Posting this explanation so people understand his point because the short does a poor job. But I think it is a great observation by Zizek that is worth explaining. He is talking about ideology at large (as superstition which the short usefully points out)...not just democracy. No one really believes in the ideologies (even you who claims too in the comments ), they are just memes that have very little connection to the underlining reality, yet somehow (the "unfortunately" because we believe our superstition is what works) with us all running around believing in this superstitious nonsense we have working systems (the bureaucracy, legal and cultural structure) of governance in most places. i.e Go look at the actual design of "democratic" nations, many successful ones are not entirely alike and many failed ones have similarities. Then look at other countries that aren't considered democratic but are successful or failed... What matters is the design of the actual workings of that system and the culture in it. And then political ideology can (and does) comes along like claiming it for itself but the "ideologies" aren't really that important or even real. As evidenced by many countries swapping their ideological memes without real change, or preserving the meme while making huge changes to the actual systems.
"No one really believes in the ideologies . . ." Can you support that claim? I don't think so. There is no way to prove it. You can't speak for the entire world. There are fundamental differences between systems, political and economic. They are not all the same. Choosing one system over another is not a "meme" (what you mean by that is not clear to me). It is a choice. People have died and are dying still for such choices.
@@myfairlady343A republic and a democracy aren’t mutually exclusive. May I ask where you got that idea from? I’ve seen people making that mistake a lot lately, so is there some sort of video that makes this claim or something?
@@utilitymonster8267 I am a political scientist. Democracy is a very broad term that changed its meening throughout history. It is true that it kinda has the same meening nowadays but technically when we are talking about democracies nowadays we meen liberal mass Republics the Republikan Idea being less about direct democracy and more about representative democracy with legal barriers that prevent the tyranny of the majority and other problems a "true" democracy would bring. So no not mutually exclusive but the critizism OP made was about direct democracy with Platos critizism on democracy which was solved by republicanism
@@myfairlady343 I find it hard to believe you’re a political scientist with such elementary mistakes. That aside, a republic is just the opposite of a monarchy; a free state in stead of one being ruled by monarchs. And democraty means that the people rule. Republics are sometimes democratic, sometimes they’re not. For example the Dutch Republic was a republic because they fought free from the Spanish and couldn’t find another monarch. They weren’t a democracy. The US, on the other hand, (at least formally) is a democracy. Again, where did you get that definition of “basic rights” from? Many people make this mistakes lately and I’m just wondering where they got it from.
The reason why the world's democracies have struggled is their reliance on traditional primitive voting methods, which count only one majority (or plurality), for electing public offices. That makes it easy to assemble a winning coalition consisting of minorities on different issues. This undermines majority rule, undermines policy stability, and destroys the incentive for politicians to support policies preferred by majorities of the voters. It also empowers extremists by making their votes needed by the rest of their coalition. The solution is to switch to a voting method that counts all the head-to-head majorities. The importance of counting multiple head-to-head majorities is understood by the world's most widely used, most frequently used voting method: the Robert's Rules procedure for voting on motions. Robert's Rules eliminates N-1 of the N alternatives by counting N-1 head-to-head majorities (analogous to a single-elimination sports tournament). All of the head-to-head majorities can be counted by letting each voter rank the alternatives in order of preference. (No runoffs or primary elections are needed.) The order of finish should be constructed by processing the head-to-head majorities one at a time, from largest majority to smallest majority, placing each majority's more-preferred candidate (or party) ahead of their less-preferred candidate (or party) in the order of finish.
The problem isn't that majority rule is undermined, and if we just went with majority rule, things would be fine. NO. The critics of Democracy are critical of majority rule, itself.
