was strong enough to say, okay, market is nice, it works competition, but sorry guys now things are serious we should suspend it. And they did in this sense the right thing. They had a lockdown for what one month and so on and now they are reaping the reward. Yeah, people in Wuhan can go outside without masks and have parties and yeah. What I want to say is that we should do it the Chinese way. Exactly, it's not even necessary, take Taiwan which is definitely not communist. But let's look at the few success stories. I will not talk about New Zealand because they are lucky the guys there, they are an island and so on. But look at Vietnam, even Cuba, one has to admit it, you know, Taiwan, Chinese don't want to hear that. So what I mean is that it is possible, my God, to, and what I even read in some American Business Institute totally pro-capitalist, they said strike with full lockdown when the numbers are still low. Chinese numbers are ridiculous compared to our numbers now. My God, Chinese all in all had less numbers, much less than you in the United
unknown
States get in one day now and so on. So it's crucial this some kind of social control over economy,
States get in one day now and so on. So it's crucial this some kind of social control over economy,
Slavoj Žižek
global healthcare and so on and so on. Whatever you call it, these are, this is a tendency, everybody admits it, to some kind of communism. And what I'm saying, what I wanted to say is that all what is happening now, I found almost more disgusting than Trump's basically return to normality, this great reset idea, you know, which is they like the guy called Chris Galloway or who who did a bestseller for New York Times, no? He gives, I was fascinated by his self-description, although I didn't read the whole book. He gives a quite correct situation that earlier we had one to four, twenty to eighty percent rich versus the poor, now the rich, the wealth is concentrated into three percent, middle class, we know the story. But then what's his solution? Against egotism and for love and empathy. How do you translate this? I think it's this new corporate masters like Bill Gates and so on and they are very important. They signal, would you agree or not, the change in today's capitalism. Because on the one hand, I've written about this a lot years ago, they for me, one has to be very clear here, maybe I'm economically wrong but it seems to me the most obvious proposal, that people like Bill Gates, they didn't become as wealthy as they are because of the classical profit. It's not that Bill Gates exploits his workers more and so on. It's rent, I think. All these guys, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, they privatize what Marx called part of our commons. We are probably talking now through some Microsoft software and so on. We order books and so on, many other things now through Amazon. If you have personal message through Facebook and so on and so on. So we, it's it's paradoxically a return from profit to rent. Marx described the process of first it was rent, for example a landlord, you worked you paid him rent, then it was commodification of working towards profit. Now we are returning to then and this is to profit and sorry to rent and this I think is what is is crucial today to understand again these new figures which are even I agree with some people who said almost figures of new new new corporate wisdom. It's not only about COVID. Everything you want to know there is always somebody like, not so much Jeff Bezos as Bill Gates and so on, somebody like that to to give some wise comment and so on. They are our new aristocracy as somebody said and I think this is maybe the most dangerous version, this new form of capitalism, the great reset where if anything the the opposites, the concentration of wealth, the opposite between the wealthy one and the poor one is even is growing but it's crucial that this is or presents itself as what. You know when I was young we all dreamed about a socialism with a human face. Now we are getting capitalism with a human face. Bill Gates the greatest humanitarian. But do you remember when Elizabeth Warren, she was not as radical as Bernie, but nonetheless when she proposed a tax plan which would have implied a very modest rise of taxes on the rich, Bill Gates immediately protested. Oh my God this is no longer capitalism and so on and so on. You know this is I think the greatest threat, the big reset which is not really what is needed, is these guys like Bill Gates, they are not stupid. You know Bill Gates even had a debate with Piketty, you know this? I did not know that. Yeah and said I agree in many things with you and so on. So they they even at some point Bill Gates and I don't know who close to him defined themselves as some kind of socialists, you know, social, but if you look at it closely it's not real socialism, it's just social responsibility of the truly wealthy and so on and so on. So I think Ben, I'm curious because I guess this gets down to what I was asking with the war communism question. Obviously just capitalism plus you know social responsibility isn't socialism but when you talk about what we actually do need or the level of control over the economy that we'd need, I'm thinking here for example of an article that you wrote a couple of years ago after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was elected where you said of course we should support these democratic socialists but it's ultimately not radical enough what we need is communism. And so I'm hoping now it's possible here that you know my academic background is in analytic philosophy so one of the dangers of that is that I get really, really, sorry to interrupt you, who are your great guys? Whom did you like in analytic philosophy? Do you remember she now disappeared from the scene but Naming and Necessity, the 20th anniversary of Saul Kripke, even Donald Davidson was not bad, I have to, just to dispel this misunderstanding as a Hegelian I I I like some type of analytic philosophy I must say. They they can be very, very, in no way have I this standard European arrogance, you know, they are too positivist they don't know how to reflect on things and so on and so on. Not okay, sorry I interrupted. Yeah, so what I was going to say though I think one of the you know possibly as an effect of that background it's possible I'm being too pedantic and literal here but I mean you know when you talk about you know communism or you know we need this more radical break, you know since you since you said earlier of course right obviously you don't advocate like the you know the Chinese model and I think we can probably all agree that the version of economic planning that that existed in Eastern Europe and other places in the 20th century. That's
global healthcare and so on and so on. Whatever you call it, these are, this is a tendency, everybody admits it, to some kind of communism. And what I'm saying, what I wanted to say is that all what is happening now, I found almost more disgusting than Trump's basically return to normality, this great reset idea, you know, which is they like the guy called Chris Galloway or who who did a bestseller for New York Times, no? He gives, I was fascinated by his self-description, although I didn't read the whole book. He gives a quite correct situation that earlier we had one to four, twenty to eighty percent rich versus the poor, now the rich, the wealth is concentrated into three percent, middle class, we know the story. But then what's his solution? Against egotism and for love and empathy. How do you translate this? I think it's this new corporate masters like Bill Gates and so on and they are very important. They signal, would you agree or not, the change in today's capitalism. Because on the one hand, I've written about this a lot years ago, they for me, one has to be very clear here, maybe I'm economically wrong but it seems to me the most obvious proposal, that people like Bill Gates, they didn't become as wealthy as they are because of the classical profit. It's not that Bill Gates exploits his workers more and so on. It's rent, I think. All these guys, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, they privatize what Marx called part of our commons. We are probably talking now through some Microsoft software and so on. We order books and so on, many other things now through Amazon. If you have personal message through Facebook and so on and so on. So we, it's it's paradoxically a return from profit to rent. Marx described the process of first it was rent, for example a landlord, you worked you paid him rent, then it was commodification of working towards profit. Now we are returning to then and this is to profit and sorry to rent and this I think is what is is crucial today to understand again these new figures which are even I agree with some people who said almost figures of new new new corporate wisdom. It's not only about COVID. Everything you want to know there is always somebody like, not so much Jeff Bezos as Bill Gates and so on, somebody like that to to give some wise comment and so on. They are our new aristocracy as somebody said and I think this is maybe the most dangerous version, this new form of capitalism, the great reset where if anything the the opposites, the concentration of wealth, the opposite between the wealthy one and the poor one is even is growing but it's crucial that this is or presents itself as what. You know when I was young we all dreamed about a socialism with a human face. Now we are getting capitalism with a human face. Bill Gates the greatest humanitarian. But do you remember when Elizabeth Warren, she was not as radical as Bernie, but nonetheless when she proposed a tax plan which would have implied a very modest rise of taxes on the rich, Bill Gates immediately protested. Oh my God this is no longer capitalism and so on and so on. You know this is I think the greatest threat, the big reset which is not really what is needed, is these guys like Bill Gates, they are not stupid. You know Bill Gates even had a debate with Piketty, you know this? I did not know that. Yeah and said I agree in many things with you and so on. So they they even at some point Bill Gates and I don't know who close to him defined themselves as some kind of socialists, you know, social, but if you look at it closely it's not real socialism, it's just social responsibility of the truly wealthy and so on and so on. So I think Ben, I'm curious because I guess this gets down to what I was asking with the war communism question. Obviously just capitalism plus you know social responsibility isn't socialism but when you talk about what we actually do need or the level of control over the economy that we'd need, I'm thinking here for example of an article that you wrote a couple of years ago after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was elected where you said of course we should support these democratic socialists but it's ultimately not radical enough what we need is communism. And so I'm hoping now it's possible here that you know my academic background is in analytic philosophy so one of the dangers of that is that I get really, really, sorry to interrupt you, who are your great guys? Whom did you like in analytic philosophy? Do you remember she now disappeared from the scene but Naming and Necessity, the 20th anniversary of Saul Kripke, even Donald Davidson was not bad, I have to, just to dispel this misunderstanding as a Hegelian I I I like some type of analytic philosophy I must say. They they can be very, very, in no way have I this standard European arrogance, you know, they are too positivist they don't know how to reflect on things and so on and so on. Not okay, sorry I interrupted. Yeah, so what I was going to say though I think one of the you know possibly as an effect of that background it's possible I'm being too pedantic and literal here but I mean you know when you talk about you know communism or you know we need this more radical break, you know since you since you said earlier of course right obviously you don't advocate like the you know the Chinese model and I think we can probably all agree that the version of economic planning that that existed in Eastern Europe and other places in the 20th century. That's
unknown
over, that's over. 20th century is over in the sense that that vision, that vision of communism, either it's alive in this pure historical curiosities, relics like North Korea, even Cuba, although wait a minute, Cuba did pretty well with COVID, you know this? I've heard some through on October, but they only had a hundred, you know I mean look in Ingham County Michigan where I'm from there are thousand people and about COVID deaths, Cuba has million people and only more than that, so, and you can say oh Cuba's an island but Puerto Rico's an island and they've had terrible COVID rates so. Yes but you know what I heard from friends who knew Cuba, you know what they did? You remember if you I was in Cuba totally private visit but I looked into it, you know they they had what they call this infamous Committees for the Defense of the
over, that's over. 20th century is over in the sense that that vision, that vision of communism, either it's alive in this pure historical curiosities, relics like North Korea, even Cuba, although wait a minute, Cuba did pretty well with COVID, you know this? I've heard some through on October, but they only had a hundred, you know I mean look in Ingham County Michigan where I'm from there are thousand people and about COVID deaths, Cuba has million people and only more than that, so, and you can say oh Cuba's an island but Puerto Rico's an island and they've had terrible COVID rates so. Yes but you know what I heard from friends who knew Cuba, you know what they did? You remember if you I was in Cuba totally private visit but I looked into it, you know they they had what they call this infamous Committees for the Defense of the
Slavoj Žižek
Revolution. They control each of these committees a couple of blocks if that's some dissident activity and so on, but now they used them in a very nice way to simply look over their domain and ask so is there some old person there who needs help, let's control and so on and it's a very important lesson against the Chinese model, you need local control and initiative. I'm not a believer just in state stronger centralized state, state has to be supported from beneath by local communities and absolutely by stronger international cooperation. So all this for me points against why communism, it's not just a joke for me to