He's saying that no one believes in the system we have called democracy, implying that people would prefer something else that they can believe in. However, unfortunately, it does work, so they are stuck living in a system they don't believe in. It's tongue in cheek. At least I think so
The best way to improve democracy is to Promote the General Welfare of the People and their Posterity - via a prosperous physical economy, science education, and concordant foreign policy - which benefits all nations!@@dingo4229
He is talking about ideology at large (as superstition which the short usefully points out)...not just democracy. It is a long running observation by Zizek that I think is quite accurate. If I try to summarise it. No one really believes in the ideologies (even you), they are just memes that have very little connection to the underlining reality, yet somehow (the unfortunately because we believe our superstition is what works) with us all running around believing in this superstitious nonsense we have working systems (the bureaucracy, legal and cultural structure) of governance in most places. i.e Go look at the actual design of "democratic" nations, many successful ones are not entirely alike and many failed ones have similarities. Then look at other countries that aren't considered democratic but are successful or failed... What matters is the design of the actual workings of that system and the cutlure in it. And then political ideology can (and does) comes along like claiming it for itself but the "ideologies" aren't really that important or even real. As evidenced by many countries swapping their ideological memes without real change, or preserving the meme while making huge changes to the actual systems.
Democracy doesn't work for the simple reason that it's not very clear what you mean when you say "Democracy". People could be manipulated and vote...is that Democracy? In North Korea they could have elections tomorrow and they all would vote for the leader "but they are manipulated" you would say. What makes you think you aren't. Democracy is the modern man's illusion of freedom. No society values freedom because society by definition is a group and any group is antagonistic towards freedom and individualism.
Hi from America, democracy was a horrible mistake. I honestly believe that we need to start applieng survival of the fittest again. They show you that mankind has no floor, but that they do have a ceiling.
Oh, that's funny. You don't get that a Republic is a form of democracy. Pretty basic, that. Ah, well. You've been brainwashed like the rest of the Trump followers.
For the same reason you have a picture of Stalin over your bed. You know it doesn't work, but you still believe in it. At least with a horseshoe, we are a lot safer.
believing it works even if you dont believe in it is self-contradictory. the only belief you can have in “it” is that it works or it doesnt and if you didnt believe it then you wouldnt put it up. so much of zizeks (hes a lacanian whos a sophist) is peddling confusing self-contradictory or just confusing statements as if theyre deep insights into the way things are rather than that language can confuse you when used incorrectly
but the example he gave doesnt mean what his final statement means, bc no one chooses democracy unless youre a freedom fighter and you truly believe in it. and yes most people believe democracy does precisely what it ends up doing. this dude just peddles getting lost in the intrigue of misunderstanding language and replacing your focus on reality with a focus on intriguing confusion in your mind. its escapism. his most famous big think video is called “do not act, only think” which sums up the life of this escapism succinctly
I would put cameras and other security measures to monitor all unauthorized guests. This way I will know whether my security has been breached. If it had been breached I would take measures to neutralize the threat.
Anyone who was involved in the development of quantum mechanics would have known that quantum mechanics does not defy so-called superstitions in the same way Newtonian mechanics did. So one could no longer use physics to claim that magic cannot be real. Quantum mechanics taken serious is a reversal of the age of enlightenment.
Yeah Lee Kuan Yew did an amazing job with your country while still respecting democracy honestly if every country had someone like him we would be living in a perfect world
Posting this explanation so people understand his point because the short does a poor job. But I think it is a great observation by Zizek that is worth explaining.
He is talking about ideology at large (as superstition which the short usefully points out)...not just democracy.
No one really believes in the ideologies (even you who claims too in the comments ), they are just memes that have very little connection to the underlining reality, yet somehow (the "unfortunately" because we believe our superstition is what works) with us all running around believing in this superstitious nonsense we have working systems (the bureaucracy, legal and cultural structure) of governance in most places.
i.e Go look at the actual design of "democratic" nations, many successful ones are not entirely alike and many failed ones have similarities. Then look at other countries that aren't considered democratic but are successful or failed...
What matters is the design of the actual workings of that system and the culture in it. And then political ideology can (and does) comes along like claiming it for itself but the "ideologies" aren't really that important or even real. As evidenced by many countries swapping their ideological memes without real change, or preserving the meme while making huge changes to the actual systems.
"No one really believes in the ideologies . . ." Can you support that claim? I don't think so. There is no way to prove it. You can't speak for the entire world. There are fundamental differences between systems, political and economic. They are not all the same. Choosing one system over another is not a "meme" (what you mean by that is not clear to me). It is a choice. People have died and are dying still for such choices.
@@paulaoh5306Or....perhaps you can look into the extensive work by Zizek on this subject?
I helped explain the idea, I'm not here to defend it.