Revolution. They control each of these committees a couple of blocks if that's some dissident activity and so on, but now they used them in a very nice way to simply look over their domain and ask so is there some old person there who needs help, let's control and so on and it's a very important lesson against the Chinese model, you need local control and initiative. I'm not a believer just in state stronger centralized state, state has to be supported from beneath by local communities and absolutely by stronger international cooperation. So all this for me points against why communism, it's not just a joke for me to
unknown
provoke people, because you know don't you think that socialism is okay, United States is a special case where the word socialism was prohibited till now and that's what I like with Bernie and AOC and so on, if nothing else they rehabilitated the term socialism. You are not immediately an outcast, you can use it. But I still have a problem in the sense
provoke people, because you know don't you think that socialism is okay, United States is a special case where the word socialism was prohibited till now and that's what I like with Bernie and AOC and so on, if nothing else they rehabilitated the term socialism. You are not immediately an outcast, you can use it. But I still have a problem in the sense
unknown
that you know even Gates said hinted that maybe in some sense he's a social, socialism in today's moralistic age isn't it more or less a term for some kind of social solidarity, open openness and so on. So you know like you you the system remains the
that you know even Gates said hinted that maybe in some sense he's a social, socialism in today's moralistic age isn't it more or less a term for some kind of social solidarity, open openness and so on. So you know like you you the system remains the
Slavoj Žižek
same but you just do it with a more human face and so on. That's my limit, but in practical pragmatic political terms I of course agree with it. And why on the other hand you know why I like to use the word provocative I know communism? Because it indicates a real change, radical change and I think here it's not that's why I use the term war communism, because
same but you just do it with a more human face and so on. That's my limit, but in practical pragmatic political terms I of course agree with it. And why on the other hand you know why I like to use the word provocative I know communism? Because it indicates a real change, radical change and I think here it's not that's why I use the term war communism, because
unknown
now it will not be that happy, polymorphous almost perversity that Marx imagined, it there will be harsh times ahead. My God I'm not taking this from some left lunatic so-called. The more we learn about what experts are saying to different governments like now we learn that two years ago some group of experts wrote a memo to Prime Minister, I don't think it was even already Boris Johnson, about what are the threats, two years ago or
now it will not be that happy, polymorphous almost perversity that Marx imagined, it there will be harsh times ahead. My God I'm not taking this from some left lunatic so-called. The more we learn about what experts are saying to different governments like now we learn that two years ago some group of experts wrote a memo to Prime Minister, I don't think it was even already Boris Johnson, about what are the threats, two years ago or
Slavoj Žižek
three even, yes, and they explicitly named virus as the first danger, the second one global warming and then way after all the China, Putin or whatever all that. So I think we are entering a much longer emergency period. It will not be now we get all vaccinated and then the summer will be normal. We don't even know how all this vaccination will function, there are already other strains of the virus, not to
three even, yes, and they explicitly named virus as the first danger, the second one global warming and then way after all the China, Putin or whatever all that. So I think we are entering a much longer emergency period. It will not be now we get all vaccinated and then the summer will be normal. We don't even know how all this vaccination will function, there are already other strains of the virus, not to
unknown
mention
mention
Slavoj Žižek
the real horror, I mean global warming, its effects. I think the way it looks now if nothing else it will come to tremendous large movements of the population, you know millions will have to resettle. How to do this without war? In the past this did happen through but usually through war, you know you invaded another territory when yours became uninhabited. But I think that today with nuclear weapons and so on we simply cannot afford this. So if I just very coldly and rationally look at our global situation with the view that it's not just COVID, crisis will go on, something for which I like to use the term communism, I allows other other terms which especially means practical global solidarity, not this abstract humanitarian type. Universal, social control over economy and so on and so on, will be necessary and again that's my point, it's a tendency. Those in power somehow at least feel it and I think even ultimately even Trump is a reaction to this. He saw, not as a conscious moment of planning, he saw new forms of despair, poverty, he guessed well the alienation from ordinary so-called ordinary people of the democratic establishment and he entered the scene with his type of populism. That's why now a confession to our viewers and especially to you. Okay. Sometimes I enjoy looking at that America war, Bannon, Steve Bannon's podcast because it's a big lie of course. But to sustain his lie, he nonetheless points to many quite pertinent facts, you know, like he said that it doesn't really matter Obama-Trump, that even under Obama this tendency of corporate centralization, rising poverty and so on went on and
the real horror, I mean global warming, its effects. I think the way it looks now if nothing else it will come to tremendous large movements of the population, you know millions will have to resettle. How to do this without war? In the past this did happen through but usually through war, you know you invaded another territory when yours became uninhabited. But I think that today with nuclear weapons and so on we simply cannot afford this. So if I just very coldly and rationally look at our global situation with the view that it's not just COVID, crisis will go on, something for which I like to use the term communism, I allows other other terms which especially means practical global solidarity, not this abstract humanitarian type. Universal, social control over economy and so on and so on, will be necessary and again that's my point, it's a tendency. Those in power somehow at least feel it and I think even ultimately even Trump is a reaction to this. He saw, not as a conscious moment of planning, he saw new forms of despair, poverty, he guessed well the alienation from ordinary so-called ordinary people of the democratic establishment and he entered the scene with his type of populism. That's why now a confession to our viewers and especially to you. Okay. Sometimes I enjoy looking at that America war, Bannon, Steve Bannon's podcast because it's a big lie of course. But to sustain his lie, he nonetheless points to many quite pertinent facts, you know, like he said that it doesn't really matter Obama-Trump, that even under Obama this tendency of corporate centralization, rising poverty and so on went on and
unknown
so on and
so on and
Slavoj Žižek
so on. This is as I always repeat the most dangerous by our enemies the new populist left and so on, it's not when they lie, it's when they sustain their lie by partial truth. Yeah, I actually relate to our everyday experience. I talk too much please go on. Well I was actually going to say that last part reminded me, you know one of the books behind me is one that I co-wrote with Conrad Hamilton, Matt McManus and Marion Trejo that you wrote an introduction to, that's "Myth and Mayhem" and I remember in the introduction to that book that you wrote you said, you said the same thing about Jordan Peterson that the dangerous thing about him you know was that part of what he said was true and you know and that that helped to like that he was more dangerous you know because of those truths you know that he was mixing in. But as far as Bannon goes I would like I think that Bannon certainly points to a lot of actual problems although I think it is remarkable how thin his solutions are. Right so like for example so there's a there's a podcast called Red Scare that had Steve Bannon on as a guest a few months ago and a lot of people were very upset at them for having him on because Is this the two girls from Belarus or Ukraine? Yeah, yeah, Anna and Dasha, yep. That's the one, right? And so lots of people were very angry at them for you know for giving a platform to this horrible fascist etcetera. But this the thing is I loved it, right? I remember Michael Brooks pointed this out at the time because it was a great interview because they instead of just sort of yelling at him for being a bad person like most people do, they asked him a really simple question which was you say you're a populist why don't you support Medicare for All? And and it you know he it was just so obvious that he didn't have a good, a good answer to that, right? You know because so much of his rhetoric depends on all of this stuff about very real things about corporate power and economic inequality but but his the policy solutions you know aren't really there. He says oh you know he wants to deconstruct the administrative state which sounds sort of scary and sort of radical and oddly. It's kind of a scary, scary Derrida thing, Derrida returning as a monster. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it's like what does that actually mean that deregulation doesn't mean you know
so on. This is as I always repeat the most dangerous by our enemies the new populist left and so on, it's not when they lie, it's when they sustain their lie by partial truth. Yeah, I actually relate to our everyday experience. I talk too much please go on. Well I was actually going to say that last part reminded me, you know one of the books behind me is one that I co-wrote with Conrad Hamilton, Matt McManus and Marion Trejo that you wrote an introduction to, that's "Myth and Mayhem" and I remember in the introduction to that book that you wrote you said, you said the same thing about Jordan Peterson that the dangerous thing about him you know was that part of what he said was true and you know and that that helped to like that he was more dangerous you know because of those truths you know that he was mixing in. But as far as Bannon goes I would like I think that Bannon certainly points to a lot of actual problems although I think it is remarkable how thin his solutions are. Right so like for example so there's a there's a podcast called Red Scare that had Steve Bannon on as a guest a few months ago and a lot of people were very upset at them for having him on because Is this the two girls from Belarus or Ukraine? Yeah, yeah, Anna and Dasha, yep. That's the one, right? And so lots of people were very angry at them for you know for giving a platform to this horrible fascist etcetera. But this the thing is I loved it, right? I remember Michael Brooks pointed this out at the time because it was a great interview because they instead of just sort of yelling at him for being a bad person like most people do, they asked him a really simple question which was you say you're a populist why don't you support Medicare for All? And and it you know he it was just so obvious that he didn't have a good, a good answer to that, right? You know because so much of his rhetoric depends on all of this stuff about very real things about corporate power and economic inequality but but his the policy solutions you know aren't really there. He says oh you know he wants to deconstruct the administrative state which sounds sort of scary and sort of radical and oddly. It's kind of a scary, scary Derrida thing, Derrida returning as a monster. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it's like what does that actually mean that deregulation doesn't mean you know
unknown
it's it's at
it's it's at
Slavoj Žižek
the very least it's very unclear to me. But as far as your long-term solutions go right so you said you want you know like you prefer the word communism because socialism has been defanged. Yeah but I'm flexible here I'm not a fanatic. I just think people the message should get to people that it's not a joke this. You know I that's one of the few moments when I wouldn't say I liked Trump but I felt although with that person I don't think he has really an ego as a self-decent personality but you know when you could hear you know Bernstein when he he even played that recording how you could feel that Trump was really impressed when Xi the Chinese guy told him sorry this COVID this is not a joke it's deathly serious you know. So here I agree totally with you to avoid
the very least it's very unclear to me. But as far as your long-term solutions go right so you said you want you know like you prefer the word communism because socialism has been defanged. Yeah but I'm flexible here I'm not a fanatic. I just think people the message should get to people that it's not a joke this. You know I that's one of the few moments when I wouldn't say I liked Trump but I felt although with that person I don't think he has really an ego as a self-decent personality but you know when you could hear you know Bernstein when he he even played that recording how you could feel that Trump was really impressed when Xi the Chinese guy told him sorry this COVID this is not a joke it's deathly serious you know. So here I agree totally with you to avoid
unknown
a misunderstanding. Okay one good thing
a misunderstanding. Okay one good thing
Slavoj Žižek
I'm ready half to say for Steve Bannon is that but then he made a compromise immediately. You remember before the elections or and before he was thrown out of the White House he nonetheless one must say he advocated raising taxes to Yeah that was one. But on the other hand when he says under Obama concentration of wealth went on, well okay but even more under Trump. Okay Trump did elements of under quotation marks socialism basically already some version of universal basic income giving these checks and so on and so on. But you know it's obscene how most of the money to support business and so on to survive went to big corporation often on a political basis, went even, some of my Catholic friends
I'm ready half to say for Steve Bannon is that but then he made a compromise immediately. You remember before the elections or and before he was thrown out of the White House he nonetheless one must say he advocated raising taxes to Yeah that was one. But on the other hand when he says under Obama concentration of wealth went on, well okay but even more under Trump. Okay Trump did elements of under quotation marks socialism basically already some version of universal basic income giving these checks and so on and so on. But you know it's obscene how most of the money to support business and so on to survive went to big corporation often on a political basis, went even, some of my Catholic friends