@@paulaoh5306proof?
u read deep into it cos u have too cos zizek sucks
@TickIeMonster Well look at you. Rubbing your two IQ points together to come up with that burn. Good job.
Great one😅
Brilliance!
...unfortunately... 😮
...that ideology today...
😉
@@abitoftheuniverse2 ...is just superficial woo woo that we mistakenly attribute to the success of our systems of governance...
Yeah, democracy, that has killed Socrates 😅
Which is why we havr republiks
@@myfairlady343A republic and a democracy aren’t mutually exclusive. May I ask where you got that idea from? I’ve seen people making that mistake a lot lately, so is there some sort of video that makes this claim or something?
@@utilitymonster8267 I am a political scientist. Democracy is a very broad term that changed its meening throughout history. It is true that it kinda has the same meening nowadays but technically when we are talking about democracies nowadays we meen liberal mass Republics the Republikan Idea being less about direct democracy and more about representative democracy with legal barriers that prevent the tyranny of the majority and other problems a "true" democracy would bring. So no not mutually exclusive but the critizism OP made was about direct democracy with Platos critizism on democracy which was solved by republicanism
@@myfairlady343 I find it hard to believe you’re a political scientist with such elementary mistakes. That aside, a republic is just the opposite of a monarchy; a free state in stead of one being ruled by monarchs. And democraty means that the people rule. Republics are sometimes democratic, sometimes they’re not. For example the Dutch Republic was a republic because they fought free from the Spanish and couldn’t find another monarch. They weren’t a democracy. The US, on the other hand, (at least formally) is a democracy.
Again, where did you get that definition of “basic rights” from? Many people make this mistakes lately and I’m just wondering where they got it from.
@@utilitymonster8267 i wont undergo a reddit discussion with you
The reason why the world's democracies have struggled is their reliance on traditional primitive voting methods, which count only one majority (or plurality), for electing public offices. That makes it easy to assemble a winning coalition consisting of minorities on different issues. This undermines majority rule, undermines policy stability, and destroys the incentive for politicians to support policies preferred by majorities of the voters. It also empowers extremists by making their votes needed by the rest of their coalition.
The solution is to switch to a voting method that counts all the head-to-head majorities. The importance of counting multiple head-to-head majorities is understood by the world's most widely used, most frequently used voting method: the Robert's Rules procedure for voting on motions. Robert's Rules eliminates N-1 of the N alternatives by counting N-1 head-to-head majorities (analogous to a single-elimination sports tournament).
All of the head-to-head majorities can be counted by letting each voter rank the alternatives in order of preference. (No runoffs or primary elections are needed.) The order of finish should be constructed by processing the head-to-head majorities one at a time, from largest majority to smallest majority, placing each majority's more-preferred candidate (or party) ahead of their less-preferred candidate (or party) in the order of finish.
Everyone has phone and it’s unique and vote is unique. Thresholds for each issue/bill/vote.
is there any countries/governments that use this kind of method?
Public money in elections - no private money at all!
The problem isn't that majority rule is undermined, and if we just went with majority rule, things would be fine. NO. The critics of Democracy are critical of majority rule, itself.
>LionKimbro : The alternative to majority rule is some kind of minority rule. That's even easier to criticize.
Wow
I believe in democracy. I don't believe in a lot of politicians...
What does Zizek mean "unfortunately" it works?
What would be the alternatives?
He's saying that no one believes in the system we have called democracy, implying that people would prefer something else that they can believe in. However, unfortunately, it does work, so they are stuck living in a system they don't believe in. It's tongue in cheek. At least I think so
This other comment is good Zizek is clever but often misunderstood it’s hard to tell what he means allot of the time
The best way to improve democracy is to Promote the General Welfare of the People and their Posterity - via a prosperous physical economy, science education, and concordant foreign policy - which benefits all nations!@@dingo4229
A Constitutional republic!@@dingo4229
He is talking about ideology at large (as superstition which the short usefully points out)...not just democracy. It is a long running observation by Zizek that I think is quite accurate. If I try to summarise it.
No one really believes in the ideologies (even you), they are just memes that have very little connection to the underlining reality, yet somehow (the unfortunately because we believe our superstition is what works) with us all running around believing in this superstitious nonsense we have working systems (the bureaucracy, legal and cultural structure) of governance in most places.
i.e Go look at the actual design of "democratic" nations, many successful ones are not entirely alike and many failed ones have similarities. Then look at other countries that aren't considered democratic but are successful or failed...