unknown
in the United States laughed when they learned did you know that Trump gave millions to the Catholic Church to survive the COVID. And my
in the United States laughed when they learned did you know that Trump gave millions to the Catholic Church to survive the COVID. And my
unknown
friends said this is wonderful we will now be able to repay all that we owe people for pedophilia cases and so on and you know. So no it's absolutely a lie I know. But obviously and again sorry if I repeat myself I often wrote about this but Bernie Sanders saw this clearly. Our more than this typical Biden obsession, who will cover the center? We should occupy the center. Let's not move too much to the left we will scare the center. We should at least here learn things from Trump, don't you think? Trump did exactly the opposite and he even consciously alienated much of the Republican establishment and we should learn the same I think. That the way that's why among other things let's not go into it in detail Hillary Wall, Hillary lost sorry. She was obsessed precisely by this. That's why if you ask me I worry very much about the future. I am not against Americans as people, it's a great nation it did my God how can you hate a nation which produced great Hollywood classics and writers like Dashiel Hammett or Raymond Chandler and so on you know. But Trump will screw up things so much and leave behind problems that how will Biden cope with it. I hope they will succeed somehow to prosecute Trump or whatever because you don't think so? I mean like it's it seems like we never you know prosecute former, former presidents who've committed crimes. I mean Nixon. Yeah no I said I hope no I don't believe I think it's a minimal chance. Although this is you know I wrote a text which was very marginalized but you know now I love this as a philosophical problem this I connected it to that Barber Paradox you know which was already used by Russell,
friends said this is wonderful we will now be able to repay all that we owe people for pedophilia cases and so on and you know. So no it's absolutely a lie I know. But obviously and again sorry if I repeat myself I often wrote about this but Bernie Sanders saw this clearly. Our more than this typical Biden obsession, who will cover the center? We should occupy the center. Let's not move too much to the left we will scare the center. We should at least here learn things from Trump, don't you think? Trump did exactly the opposite and he even consciously alienated much of the Republican establishment and we should learn the same I think. That the way that's why among other things let's not go into it in detail Hillary Wall, Hillary lost sorry. She was obsessed precisely by this. That's why if you ask me I worry very much about the future. I am not against Americans as people, it's a great nation it did my God how can you hate a nation which produced great Hollywood classics and writers like Dashiel Hammett or Raymond Chandler and so on you know. But Trump will screw up things so much and leave behind problems that how will Biden cope with it. I hope they will succeed somehow to prosecute Trump or whatever because you don't think so? I mean like it's it seems like we never you know prosecute former, former presidents who've committed crimes. I mean Nixon. Yeah no I said I hope no I don't believe I think it's a minimal chance. Although this is you know I wrote a text which was very marginalized but you know now I love this as a philosophical problem this I connected it to that Barber Paradox you know which was already used by Russell,
Slavoj Žižek
you know how
you know how
unknown
a barber who shaves only people who don't shave themselves, can he shave himself? Whichever way you turn it you're in a paradox and I tried to apply the same on Trump. A president who pardons other people can he pardon himself and so on. But it's the sad thing is and you may disagree with her but here she made a point Angela Nagle no? The thing
a barber who shaves only people who don't shave themselves, can he shave himself? Whichever way you turn it you're in a paradox and I tried to apply the same on Trump. A president who pardons other people can he pardon himself and so on. But it's the sad thing is and you may disagree with her but here she made a point Angela Nagle no? The thing
Slavoj Žižek
she said nonetheless correctly I think is how this new populist right they behave in the form of their behavior, not content, they behave in this pseudo subversive way as once the radical left did. And here now what to do? You will probably not agree but my crazy solution is what if we adopt or at least to a point the language of moral majority? No not that Nixon moral majority. Look when I had that unfortunate debate with Jordan Peterson and afterwards I spoke with him for a couple of minutes and he admitted to me privately that there he doesn't have a good answer to my point. I said okay tell him Jordan okay you are against postmodern historicism, relativism, irony and so on. But wait a minute Trump is the absolute postmodern historicist relativist president that you have. You know it's typical Trump's answer to one of those right-wing groups who call for violence no? They ask him what's your stance towards them and he said no they love America and they like me that's what matters to me he didn't even enter you know this topic but is it right what they are saying. So I think that I would risk this it's a risky move I know but to say sorry we understand you if you are an ordinary even Christian guy believer, sorry no Trump is the ultimate relativist decadent postmodernist and that's what I like about Bernie. If there ever was a common decent person it's him you know. And this is an important element. I think this is also why for some time Jeremy Corbyn was doing well in the United States, now this was totally it's clear a state coup against him in the Labour party it's horror what happened there you know. But what I want to say is that I would shamelessly address also this what Nixon called silent moral majority. Bernie knows this it's crucial to get them to tell them that no this new right Trump these are the true nihilistic postmodern decadents or whatever. Sorry I talked too much. Yeah no so so I think there's morality in two, two senses right? So one one is like be like moralistic policing of individual behavior which I kind of think we have too much of on the left and I think that especially with the pandemic you know some of the obsession with like yelling at people for not wearing masks and things like that is probably unhelpful but then then the other part is is moral critique of institutions saying it's morally outrageous that there are people who lose their health insurance during a pandemic, that there are people who are homeless and I think Bernie Sanders is very good at that at sort of channeling that moral outrage at the you know at the workings of the American economy. Yes and this is what I would call effective critique of ideology. That we have an outrage but how we experience this outrage depends on ideology how we channel it. Here it's the here it's the key trouble. Which is why again as people wrongly think my problem with political correctness it's not its moralism it's that it's a fake false moralism. You know this apparent extremism is just a cover for very compromising stance when you really look at the details. For example I've written about it you know which is for me the most disgusting
she said nonetheless correctly I think is how this new populist right they behave in the form of their behavior, not content, they behave in this pseudo subversive way as once the radical left did. And here now what to do? You will probably not agree but my crazy solution is what if we adopt or at least to a point the language of moral majority? No not that Nixon moral majority. Look when I had that unfortunate debate with Jordan Peterson and afterwards I spoke with him for a couple of minutes and he admitted to me privately that there he doesn't have a good answer to my point. I said okay tell him Jordan okay you are against postmodern historicism, relativism, irony and so on. But wait a minute Trump is the absolute postmodern historicist relativist president that you have. You know it's typical Trump's answer to one of those right-wing groups who call for violence no? They ask him what's your stance towards them and he said no they love America and they like me that's what matters to me he didn't even enter you know this topic but is it right what they are saying. So I think that I would risk this it's a risky move I know but to say sorry we understand you if you are an ordinary even Christian guy believer, sorry no Trump is the ultimate relativist decadent postmodernist and that's what I like about Bernie. If there ever was a common decent person it's him you know. And this is an important element. I think this is also why for some time Jeremy Corbyn was doing well in the United States, now this was totally it's clear a state coup against him in the Labour party it's horror what happened there you know. But what I want to say is that I would shamelessly address also this what Nixon called silent moral majority. Bernie knows this it's crucial to get them to tell them that no this new right Trump these are the true nihilistic postmodern decadents or whatever. Sorry I talked too much. Yeah no so so I think there's morality in two, two senses right? So one one is like be like moralistic policing of individual behavior which I kind of think we have too much of on the left and I think that especially with the pandemic you know some of the obsession with like yelling at people for not wearing masks and things like that is probably unhelpful but then then the other part is is moral critique of institutions saying it's morally outrageous that there are people who lose their health insurance during a pandemic, that there are people who are homeless and I think Bernie Sanders is very good at that at sort of channeling that moral outrage at the you know at the workings of the American economy. Yes and this is what I would call effective critique of ideology. That we have an outrage but how we experience this outrage depends on ideology how we channel it. Here it's the here it's the key trouble. Which is why again as people wrongly think my problem with political correctness it's not its moralism it's that it's a fake false moralism. You know this apparent extremism is just a cover for very compromising stance when you really look at the details. For example I've written about it you know which is for me the most disgusting
unknown
example. You remember how easily a big corporate company when they catch some of their usually minor or mid-level executives making racial slur or whatever
example. You remember how easily a big corporate company when they catch some of their usually minor or mid-level executives making racial slur or whatever
Slavoj Žižek
sexist remark with all the pomp in the media they discharge him and so on and so on. And what then they nominate another guy and then the same system goes on. In the same sense there is something like I call it ironically in a very brutal way corporate feminism. You know they think that all that matters is that okay we name to the top position a couple of women. Nice but the system remains the same. This is where this is where we should refocus in a way you know. And again I think that for me precisely what many people perceive as a danger new populism and so on and even this panic with Bill Gates and so on now everybody wants to be some kind of a soft humanitarian socialist, it is a panic on their side. They are aware that the tendency is towards some kind of I call it sorry for
sexist remark with all the pomp in the media they discharge him and so on and so on. And what then they nominate another guy and then the same system goes on. In the same sense there is something like I call it ironically in a very brutal way corporate feminism. You know they think that all that matters is that okay we name to the top position a couple of women. Nice but the system remains the same. This is where this is where we should refocus in a way you know. And again I think that for me precisely what many people perceive as a danger new populism and so on and even this panic with Bill Gates and so on now everybody wants to be some kind of a soft humanitarian socialist, it is a panic on their side. They are aware that the tendency is towards some kind of I call it sorry for
unknown
the term communism although again this
the term communism although again this
Slavoj Žižek
is in Marxian sense a tendency. It may provoke the much as Marx says the same. The the actual effect of the falling rate of profit may be that the reaction to it will be so strong that the profit rate will even raise more I mean nothing is predetermined here. Yeah I well okay so first of all just a parenthetical note was happy and surprised to hear you mention the Barber Paradox, I actually you know you asked me about this
is in Marxian sense a tendency. It may provoke the much as Marx says the same. The the actual effect of the falling rate of profit may be that the reaction to it will be so strong that the profit rate will even raise more I mean nothing is predetermined here. Yeah I well okay so first of all just a parenthetical note was happy and surprised to hear you mention the Barber Paradox, I actually you know you asked me about this
unknown
earlier my
earlier my
Slavoj Žižek
my PhD dissertation was actually about logical paradoxes so that's that's manna to me but but as far as Really oh my god did you print it your dissertation? No it's actually being adapted into a book that might come out next year. I can send it to you if you want but more to our topic so that we don't lose time you know what interests me what was your basic so I hope you didn't buy Russell solution which No no through this classification into different levels you can get rid of them. Yeah yeah which which actually I liked there's a there's actually a graphic novel called Logicomix about Bertrand Russell and Russell's Paradox and all of that and there's a good line in there where they're talking about Russell's theory of types and they explain it by using the Barber Paradox and they say that you imagine a caste system where people could only shave
my PhD dissertation was actually about logical paradoxes so that's that's manna to me but but as far as Really oh my god did you print it your dissertation? No it's actually being adapted into a book that might come out next year. I can send it to you if you want but more to our topic so that we don't lose time you know what interests me what was your basic so I hope you didn't buy Russell solution which No no through this classification into different levels you can get rid of them. Yeah yeah which which actually I liked there's a there's actually a graphic novel called Logicomix about Bertrand Russell and Russell's Paradox and all of that and there's a good line in there where they're talking about Russell's theory of types and they explain it by using the Barber Paradox and they say that you imagine a caste system where people could only shave
unknown
people in the caste above them and you'd have
people in the caste above them and you'd have
Slavoj Žižek
a very hairy lowest caste but no I didn't I don't buy that I think that you know I mean I think basically that you can have like different versions of set theory that don't you know that have different axioms and none of them are actually describing something that that really exists but in any case I'll I'll send it to you I don't
a very hairy lowest caste but no I didn't I don't buy that I think that you know I mean I think basically that you can have like different versions of set theory that don't you know that have different axioms and none of them are actually describing something that that really exists but in any case I'll I'll send it to you I don't
unknown
want to get too far off but as far but but
want to get too far off but as far but but
Slavoj Žižek
the reason I was asking you about communism wasn't really about what we call it wasn't really about terminology but about you know I know of course that that Karl Marx famously said that he didn't want to write recipes for the cookshops of the future and I think I understand why he said that but I think that heretically I do disagree with Marx about this
the reason I was asking you about communism wasn't really about what we call it wasn't really about terminology but about you know I know of course that that Karl Marx famously said that he didn't want to write recipes for the cookshops of the future and I think I understand why he said that but I think that heretically I do disagree with Marx about this
unknown
I think we need to write recipes for the cookshops of the future. Very good point. Sorry to interrupt you and I'm always a bad guy I'm a living Barber Paradox. You know why it's important to say this? Because people praise this as you see Marx was not a dogmatic and so on. I'm almost almost it will be very brutal what I say tempted to say yes that's why we had Stalinism then you know because Marx left it so abstract. But one thing to say for Marx nonetheless he was not naive here he was open to history. For example many subtle readers of Marx noticed that till the Paris Commune he was much closer to a traditional centralist notion, strong state as in at the end of the Communist Manifesto,
I think we need to write recipes for the cookshops of the future. Very good point. Sorry to interrupt you and I'm always a bad guy I'm a living Barber Paradox. You know why it's important to say this? Because people praise this as you see Marx was not a dogmatic and so on. I'm almost almost it will be very brutal what I say tempted to say yes that's why we had Stalinism then you know because Marx left it so abstract. But one thing to say for Marx nonetheless he was not naive here he was open to history. For example many subtle readers of Marx noticed that till the Paris Commune he was much closer to a traditional centralist notion, strong state as in at the end of the Communist Manifesto,
Slavoj Žižek
a strong state will centralize bank will nationalize banks, big industry and Marx was in a positive sense surprised shocked by the Paris Commune, said my God this is the first time this new form and although Lenin then changed his position but you know when he wrote not only state and revolution but even in the first month of Alen Badiou told me this wonderful detail of October Revolution, I think that Paris Commune was in power of Paris of course for two months. You know what Lenin did it was winter of I think was it December or already January when the Soviet power survived longer one day more than Paris Commune Lenin went out and danced on the snow there. Like you know much more than I don't know what he considered himself the heir of the Paris Commune. But it's very important what you said. I think this problem with Marx it's not just a simple failure, many theoreticians pro-Marxists but critical of Marx noticed that Etie Balibar has shown this and others that Marx didn't have a good proper theory of political power, authority, how do these things reproduce themselves
a strong state will centralize bank will nationalize banks, big industry and Marx was in a positive sense surprised shocked by the Paris Commune, said my God this is the first time this new form and although Lenin then changed his position but you know when he wrote not only state and revolution but even in the first month of Alen Badiou told me this wonderful detail of October Revolution, I think that Paris Commune was in power of Paris of course for two months. You know what Lenin did it was winter of I think was it December or already January when the Soviet power survived longer one day more than Paris Commune Lenin went out and danced on the snow there. Like you know much more than I don't know what he considered himself the heir of the Paris Commune. But it's very important what you said. I think this problem with Marx it's not just a simple failure, many theoreticians pro-Marxists but critical of Marx noticed that Etie Balibar has shown this and others that Marx didn't have a good proper theory of political power, authority, how do these things reproduce themselves
unknown
and that's we know more than ever sorry we know we
and that's we know more than ever sorry we know we
Slavoj Žižek
need today. Because here I think as I write in my volume two of Pandemic which you can order it's out only as print of demand it will be out in a month or two in bookstores. You know usually we had leaders with dignified mask and then you have obscenities behind the mask and so on and so on. But Trump introduced a new logic where you know we don't need a child who says the emperor is naked, Trump proudly displays his own nakedness. And the mystery is nonetheless he retains his authority. And this is what we should analyze how authority can survive this radical how should I call it dis-sublimation or whatever. How leaders today can even make fun of themselves and so on, appear ridiculous, it even strengthens sometimes their executive power. We have new forms of authority today. It's no longer the traditional authority and it's typical how in the West we went further here while Chinese remain classic here you know. Yeah so
need today. Because here I think as I write in my volume two of Pandemic which you can order it's out only as print of demand it will be out in a month or two in bookstores. You know usually we had leaders with dignified mask and then you have obscenities behind the mask and so on and so on. But Trump introduced a new logic where you know we don't need a child who says the emperor is naked, Trump proudly displays his own nakedness. And the mystery is nonetheless he retains his authority. And this is what we should analyze how authority can survive this radical how should I call it dis-sublimation or whatever. How leaders today can even make fun of themselves and so on, appear ridiculous, it even strengthens sometimes their executive power. We have new forms of authority today. It's no longer the traditional authority and it's typical how in the West we went further here while Chinese remain classic here you know. Yeah so
unknown
so I do want to get back to the communism question but I think what you just said was interesting because it seems like in Trump's case really actually a lot of his connection with followers is based on this the their impression that he's just giving this constant stream of consciousness expression
so I do want to get back to the communism question but I think what you just said was interesting because it seems like in Trump's case really actually a lot of his connection with followers is based on this the their impression that he's just giving this constant stream of consciousness expression
Slavoj Žižek
of his
of his
unknown
thoughts and he's often openly extremely petty and and and I think all of that seems to make them identify with him that
thoughts and he's often openly extremely petty and and and I think all of that seems to make them identify with him that
Slavoj Žižek
much more because they feel like they have some kind of human connection with him. Yeah you know what's important here that when direct charismatic author not even charismatic, this classic dignified authority began to disintegrate we get experts, we get
much more because they feel like they have some kind of human connection with him. Yeah you know what's important here that when direct charismatic author not even charismatic, this classic dignified authority began to disintegrate we get experts, we get
unknown
people who say no it's not me I'm just telling you what science or economy or whatever or the law tells me. And now this repressed dimension of the master is returning with a vengeance with people like Trump who is no longer the old master with some dignity and here I agree maybe you will not agree with me with a figure like Alain Badiou, sorry with Alain Badiou who pointed out that let's not dismiss masters generally. Sorry what was Nelson Mandela if not a great master figure. What was Gandhi if not a great master figure. And I still believe that there is an authentic I try to describe it in some of my books, an authentic figure of the master who is not telling you what to do but in a way that's how you experience an authentic master. Through him through his inspiration you discover what you really want. And that's what great masters do. Okay with Mandela it didn't end well it was clear although it was that he had to do that compromise although And it didn't it didn't right I mean the end of apartheid was one of the great victories for human freedom in the 20th century but they also had to compromise on all of their economic programs. Yeah but they are paying the price now you know what I am
people who say no it's not me I'm just telling you what science or economy or whatever or the law tells me. And now this repressed dimension of the master is returning with a vengeance with people like Trump who is no longer the old master with some dignity and here I agree maybe you will not agree with me with a figure like Alain Badiou, sorry with Alain Badiou who pointed out that let's not dismiss masters generally. Sorry what was Nelson Mandela if not a great master figure. What was Gandhi if not a great master figure. And I still believe that there is an authentic I try to describe it in some of my books, an authentic figure of the master who is not telling you what to do but in a way that's how you experience an authentic master. Through him through his inspiration you discover what you really want. And that's what great masters do. Okay with Mandela it didn't end well it was clear although it was that he had to do that compromise although And it didn't it didn't right I mean the end of apartheid was one of the great victories for human freedom in the 20th century but they also had to compromise on all of their economic programs. Yeah but they are paying the price now you know what I am
Slavoj Žižek
afraid that now that economic situation is getting it's not a total catastrophe but a little bit worse in South Africa that they will fall into the Mugabe trap. Instead of changing the system let's blame the white but keep their own new wealthy class untouched because my friends are telling me in very simplified terms in South Africa basically what happens happened is only that the old white ruling class was joined by a new black ruling class while the majority of black people remained more or less at the same level of standard of living, okay more freedom no direct racist oppression but don't underestimate this much more crime violence and so on and so on. And here I just think again that expertise is not enough you need an inspirational figure of a master. We and from here we should attack Trump. The problem of Trump is not that he's a master but that he is a clownish ridiculous comedy of a master. I don't know who a good analyst wrote I quoted him somewhere that Trump is not a dictator he's somebody who plays dictator on TV etc. My god. Yeah well I remember Matt Taibbi had a great line when a few weeks ago when a lot of liberals were fainting about the idea that Trump was going to have a coup you know there was a point where like he got a defense secretary Mark Esper and people were saying oh my god he's staffing the Pentagon with his personal loyalists there's going to be a coup and Matt Taibbi said you know it's not that Trump would morally object to a coup it's that two minutes into planning it with his generals he would get bored and wander off and have a burger and watch TV and that that seemed you know that
afraid that now that economic situation is getting it's not a total catastrophe but a little bit worse in South Africa that they will fall into the Mugabe trap. Instead of changing the system let's blame the white but keep their own new wealthy class untouched because my friends are telling me in very simplified terms in South Africa basically what happens happened is only that the old white ruling class was joined by a new black ruling class while the majority of black people remained more or less at the same level of standard of living, okay more freedom no direct racist oppression but don't underestimate this much more crime violence and so on and so on. And here I just think again that expertise is not enough you need an inspirational figure of a master. We and from here we should attack Trump. The problem of Trump is not that he's a master but that he is a clownish ridiculous comedy of a master. I don't know who a good analyst wrote I quoted him somewhere that Trump is not a dictator he's somebody who plays dictator on TV etc. My god. Yeah well I remember Matt Taibbi had a great line when a few weeks ago when a lot of liberals were fainting about the idea that Trump was going to have a coup you know there was a point where like he got a defense secretary Mark Esper and people were saying oh my god he's staffing the Pentagon with his personal loyalists there's going to be a coup and Matt Taibbi said you know it's not that Trump would morally object to a coup it's that two minutes into planning it with his generals he would get bored and wander off and have a burger and watch TV and that that seemed you know that
unknown
seemed right you know but But you
seemed right you know but But you
Slavoj Žižek