What matters is the design of the actual workings of that system and the cutlure in it. And then political ideology can (and does) comes along like claiming it for itself but the "ideologies" aren't really that important or even real. As evidenced by many countries swapping their ideological memes without real change, or preserving the meme while making huge changes to the actual systems.
I believe in democracy and fortunately it does work. Creating a more perfect union is an ongoing endeavor.
Democracy doesn't work for the simple reason that it's not very clear what you mean when you say "Democracy".
People could be manipulated and vote...is that Democracy? In North Korea they could have elections tomorrow and they all would vote for the leader "but they are manipulated" you would say.
What makes you think you aren't. Democracy is the modern man's illusion of freedom. No society values freedom because society by definition is a group and any group is antagonistic towards freedom and individualism.
That logic would apply to any ideology then
Hi from America, democracy was a horrible mistake. I honestly believe that we need to start applieng survival of the fittest again. They show you that mankind has no floor, but that they do have a ceiling.
@@nate7LP_my_dog_found_the_knife if not democracy, what is it you want?
@kathyd9324 at this point, to leave. Unfortunately, there is no new frontier to leave to
I am so glad that the U.S. system is a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC and NOT a democracy, a brilliant choice by our founders.
The Constitution of the Federation + the Bill of Rights - nothing else may be the Law of the Land!
Oh, that's funny. You don't get that a Republic is a form of democracy. Pretty basic, that. Ah, well. You've been brainwashed like the rest of the Trump followers.
I could give you a thousand reasons why you should believe in it and a thousand reasons why it didn't work for you.
For the same reason you have a picture of Stalin over your bed. You know it doesn't work, but you still believe in it. At least with a horseshoe, we are a lot safer.
😅😅😅
he repeats the same things over and over again
Nice horseshoe theory, but it didn't work against fascist spirits as it turned out... I guess the horseshoe was moral relativist
believing it works even if you dont believe in it is self-contradictory. the only belief you can have in “it” is that it works or it doesnt and if you didnt believe it then you wouldnt put it up. so much of zizeks (hes a lacanian whos a sophist) is peddling confusing self-contradictory or just confusing statements as if theyre deep insights into the way things are rather than that language can confuse you when used incorrectly
but the example he gave doesnt mean what his final statement means, bc no one chooses democracy unless youre a freedom fighter and you truly believe in it. and yes most people believe democracy does precisely what it ends up doing. this dude just peddles getting lost in the intrigue of misunderstanding language and replacing your focus on reality with a focus on intriguing confusion in your mind. its escapism. his most famous big think video is called “do not act, only think” which sums up the life of this escapism succinctly
I would put cameras and other security measures to monitor all unauthorized guests. This way I will know whether my security has been breached. If it had been breached I would take measures to neutralize the threat.
But evil spirits may come in many forms, some intangibles and or microscopic ones... like misfortune, disease, fire, accident...
There were no cameras back then. Also he is talking about 'spirits' entering, not material threats.
It usually works when it's not being manipulated
Anyone who was involved in the development of quantum mechanics would have known that quantum mechanics does not defy so-called superstitions in the same way Newtonian mechanics did. So one could no longer use physics to claim that magic cannot be real. Quantum mechanics taken serious is a reversal of the age of enlightenment.
How so?
@@declanwilliams1360 Because laws that are probabilistic mean that free will exists.
@@SkyDarmosI’m impressed by such a long string of nonsense
@@texasvet2729 If two sentences are long, then you are basically dyslexic.
Democratic people's Republic.of Korea... It's a Dynasty...& nasty at it too.
Not True. I believe in Democracy. I live in a democratic society that is SINGAPORE.
Yeah Lee Kuan Yew did an amazing job with your country while still respecting democracy honestly if every country had someone like him we would be living in a perfect world
Are Town Hall Meetings the venue there?
Dictatorship of the capital
You believe in the design of your system not the ideology.
You don’t have democracy. No country has had it since it flamed out in Greece
Bro said nothing
I’m sure he’s saying some impactful stuff
I'm still looking for the impactful stuff.
Replace "unfortunately" with 'fortunately'.