see that's why although I don't underestimate the danger of Trump I never liked this quick short-circuit Trump a fascist. It's a totally different structure. You never get a fascist which openly behaves in such an obscene way making fun of himself and so on. It's another type of authority. It's I also don't think my Israeli friend Yuval Kremnitzer developed this nicely how I don't think that Trump really wanted to overthrow democracy. He it's true he did state distrust into established ritualized democracy. He did flirt with this people power people's power not ritualized election all the committees procedures but nonetheless he never made this step of okay let's be a fascist and really take power because I don't think he really had a determinate plan. He just he lived in this in-between area of of criticizing the
see that's why although I don't underestimate the danger of Trump I never liked this quick short-circuit Trump a fascist. It's a totally different structure. You never get a fascist which openly behaves in such an obscene way making fun of himself and so on. It's another type of authority. It's I also don't think my Israeli friend Yuval Kremnitzer developed this nicely how I don't think that Trump really wanted to overthrow democracy. He it's true he did state distrust into established ritualized democracy. He did flirt with this people power people's power not ritualized election all the committees procedures but nonetheless he never made this step of okay let's be a fascist and really take power because I don't think he really had a determinate plan. He just he lived in this in-between area of of criticizing the
unknown
corruption
corruption
Slavoj Žižek
of the system like and here he sometimes almost sounded as a kind of a leftist, you know our democracy is not really representative and so on and so on. But he never really wanted to overthrow it. I didn't I don't think he had this potential if you ask me. Do you think that really? No, no I don't think he did at all in fact I don't even think that when he ran for president the first time I don't think that he particularly even wanted to win. I think that he wanted to be in the spotlight he you know he probably wanted to get you know to get better TV deals and so on and that and that he was enjoying the experience but I mean he didn't I think he was more surprised than anybody was when he won but I want to bring on Ambrose, Ambrose hello. Hi. You hear us? You okay yeah. Thank you. It's time that we would be accused without you Ambrose we would be accused of some kind of a male binary patriarchal logic you know we
of the system like and here he sometimes almost sounded as a kind of a leftist, you know our democracy is not really representative and so on and so on. But he never really wanted to overthrow it. I didn't I don't think he had this potential if you ask me. Do you think that really? No, no I don't think he did at all in fact I don't even think that when he ran for president the first time I don't think that he particularly even wanted to win. I think that he wanted to be in the spotlight he you know he probably wanted to get you know to get better TV deals and so on and that and that he was enjoying the experience but I mean he didn't I think he was more surprised than anybody was when he won but I want to bring on Ambrose, Ambrose hello. Hi. You hear us? You okay yeah. Thank you. It's time that we would be accused without you Ambrose we would be accused of some kind of a male binary patriarchal logic you know we
unknown
need we need. Well, I just got here, we'll see how it goes, so. Okay. Fair enough. You want to brutally intervene? Absolutely. That's the only way to intervene, brutally or not at all. Sorry? It's the only way to intervene, brutally or not at all. That's a nice Marxist lesson I see that Marxism is not lost in the United States. Thank you. Please. So you are the boss Ben you direct us now. Yeah alright so so yeah I do I do actually want and by the way Slavoj I I hope you come back because it in a future conversation I'd really
need we need. Well, I just got here, we'll see how it goes, so. Okay. Fair enough. You want to brutally intervene? Absolutely. That's the only way to intervene, brutally or not at all. Sorry? It's the only way to intervene, brutally or not at all. That's a nice Marxist lesson I see that Marxism is not lost in the United States. Thank you. Please. So you are the boss Ben you direct us now. Yeah alright so so yeah I do I do actually want and by the way Slavoj I I hope you come back because it in a future conversation I'd really
Slavoj Žižek
like to try to drill down into your recipes for the cookshops of the future you know about communism but but I should But they don't have a precise recipe. My you know when people ask me what do you mean by communism my idea is look what even when conservatives are in power are forced to do now, distribute billions which is not founded in any market logic and so on. Now people tell me okay this is just to go through the crisis. Yeah but this crisis will not disappear in two three months. You will have to go on it will go on and on and on. And something will have to happen here either again this great reset with a totally controlled society which I think all this bubble idea you know we live in isolated bubbles yes maximum of us the will of course still stay out and so on. I mean you know to whom did I dedicate my pandemic volume You know how many countries are in the world which are heavily hit by COVID but that situation is so
like to try to drill down into your recipes for the cookshops of the future you know about communism but but I should But they don't have a precise recipe. My you know when people ask me what do you mean by communism my idea is look what even when conservatives are in power are forced to do now, distribute billions which is not founded in any market logic and so on. Now people tell me okay this is just to go through the crisis. Yeah but this crisis will not disappear in two three months. You will have to go on it will go on and on and on. And something will have to happen here either again this great reset with a totally controlled society which I think all this bubble idea you know we live in isolated bubbles yes maximum of us the will of course still stay out and so on. I mean you know to whom did I dedicate my pandemic volume You know how many countries are in the world which are heavily hit by COVID but that situation is so
unknown
horrible that they don't even think about it COVID is a minor threat, like I read about Yemen. It's under terrible COVID inflation of cases but sorry they're in a civil war they have many more problems
horrible that they don't even think about it COVID is a minor threat, like I read about Yemen. It's under terrible COVID inflation of cases but sorry they're in a civil war they have many more problems
Slavoj Žižek
it doesn't even enter. We should never forget this that COVID is as it appears now maybe there is some historical justice in it not so clearly but more or less the problem of Europe, United States, Canada and maybe some parts of Latin America where nonetheless it's getting a little bit a little bit better now because I notice even how our classification of COVID first wave second wave is Eurocentric basically. Latin America had a totally different rhythm and so on and so on. Sorry. Yeah fair enough and and I guess you know thinking about you know you were talking earlier about what Cuba has has done to contain you know COVID with the you know Committees for the Defense of the Revolution and all that and and I think that might tie into what we were talking earlier about about the difference between that sort of what you talked about as the moral majority in the good sense like Bernie Sanders and moralism right you know because because it seems to me that again so much especially of liberal discourse about about COVID is purely about about culture war you know about about whether you you wear a you know whether you're wearing a mask or not you know as as like a symbol of of individual virtue which is a which is a good place to to invite Ambrose to brutally intervene in the
it doesn't even enter. We should never forget this that COVID is as it appears now maybe there is some historical justice in it not so clearly but more or less the problem of Europe, United States, Canada and maybe some parts of Latin America where nonetheless it's getting a little bit a little bit better now because I notice even how our classification of COVID first wave second wave is Eurocentric basically. Latin America had a totally different rhythm and so on and so on. Sorry. Yeah fair enough and and I guess you know thinking about you know you were talking earlier about what Cuba has has done to contain you know COVID with the you know Committees for the Defense of the Revolution and all that and and I think that might tie into what we were talking earlier about about the difference between that sort of what you talked about as the moral majority in the good sense like Bernie Sanders and moralism right you know because because it seems to me that again so much especially of liberal discourse about about COVID is purely about about culture war you know about about whether you you wear a you know whether you're wearing a mask or not you know as as like a symbol of of individual virtue which is a which is a good place to to invite Ambrose to brutally intervene in the
unknown
conversation. Yeah, I mean I was thinking about early on when I was actually in the sort of early COVID days and I was interviewing an old like nightlife legend, I won't call her old or whatever in the sort of like drag queen scene and she had been a big Bernie Sanders advocate and she had also you know as a gay man like lived through AIDS so she was suddenly seeing again people being terrified of other people and it reminded her, she doesn't really care about pronouns, it reminded her of being a gay man and you know narrowly avoiding this you know terrible disease that killed all of her friends and more troublingly it was the the sudden presence of people's fear of one another that sort of
conversation. Yeah, I mean I was thinking about early on when I was actually in the sort of early COVID days and I was interviewing an old like nightlife legend, I won't call her old or whatever in the sort of like drag queen scene and she had been a big Bernie Sanders advocate and she had also you know as a gay man like lived through AIDS so she was suddenly seeing again people being terrified of other people and it reminded her, she doesn't really care about pronouns, it reminded her of being a gay man and you know narrowly avoiding this you know terrible disease that killed all of her friends and more troublingly it was the the sudden presence of people's fear of one another that sort of
Slavoj Žižek
brought everything to a head and there was so much animosity about it and it was like who is putting people at risk, who is putting people at danger and there was very little attention paid to for example what how Reagan was responding to it or in the UK the same thing with
brought everything to a head and there was so much animosity about it and it was like who is putting people at risk, who is putting people at danger and there was very little attention paid to for example what how Reagan was responding to it or in the UK the same thing with
unknown
Thatcher
Thatcher
Slavoj Žižek
and she said one of the things that she saw happening again with COVID very early on was people would be taking pictures of like year old kids playing basketball together without a mask and would be like you know look at these assholes not wearing masks and she's like what why she said it's an excuse not to look up, to not look at the people who are in charge of managing these sort of things. It's very easy for us to look side to side now and try to police because we don't actually have any broad institutions that we have any faith in so we look side to side, we look at our neighbor and that's the person who's the problem. We don't look at the people who ostensibly are supposed to be managing the crisis because we've just lost any idea of what that could be, what that could even look like a long time ago. No I deeply agree with what you said because incidentally in my country Slovenia it's
and she said one of the things that she saw happening again with COVID very early on was people would be taking pictures of like year old kids playing basketball together without a mask and would be like you know look at these assholes not wearing masks and she's like what why she said it's an excuse not to look up, to not look at the people who are in charge of managing these sort of things. It's very easy for us to look side to side now and try to police because we don't actually have any broad institutions that we have any faith in so we look side to side, we look at our neighbor and that's the person who's the problem. We don't look at the people who ostensibly are supposed to be managing the crisis because we've just lost any idea of what that could be, what that could even look like a long time ago. No I deeply agree with what you said because incidentally in my country Slovenia it's
unknown
exactly the same
exactly the same
Slavoj Žižek
government in a very unpopular stupid way protecting business orders some measures and then if they don't work the people are guilty
government in a very unpopular stupid way protecting business orders some measures and then if they don't work the people are guilty
unknown
you know they didn't obey and they never ask themselves it's it's horrible. But you know what worries me a little bit I don't know if it's the same in the United States it's not simply what they call the COVID fatigue, it's that now retroactively maybe this is a retroactive myth in at least here in my country and parts of Europe that I know March and April appear compared with what is going on today almost as a kind of a healthy panic you know
you know they didn't obey and they never ask themselves it's it's horrible. But you know what worries me a little bit I don't know if it's the same in the United States it's not simply what they call the COVID fatigue, it's that now retroactively maybe this is a retroactive myth in at least here in my country and parts of Europe that I know March and April appear compared with what is going on today almost as a kind of a healthy panic you know
Slavoj Žižek
we
we
unknown
were
were
Slavoj Žižek
just afraid of COVID we have to quarantine and so on but now something very strange is happening at the same time relaxation even if for example in Slovenia now numbers are times
just afraid of COVID we have to quarantine and so on but now something very strange is happening at the same time relaxation even if for example in Slovenia now numbers are times
unknown
three zero higher than they were in April but nonetheless
three zero higher than they were in April but nonetheless
Slavoj Žižek
people go around they meet even
people go around they meet even
unknown
if it's prohibited it's a kind of a relaxation but it's a very desperate relaxation. It's not so
if it's prohibited it's a kind of a relaxation but it's a very desperate relaxation. It's not so
Slavoj Žižek
much fear as depression. People don't see even any perspective and even if they engaged in not
much fear as depression. People don't see even any perspective and even if they engaged in not
unknown
so much sexual
so much sexual
Slavoj Žižek
or as socializing orgies and so on it's always some despair in it like
or as socializing orgies and so on it's always some despair in it like
unknown
let's enjoy it as long as we can. I mean to us to Americans that makes a lot of sense because for Americans I mean I think with the American like apocalyptic sort of Protestantism I mean that's just that's an apocalyptic hedonism I think sets
let's enjoy it as long as we can. I mean to us to Americans that makes a lot of sense because for Americans I mean I think with the American like apocalyptic sort of Protestantism I mean that's just that's an apocalyptic hedonism I think sets
Slavoj Žižek
in after a while. That's a nice term did you invent it? Apocalyptic hedonism. Yeah. It's a wonderful term because that's the problem with this I once said that wrote that apocalyptic visions the situation is too serious for apocalyptic visions how should I put it we cannot afford them. The terms we should maybe you know that line of mine I love to repeat it. The best formula I heard was way back from Chile you know when these apocalyptic visions began to predominate you know what was their formula? No it's not the end of the world but we want a different better end of the world you know. Let's not play this democratic establishment game a little bit of patience which also Trump plays returning to normal and so on. No a certain world is coming to an end and we have to work hard to construct a new normality and it can be done. I think one of the problems we have now is that the sort of dominant liberal discourse which has positioned itself as the moral discourse on COVID they have absolutely zero ability in tone beyond either smug or hysterical. And not only is the hysteria completely alienating but it actually I think I think it undermines the actual urgency of the situation because the thing about panic is that it's rarely ever warranted. There's rarely ever a reason to panic and when there is a reason to panic that's when you definitely need to not panic. So under no situation is someone claiming to be a moral authority ever you know lending credibility to their own leadership by running around hysterically but that's basically what we have. Um and I I really don't I mean I see
in after a while. That's a nice term did you invent it? Apocalyptic hedonism. Yeah. It's a wonderful term because that's the problem with this I once said that wrote that apocalyptic visions the situation is too serious for apocalyptic visions how should I put it we cannot afford them. The terms we should maybe you know that line of mine I love to repeat it. The best formula I heard was way back from Chile you know when these apocalyptic visions began to predominate you know what was their formula? No it's not the end of the world but we want a different better end of the world you know. Let's not play this democratic establishment game a little bit of patience which also Trump plays returning to normal and so on. No a certain world is coming to an end and we have to work hard to construct a new normality and it can be done. I think one of the problems we have now is that the sort of dominant liberal discourse which has positioned itself as the moral discourse on COVID they have absolutely zero ability in tone beyond either smug or hysterical. And not only is the hysteria completely alienating but it actually I think I think it undermines the actual urgency of the situation because the thing about panic is that it's rarely ever warranted. There's rarely ever a reason to panic and when there is a reason to panic that's when you definitely need to not panic. So under no situation is someone claiming to be a moral authority ever you know lending credibility to their own leadership by running around hysterically but that's basically what we have. Um and I I really don't I mean I see
unknown
the anti-mask protests and you know it's like you're really taking your lives into your own hands but I I absolutely see where it comes
the anti-mask protests and you know it's like you're really taking your lives into your own hands but I I absolutely see where it comes
unknown
from because it's disgusting seeing these people walk around just
from because it's disgusting seeing these people walk around just
unknown
again there also the people panicking tend to be very the lowest risk they have a home they have a yard they don't have to go to work so it's extra ridiculous coming from them you're not seeing nurseries or people who work at grocery stores exhibit the same degree of hysteria as someone who now teaches you know Zoom philosophy classes at the New School from at home um and yet those are the people that are sort of adopting the tenor of someone who is actually in danger. Um but it's there's no room for in this moment there are these two poles there are the you know sort of broader skepticism of it and sort of the oppositional
again there also the people panicking tend to be very the lowest risk they have a home they have a yard they don't have to go to work so it's extra ridiculous coming from them you're not seeing nurseries or people who work at grocery stores exhibit the same degree of hysteria as someone who now teaches you know Zoom philosophy classes at the New School from at home um and yet those are the people that are sort of adopting the tenor of someone who is actually in danger. Um but it's there's no room for in this moment there are these two poles there are the you know sort of broader skepticism of it and sort of the oppositional
unknown
defiance to um all the prescriptions for safety which I think are inevitable you can't judge them they're inevitable. And then there's these screeching hysterics um who have no solution to the problem other than personal responsibility and shaming and isolation and smug self-importance. And those are the people of course that believe it's the end of the world and that scream it's the end of the world and it's like well then why then why would anyone do anything? Yeah if it really is the end of the world then apocalyptic hedonism would be appropriate. Yeah then let's get drunk. Yeah but I don't think it's very bad it doesn't need to be the end of the world for us to intervene and do something. No but I here I try to maybe I'm wrong I try to give a positive spin to it. Yes but every first this end of the world you know it will drag on and on it will never end that's the first paradox for me you know did you notice how history was proposed was supposed to end and then this end just drags on and on and on. I think that I would like to Sorry please I was interrupting. No one joyfully end of the world said yeah. Yeah but it's one interesting point maybe somebody I don't know who told me recently even on a podcast maybe maybe Fukuyama who began this story of end of the world do you know is it true or not? He's not so bad somebody told me that now he changed his position and that he supports Bernie Sanders. No he advocated for basic like welfare interventions and also just recanted his entire proposition he was like oh apparently there isn't an endpoint nothing is fixed which I think I mean I applaud him for like you
defiance to um all the prescriptions for safety which I think are inevitable you can't judge them they're inevitable. And then there's these screeching hysterics um who have no solution to the problem other than personal responsibility and shaming and isolation and smug self-importance. And those are the people of course that believe it's the end of the world and that scream it's the end of the world and it's like well then why then why would anyone do anything? Yeah if it really is the end of the world then apocalyptic hedonism would be appropriate. Yeah then let's get drunk. Yeah but I don't think it's very bad it doesn't need to be the end of the world for us to intervene and do something. No but I here I try to maybe I'm wrong I try to give a positive spin to it. Yes but every first this end of the world you know it will drag on and on it will never end that's the first paradox for me you know did you notice how history was proposed was supposed to end and then this end just drags on and on and on. I think that I would like to Sorry please I was interrupting. No one joyfully end of the world said yeah. Yeah but it's one interesting point maybe somebody I don't know who told me recently even on a podcast maybe maybe Fukuyama who began this story of end of the world do you know is it true or not? He's not so bad somebody told me that now he changed his position and that he supports Bernie Sanders. No he advocated for basic like welfare interventions and also just recanted his entire proposition he was like oh apparently there isn't an endpoint nothing is fixed which I think I mean I applaud him for like you
Slavoj Žižek
know once you see history happening again you can't stick your head in the sand. Um it's not the history that we wanted but you know in some ways it is encouraging because the future is not written and and that is good news. So that's why you said something wonderful if I may to engage my professional corruption into a kind of philosophy rather playing with terms do you have it in English I don't think you do in French and some other languages we have it. There is a wonderful distinction between two terms for future, futur and avenir. But they are not the same. Futur means just what will come but it can be the same. For example if Trump were to win he would be the present and future president. But if you say avenir it's to come, what will come after it's a change. Trump will not be the president to come, he would be just the same. And I think the problem with futurologists and all people that panic and so on that they consciously it's a kind of perverted structure of pleasure reject to think this to come, a new beginning. It's really the perverted enjoyment into this, I'm stuck at home I watch old TV movies all the time they basically in a very perverted way enjoy this situation I think. And it's I mean they don't feel pleasure but they can feel glee. It's very perverse. Ah no I was here a Lacanian I agree with you you know for Lacan enjoyment is pleasure in pain not direct pleasure. Never underestimate underestimate how
know once you see history happening again you can't stick your head in the sand. Um it's not the history that we wanted but you know in some ways it is encouraging because the future is not written and and that is good news. So that's why you said something wonderful if I may to engage my professional corruption into a kind of philosophy rather playing with terms do you have it in English I don't think you do in French and some other languages we have it. There is a wonderful distinction between two terms for future, futur and avenir. But they are not the same. Futur means just what will come but it can be the same. For example if Trump were to win he would be the present and future president. But if you say avenir it's to come, what will come after it's a change. Trump will not be the president to come, he would be just the same. And I think the problem with futurologists and all people that panic and so on that they consciously it's a kind of perverted structure of pleasure reject to think this to come, a new beginning. It's really the perverted enjoyment into this, I'm stuck at home I watch old TV movies all the time they basically in a very perverted way enjoy this situation I think. And it's I mean they don't feel pleasure but they can feel glee. It's very perverse. Ah no I was here a Lacanian I agree with you you know for Lacan enjoyment is pleasure in pain not direct pleasure. Never underestimate underestimate how
unknown
people when they have to renounce some pleasure can draw enjoyment out of these rituals of renunciation. For example my British friend psychoanalyst Darian Leader pointed out how this rules that are imposed
people when they have to renounce some pleasure can draw enjoyment out of these rituals of renunciation. For example my British friend psychoanalyst Darian Leader pointed out how this rules that are imposed
Slavoj Žižek
now are a paradise for obsessional neurotics like me incidentally you know like you don't have to worry how should I greet you what are the forms everything is preset how you knock your elbows or whatever you know. Another thing that I often repeat I would like to repeat it here. Would you agree or not that it's not as simple as it looks with this social distance thing. It's really only bodily distancing. Socially through the media digital media and so on we are probably more socialized more connected more controlled than ever. For me the point is Sorry I actually I just wrote an article about sort of Twitter
now are a paradise for obsessional neurotics like me incidentally you know like you don't have to worry how should I greet you what are the forms everything is preset how you knock your elbows or whatever you know. Another thing that I often repeat I would like to repeat it here. Would you agree or not that it's not as simple as it looks with this social distance thing. It's really only bodily distancing. Socially through the media digital media and so on we are probably more socialized more connected more controlled than ever. For me the point is Sorry I actually I just wrote an article about sort of Twitter
unknown
activism
activism
Slavoj Žižek
and there was this moment where it's like we are closer than we have ever been socially and we are lonelier than we have ever been because those things are not necessarily the same thing but definitely we are we are breathing down each other's necks yet there is no intimacy. Yeah
and there was this moment where it's like we are closer than we have ever been socially and we are lonelier than we have ever been because those things are not necessarily the same thing but definitely we are we are breathing down each other's necks yet there is no intimacy. Yeah
unknown
you very good formula and what I am afraid is is precisely this tendency, this type new type of social contact I fear it much more than isolation. I mean often I feel almost
you very good formula and what I am afraid is is precisely this tendency, this type new type of social contact I fear it much more than isolation. I mean often I feel almost
Slavoj Žižek
a need to be authentically alone.
a need to be authentically alone.
unknown
That's what I mean that's what I miss now. It's crazy but yeah. Yeah, yeah so so the article Ambrose talking about it's called "The Problem with Hashtag Activism" and it came out I think in Catalyst like a couple months ago I'm exactly the kind of strange nerd who'd like keep a copy of Catalyst in the bathroom and you know like read through it all the time you know and I'm not with you in your intimate moments. Yeah, yeah, yeah and it was
That's what I mean that's what I miss now. It's crazy but yeah. Yeah, yeah so so the article Ambrose talking about it's called "The Problem with Hashtag Activism" and it came out I think in Catalyst like a couple months ago I'm exactly the kind of strange nerd who'd like keep a copy of Catalyst in the bathroom and you know like read through it all the time you know and I'm not with you in your intimate moments. Yeah, yeah, yeah and it was
unknown
reprinted recently in Jacobin and in it Ambrose and by the way I should say Slavoj I really hope you can you know you can stay and talk to us for a few minutes I know it's getting late in Ljubljana. Do you have another ten minutes or so in you? Okay okay okay. Let's go yes. Yeah so so in the article Ambrose you talk about how you know the article's written as a review of a book about about Twitter activism but the larger thing is that it feels like we can very easily be involved in these activist efforts to change the world online you know with with these kind of viral hashtags and things like that. And and there's all this stuff that's been written in celebration of this and and how amazing it is and how participatory it is. What seems to be left out of that is that none of it ever seems to work. Yeah and even the authors themselves the examples they use I mean you know the Greek referendum vote, Occupy Wall Street, the Arab Spring nothing worked. It doesn't work but they're so you know they're they're so pleased to see activity and the idea that this might be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing is irrelevant to them. Now I wondered if for a while that they thought that they had succeeded at these things
reprinted recently in Jacobin and in it Ambrose and by the way I should say Slavoj I really hope you can you know you can stay and talk to us for a few minutes I know it's getting late in Ljubljana. Do you have another ten minutes or so in you? Okay okay okay. Let's go yes. Yeah so so in the article Ambrose you talk about how you know the article's written as a review of a book about about Twitter activism but the larger thing is that it feels like we can very easily be involved in these activist efforts to change the world online you know with with these kind of viral hashtags and things like that. And and there's all this stuff that's been written in celebration of this and and how amazing it is and how participatory it is. What seems to be left out of that is that none of it ever seems to work. Yeah and even the authors themselves the examples they use I mean you know the Greek referendum vote, Occupy Wall Street, the Arab Spring nothing worked. It doesn't work but they're so you know they're they're so pleased to see activity and the idea that this might be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing is irrelevant to them. Now I wondered if for a while that they thought that they had succeeded at these things
unknown
or they considered them to be successes or they considered them I couldn't figure out why
or they considered them to be successes or they considered them I couldn't figure out why
unknown
when they would say well what about Occupy didn't didn't didn't Twitter do Occupy
when they would say well what about Occupy didn't didn't didn't Twitter do Occupy
Slavoj Žižek
and it's like well first of all no it didn't I think the financial collapse of did Occupy. Twitter was a a tool used in that. But also Occupy was not successful. And then I realized basically I think in this kind of academic/activist world which is you know since the cultural turn and the decline of the trade union movement at least in America has supplanted working class politics their definition of what constitutes success does not resemble mine at all. And I remember this specifically being at Occupy in Zuccotti Park, someone was saying well you know I want to make sure we get results from this. This was when we were arguing about whether or not to have demands and I wanted to have demands as I often do. And someone said but what we're doing right here right now is doing something. And somebody raised their hand and
and it's like well first of all no it didn't I think the financial collapse of did Occupy. Twitter was a a tool used in that. But also Occupy was not successful. And then I realized basically I think in this kind of academic/activist world which is you know since the cultural turn and the decline of the trade union movement at least in America has supplanted working class politics their definition of what constitutes success does not resemble mine at all. And I remember this specifically being at Occupy in Zuccotti Park, someone was saying well you know I want to make sure we get results from this. This was when we were arguing about whether or not to have demands and I wanted to have demands as I often do. And someone said but what we're doing right here right now is doing something. And somebody raised their hand and
unknown
they're like look I just want healthcare. And that is how most people experience politics. It's supposed to be a means to an end. I don't need a community. I'm not an isolated middle class cul-de-sac born you know PMC track person. I already have friends. I get involved in politics and activism because I want people to have fucking healthcare. Um so I think ultimately the problem with sort of like hashtag activism or online activism
they're like look I just want healthcare. And that is how most people experience politics. It's supposed to be a means to an end. I don't need a community. I'm not an isolated middle class cul-de-sac born you know PMC track person. I already have friends. I get involved in politics and activism because I want people to have fucking healthcare. Um so I think ultimately the problem with sort of like hashtag activism or online activism
Slavoj Žižek
isn't so much the use of the tools but it's the fact that there are no politics undergirding them and there are no institutions that are steering these things. Um I think the fact that it's very diffuse and it's very I mean they they emphasize all of this stuff. It's the kind of post-Marxist spontaneity and the crowd and you know the the strike is dead long live the riot and all of that silly bullshit. Um but it's represented very much by and facilitated very much by the way social media functions and what it is capable of doing with activism is generating more activism. Not generating power or building institutions or or certainly not you know affecting change in the world. I cannot agree more with you because some people dismiss me as I don't know secret right-winger when I repeat that I'm sick and tired of this you know one million people gathered on Syntagma Square or I
isn't so much the use of the tools but it's the fact that there are no politics undergirding them and there are no institutions that are steering these things. Um I think the fact that it's very diffuse and it's very I mean they they emphasize all of this stuff. It's the kind of post-Marxist spontaneity and the crowd and you know the the strike is dead long live the riot and all of that silly bullshit. Um but it's represented very much by and facilitated very much by the way social media functions and what it is capable of doing with activism is generating more activism. Not generating power or building institutions or or certainly not you know affecting change in the world. I cannot agree more with you because some people dismiss me as I don't know secret right-winger when I repeat that I'm sick and tired of this you know one million people gathered on Syntagma Square or I
unknown
don't know where. We were
don't know where. We were
Slavoj Žižek
all in solidarity, tears, unique moment. I'm saying okay but the morning after you know. I I'm very naive here. I I think the real result of a radical movement is how ordinary people will feel the change if any after afterwards. And this is why for example what really depressed me is did you see it I don't know where in one of the big media Guardian or CNN I read a report on Tunisia the hero of ten years ago the Arab Spring was a guy there a fruit seller who self-immolated. Immolated himself and now streets are named after him but the family is now so hated that they had to move to Canada you know. Because for ordinary okay there is more freedom now they got these liberal freedoms but as one of them said we didn't fight just for this we fought for dignity and work a
all in solidarity, tears, unique moment. I'm saying okay but the morning after you know. I I'm very naive here. I I think the real result of a radical movement is how ordinary people will feel the change if any after afterwards. And this is why for example what really depressed me is did you see it I don't know where in one of the big media Guardian or CNN I read a report on Tunisia the hero of ten years ago the Arab Spring was a guy there a fruit seller who self-immolated. Immolated himself and now streets are named after him but the family is now so hated that they had to move to Canada you know. Because for ordinary okay there is more freedom now they got these liberal freedoms but as one of them said we didn't fight just for this we fought for dignity and work a
unknown
work or whatever that gives
work or whatever that gives
Slavoj Žižek
you a chance of dignified life and it's it's even it's even worse now. And this is why I don't think this on the other hand I hate people
you a chance of dignified life and it's it's even it's even worse now. And this is why I don't think this on the other hand I hate people
unknown
who are pseudo radicals. Many of my friends said Syriza is nothing it's nothing. I tell them okay but then what will you do wait for a big authentic revolution? This is really a situation for me I always like to and I think the situation
who are pseudo radicals. Many of my friends said Syriza is nothing it's nothing. I tell them okay but then what will you do wait for a big authentic revolution? This is really a situation for me I always like to and I think the situation
Slavoj Žižek
is not totally hopeless. What do you think for example about Bolivia? Yeah I knew Vice President I supported now Lucho Arce they showed something they won re-elected they were re-elected because as Lucho Arce said very nicely look we
is not totally hopeless. What do you think for example about Bolivia? Yeah I knew Vice President I supported now Lucho Arce they showed something they won re-elected they were re-elected because as Lucho Arce said very nicely look we
unknown
are not giving you empty words years for years when I was fine finance minister we you never did so well that's why I think there had to be coup at that time in Bolivia. It wasn't another Venezuela or what they did it moderately but with a clear line they didn't screw it up and that's the real thing to do today. Yeah and there's Bolivia has a cultural
are not giving you empty words years for years when I was fine finance minister we you never did so well that's why I think there had to be coup at that time in Bolivia. It wasn't another Venezuela or what they did it moderately but with a clear line they didn't screw it up and that's the real thing to do today. Yeah and there's Bolivia has a cultural
unknown
and political memory of wins. Uh of winning and I
and political memory of wins. Uh of winning and I
unknown
think one of the problems that is compounded by like the the kind of onlinification, the depersonalized activism is the fact that we have no generational memory of wins. And the wins that we are taught about are mis-taught. So things then as you said Sorry. Yeah I would say maybe the civil rights movement was one of the last you know truly successful coordinated moments we had. Now right now that's taught
think one of the problems that is compounded by like the the kind of onlinification, the depersonalized activism is the fact that we have no generational memory of wins. And the wins that we are taught about are mis-taught. So things then as you said Sorry. Yeah I would say maybe the civil rights movement was one of the last you know truly successful coordinated moments we had. Now right now that's taught
unknown
um you know even in sort of like the the liberal theology if you will is is all of these people got together and they held hands and they marched on Washington. Never mentioned the degree of of trade union influence and of labor coordination that went behind this so that they actually had the muscle for a strike. That's important Amber what you said
um you know even in sort of like the the liberal theology if you will is is all of these people got together and they held hands and they marched on Washington. Never mentioned the degree of of trade union influence and of labor coordination that went behind this so that they actually had the muscle for a strike. That's important Amber what you said
unknown
because people forget that when he was shot Martin Luther King in that city he was on a tour to support a combined black and white worker strike. Yeah yeah yeah. And he had nonetheless first he got much more radicalized. Yeah yeah yeah he was. I mean literally if you actually look at pictures of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom it's bad enough like the erasure like it's bad enough that like we literally have have erased the memory of the jobs and you know part of that uh and Am I going too far now for Am I going too far now or would the two of you agree at least a little bit with me. I've written about it I fully support LGBT+ and so on and so on. But it looked to me a little bit ridiculous in the summer when Trump was gaining in the summer of or when when Trump was gaining strength for the campaign you remember before Trump occupied the space the big topic on front page of the media was how to solve that toilets problem you know so that it will not be binary should there be asexual toilet should that be it was madness there was a revolution forming right-wing the wrong one and you had these high theological almost debates about three toilets all toilets no toilets or whatever I mean I'm fully for LGBT and for theoretical reasons you know I just don't like when it totally obfuscates this moment. Well I don't want to stay, I don't want to spend the entirety of the political discourse arguing about where we have to shit. Um that's that's that's a waste of my time. I mean also to me just being a purely pragmatic person I'm like you know what make every bathroom a stall, everyone gets one, problem solved, remove the conflict, who cares, um don't turn it into a battle, just everyone benefits from a private bathroom anyway, who gives a shit? But I think it had more to do with demonstrating what side you were on, what your political identity was and that's the that's the terrible thing that I think has developed and has been exacerbated by this sort of online stuff is that like politics has become a moral identity rather than a means to an end. It's are you the good guy or the bad guy. That's absurd, people have
because people forget that when he was shot Martin Luther King in that city he was on a tour to support a combined black and white worker strike. Yeah yeah yeah. And he had nonetheless first he got much more radicalized. Yeah yeah yeah he was. I mean literally if you actually look at pictures of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom it's bad enough like the erasure like it's bad enough that like we literally have have erased the memory of the jobs and you know part of that uh and Am I going too far now for Am I going too far now or would the two of you agree at least a little bit with me. I've written about it I fully support LGBT+ and so on and so on. But it looked to me a little bit ridiculous in the summer when Trump was gaining in the summer of or when when Trump was gaining strength for the campaign you remember before Trump occupied the space the big topic on front page of the media was how to solve that toilets problem you know so that it will not be binary should there be asexual toilet should that be it was madness there was a revolution forming right-wing the wrong one and you had these high theological almost debates about three toilets all toilets no toilets or whatever I mean I'm fully for LGBT and for theoretical reasons you know I just don't like when it totally obfuscates this moment. Well I don't want to stay, I don't want to spend the entirety of the political discourse arguing about where we have to shit. Um that's that's that's a waste of my time. I mean also to me just being a purely pragmatic person I'm like you know what make every bathroom a stall, everyone gets one, problem solved, remove the conflict, who cares, um don't turn it into a battle, just everyone benefits from a private bathroom anyway, who gives a shit? But I think it had more to do with demonstrating what side you were on, what your political identity was and that's the that's the terrible thing that I think has developed and has been exacerbated by this sort of online stuff is that like politics has become a moral identity rather than a means to an end. It's are you the good guy or the bad guy. That's absurd, people have
Slavoj Žižek
interests, people have concerns, people do have morals and values, but the whole point of politics is to wield them in such a way that you shape a world that is that looks the way you want it to look, that functions the way you want it to look. Would you agree then Amber with me uh I'm seriously concerned with this problem that some of this your criticism holds I think even for a certain type of popular middle-class ecological movement. For example I have friends who always buy organic apples and so on all that stuff. And I always to provoke them tell them do you really believe in it that those apples who look more
interests, people have concerns, people do have morals and values, but the whole point of politics is to wield them in such a way that you shape a world that is that looks the way you want it to look, that functions the way you want it to look. Would you agree then Amber with me uh I'm seriously concerned with this problem that some of this your criticism holds I think even for a certain type of popular middle-class ecological movement. For example I have friends who always buy organic apples and so on all that stuff. And I always to provoke them tell them do you really believe in it that those apples who look more
unknown
rotten
rotten
Slavoj Žižek
but cost much more than the genetically modified they and they once some of them were honest and openly told me no but it makes me feel good to be part of a big thing and so on all that to do to show solidarity to do something for mother nature and so on that's why I repeated this line many times in my books but I find it that's why for me the supreme ingenuity of today's capitalism is what they are not doing it so much now what Starbucks did years ago, the message was our coffee is a little bit more expensive but goes to save Guatemala children the other percent goes so that it's an ingenious move because in usual morality discourse we are split between being consumers and then working for common good and they are offering you a wonderful formula you pay a little bit more so your social duty is already commodified it's included in the price so you can easily enjoy your coffee. I would go one step further than that. Um in so far as you are not supposed to even think of
but cost much more than the genetically modified they and they once some of them were honest and openly told me no but it makes me feel good to be part of a big thing and so on all that to do to show solidarity to do something for mother nature and so on that's why I repeated this line many times in my books but I find it that's why for me the supreme ingenuity of today's capitalism is what they are not doing it so much now what Starbucks did years ago, the message was our coffee is a little bit more expensive but goes to save Guatemala children the other percent goes so that it's an ingenious move because in usual morality discourse we are split between being consumers and then working for common good and they are offering you a wonderful formula you pay a little bit more so your social duty is already commodified it's included in the price so you can easily enjoy your coffee. I would go one step further than that. Um in so far as you are not supposed to even think of
unknown
yourself as a worker but um you know as a part of the Starbucks family I remember working for Starbucks as a barista during the time when the CEO was fighting tooth and nail to prevent us from getting
yourself as a worker but um you know as a part of the Starbucks family I remember working for Starbucks as a barista during the time when the CEO was fighting tooth and nail to prevent us from getting
Slavoj Žižek
health insurance. And not only
health insurance. And not only
unknown
do they tell the consumers of Starbucks like you're you're being a good person you're saving the world by drinking this coffee which no one really believes but they want something people are very desperate. They told us in training as employees that we were a part of of an ethical moral company and that we were contributing to the Starbucks mission and the Starbucks agenda meanwhile
do they tell the consumers of Starbucks like you're you're being a good person you're saving the world by drinking this coffee which no one really believes but they want something people are very desperate. They told us in training as employees that we were a part of of an ethical moral company and that we were contributing to the Starbucks mission and the Starbucks agenda meanwhile
Slavoj Žižek
they weren't fucking paying for our healthcare so it's there's like three points in which you're being told these are the ways to be good and none of them are politically effective and all of them divest from a working class political project. Well it all goes back to your point about hashtag activism that you know
they weren't fucking paying for our healthcare so it's there's like three points in which you're being told these are the ways to be good and none of them are politically effective and all of them divest from a working class political project. Well it all goes back to your point about hashtag activism that you know
unknown
people
people
Slavoj Žižek
who
who
unknown
say things like oh you know we Occupy was a great victory just the existence of Occupy was a great victory it's kind of the same thing with the ethical consumption for Starbucks or
say things like oh you know we Occupy was a great victory just the existence of Occupy was a great victory it's kind of the same thing with the ethical consumption for Starbucks or
Slavoj Žižek
when people when people say that they um you know like like my favorite lib thing is is when people say oh I'm not going to buy that I'm boycotting it and I always think well do you know what a boycott is right like No they don't. Workers call boycotts and most people don't understand what a boycott is. That's like again when I talk about how we have no
when people when people say that they um you know like like my favorite lib thing is is when people say oh I'm not going to buy that I'm boycotting it and I always think well do you know what a boycott is right like No they don't. Workers call boycotts and most people don't understand what a boycott is. That's like again when I talk about how we have no
unknown
memory of winning we also have no memory of like what
memory of winning we also have no memory of like what
Slavoj Žižek
these words even mean anymore. Um you saw this with like there was like a one-day strike called by Amazon and people were like I'm never buying from Amazon again it's like that's not what the workers are asking for this is not actually about you you're supposed to
these words even mean anymore. Um you saw this with like there was like a one-day strike called by Amazon and people were like I'm never buying from Amazon again it's like that's not what the workers are asking for this is not actually about you you're supposed to
unknown
be acting in solidarity. Solidarity is another word that's been debased beyond it's basically like Namaste or love and light now. Solidarity implies a shared risk that you are taking on with someone. It requires That's why would you agree I'm also very skeptical that's for me the ultimate horror of today's humanitarian corporate capitalism this obsession with well-being you know we should be all protected in in educational institutions you shouldn't be too my god for me good education means it precisely takes you out of your bubble and teaches you how to confront the brutal reality. No now you should be guaranteed that you will not be
be acting in solidarity. Solidarity is another word that's been debased beyond it's basically like Namaste or love and light now. Solidarity implies a shared risk that you are taking on with someone. It requires That's why would you agree I'm also very skeptical that's for me the ultimate horror of today's humanitarian corporate capitalism this obsession with well-being you know we should be all protected in in educational institutions you shouldn't be too my god for me good education means it precisely takes you out of your bubble and teaches you how to confront the brutal reality. No now you should be guaranteed that you will not be
Slavoj Žižek
disturbed in any way and so on and so on. Now some friends who defend this well-being protection tell me but otherwise you can be traumatized. No if you live also in the academia in such a bubble you will be really traumatized then will be a crisis when you enter the real world no. Right and if you ask me it's never
disturbed in any way and so on and so on. Now some friends who defend this well-being protection tell me but otherwise you can be traumatized. No if you live also in the academia in such a bubble you will be really traumatized then will be a crisis when you enter the real world no. Right and if you ask me it's never
unknown
it's never
it's never
Slavoj Žižek
the people with this sort of like eviscerating trauma that tend to be the hysterics. I mean it's it's never the people who are like yes I was a child soldier. It's uh it's always a thing that you know I'm sure it was troubling but there was a there was a developmental psychologist I think that said the best way for a child to grow up is a series of small but manageable traumas. Absolutely, absolutely, yes. And I even think that that this is always also the source of true creativity. You are you are traumatized which means the
the people with this sort of like eviscerating trauma that tend to be the hysterics. I mean it's it's never the people who are like yes I was a child soldier. It's uh it's always a thing that you know I'm sure it was troubling but there was a there was a developmental psychologist I think that said the best way for a child to grow up is a series of small but manageable traumas. Absolutely, absolutely, yes. And I even think that that this is always also the source of true creativity. You are you are traumatized which means the
unknown
coordinates in
coordinates in
Slavoj Žižek
which you were living are shattered and then you have to think to invent and so on. I think that not only trauma does not prevent you thinking there is no thinking
which you were living are shattered and then you have to think to invent and so on. I think that not only trauma does not prevent you thinking there is no thinking
unknown
real thinking without a at least as you put it nicely a moderate trauma. I mean the biological model is the obvious one where the actual way you literally build physical muscle is by damaging it and then it rebuilds itself stronger. I mean it's a heavy-handed biological metaphor but like yeah a little bit of measured consistent trauma is good obviously horrible things happening to you can be eviscerating but like no you're supposed to engage with difficult things you're supposed to you know like uh you're supposed to challenge yourself things are supposed to be difficult you're supposed
real thinking without a at least as you put it nicely a moderate trauma. I mean the biological model is the obvious one where the actual way you literally build physical muscle is by damaging it and then it rebuilds itself stronger. I mean it's a heavy-handed biological metaphor but like yeah a little bit of measured consistent trauma is good obviously horrible things happening to you can be eviscerating but like no you're supposed to engage with difficult things you're supposed to you know like uh you're supposed to challenge yourself things are supposed to be difficult you're supposed
unknown
to be sore and exhausted and that makes you better. Yeah fair enough so uh I don't want to continue this until anyone is I'm sorry in fact sore and exhausted but I But we can how do they say in California style we can repeat the experience if you want. Uh well I just got here so I'm not sure uh but uh it's But you can continue with
to be sore and exhausted and that makes you better. Yeah fair enough so uh I don't want to continue this until anyone is I'm sorry in fact sore and exhausted but I But we can how do they say in California style we can repeat the experience if you want. Uh well I just got here so I'm not sure uh but uh it's But you can continue with
unknown
the lady I leave and then you can say all you wanted against me you are free. Never never. I never say anything behind anyone's back uh I only say it to their face. Ah you know what's my worst humanitarian joke? I when I'm caught saying somebody something against somebody behind his or her back my excuse is but I'm a warm human being I cannot hurt you if I
the lady I leave and then you can say all you wanted against me you are free. Never never. I never say anything behind anyone's back uh I only say it to their face. Ah you know what's my worst humanitarian joke? I when I'm caught saying somebody something against somebody behind his or her back my excuse is but I'm a warm human being I cannot hurt you if I
Slavoj Žižek
say to you face to face it will be offensive so I'm sorry out of my humanitarian spirit I'm only saying it behind your back you know. Very kind, very kind. I like it. So the Žižek theory of shit talking you heard for here first. Uh I really uh I really appreciate this uh this Slavoj uh this but do some cutting of me above all. Yeah no. Censorship, censorship. Yeah and we'll cut it all in extremely misleading ways make it seem like you were saying things that you weren't
say to you face to face it will be offensive so I'm sorry out of my humanitarian spirit I'm only saying it behind your back you know. Very kind, very kind. I like it. So the Žižek theory of shit talking you heard for here first. Uh I really uh I really appreciate this uh this Slavoj uh this but do some cutting of me above all. Yeah no. Censorship, censorship. Yeah and we'll cut it all in extremely misleading ways make it seem like you were saying things that you weren't
unknown
really saying you know so. That's my idea that's what I like. Did you see I always repeat this case did you see that movie "The Thin
really saying you know so. That's my idea that's what I like. Did you see I always repeat this case did you see that movie "The Thin
Slavoj Žižek
Blue Line" where a guy says to get an inno to get a guilty person condemned every average prosecutor can do, to get an innocent person
Blue Line" where a guy says to get an inno to get a guilty person condemned every average prosecutor can do, to get an innocent person
unknown
condemned you need a really good prosecutor not so that's what we should do. Thank you very
condemned you need a really good prosecutor not so that's what we should do. Thank you very
unknown
much
much
Slavoj Žižek
I have to go.
I have to go.
unknown
Alright
Alright
Slavoj Žižek
fair enough thank you so much. Sorry
fair enough thank you so much. Sorry
unknown
how do I go
how do I go
Slavoj Žižek
out? Oh I will. Have a nice time although you know that here in Slovenia it's much worse we are a nation of two million which has between and cases per day per capita we are at some point the worst in the world. So goodbye. Alright fair enough thank you so much. Sorry goodbye
out? Oh I will. Have a nice time although you know that here in Slovenia it's much worse we are a nation of two million which has between and cases per day per capita we are at some point the worst in the world. So goodbye. Alright fair enough thank you so much. Sorry goodbye
unknown
Slavoj. Goodbye.
Slavoj. Goodbye.