Most of the visitors around here a hopelessly overstrained and unable to listen anyway . Not to speak about discussing the topics Z. addresses 🙄 Revolution is the replacement of one illusion with another one Syndicate with another Germany 🇩🇪 best example .•°
the biggest argument he makes here is that socialism has become defined by things like social democracy (capitalism with social welfare programs) or just general social progressivism, but this is something that even self-identified socialists criticize. i don't think that the dilution of the term socialism means that leftists can no longer use the term, just means that the way the general public thinks of socialism isn't totally accurate. the same can easily be said for communism. it would be far more accurate to title this talk "why i call myself a communist and not a socialist" rather than "why i'm a communist but _not_ a socialist"
drac ! So basically he’s a socialist but he calls himself a communist because of the negative connotations of social democracy and capitalist things and some revisionist Marxist things ? Normally the other way round but okay
we can debate all day the meaning of words, and those meanings may evolve even as we talk. I dont think zizek is very concerned here with what labels we apply to ourselves, but is instead using those words as a tool to draw attention to an actually very real, objective, and concrete phenomena on the left: the tendency to subconsciously take elements of bourgeois society for granted. zizek likely isnt very concerned with whether he's called a socialist or a communist. hes only making a generalization in order to make his point. you can call yourself a socialist or communist or anything while still taking pains to challenge your unconscious bourgeois assumptions of the world.
@@keyan1219 not quite, I took more of it to mean he calls himself a communist because he is a communist and that socialism now means more than it did in the marxist definition. Keep in mind that Marx and Engels usually used the words interchangeably. Nowadays people who want M4A could call themselves socialists. His story about Fukuyama relates how Fukuyama thought that liberal democracy is the highest form of government to the new “left fukuyamaists” (or self-titled socialists) now think that -something that is more accurately described as- social democracy is the last/highest form of government. If Bill Gates is a socialist Zizek is a communist
@@ariestheram9326 Russia, but considering current situation and my anticipation of war I can literally be called a citizen of Putin as my opinion as well as the opinion of the majority of people is not worth a thing in this country's decision-making process
@@glaszataj5126 i'm here by chance but i was just thinking your first comment didn't age very well and then i saw your reply lmaooo...hang in there buddy..
@@polidott nu inteleg de ce multi rusi se considera comunisti dar tin cu Putin...ieu nu ma consider comunist dar desigur stiu ca un Adevarat Comunist ar trebui sa fie total contra Putin si Rusia actuala (imi cer scuse pentru evenctualele erori gramaticale, nu am facut scoala in Romania)✊🇮🇹🇺🇦
@UnusualBug Nah, I think he sees some value in stalinism, he said: “You know what would be really interesting to do? Don’t denounce me as a Stalinist but, for example - it’s my old temptation - to rewrite Star Wars… presenting Palpatine and Darth Vader as good progressive egalitarian centralist fighting reactionary feudalists, all the Jedi bullshit. It would tell a completely different story, from the others point of view. What do they [Jedi] stand for? All that, ‘Republic’, what strange of Republic is when you have a Princess, knights, kings and so on? No, Palpatine the Emperor and Darth Vader, they are my good progressive Bonapartist revolutionaries trying to get rid of the old world.” - Slavoj Zizek Lenin has denounced left communists in "Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder", I feel like people who have actually read a lot of theory become tankies.
@UnusualBug Ok, I'm no expert on marxism, but proponents of marxism changing their views as more marxist writers contributed, and as the history of socialist countries evolved should be no surprise, nobody is espousing orthodox marxism nowadays.
@@werrkowalski2985 I'm sorry that's actually a hilarious comment, I always think about how the plot of Star Wars only "works" because we wholly accept that one side is evil and the other is good (and they are also presented to us this way). If their motivations were switched but tactics remained the same, Palpatine and Vader could easily be the vanguard of a new, egalitarian, peace loving, revolutionary state. There's plenty enough cracks in the Republic to demand change, if Palpatine and Vader were not openly fascist, you could almost see the Jedi as just foot soldiers of a decaying, neoliberal regime.
@@laurier3348 by saying "great again" one would presume that communism was great at some point in history. I don't think a person defending that view would stand any chance in a serious debate.
Joseph Cro communism as an emancipatory project has always been great. Zizek is a ”serious” intellectual, and I am sure he will defend communism as a concept.
Zizek's critique of this 'new left' reminds me a lot of the distinction Engels made between Scientific and Utopian Socialism. Democratic liberalism is just wearing the guise of leftism and yet we are surprised to see it consistently fail and be the object of ridicule. So removed are these Utopian capitalist reformists (or left Fukuyamaists, as he brands them) from an understanding of material realism that they can never hope to achieve any kind of substantial change in ecology, equality or power hierarchies. The idea that liberalism can stand up to authoritarian capitalism in the 21st Century is just ludicrous.
@Nacht Aktiv I believe its one gigantic part that exists alongside, In the U.S. at least, with neoconservativism - Manifest Destiny and the psychopath mixture with right wing Christianity.
@@matusmotlo3854 The key is to realize that it doesn't matter, he says he a communist and the only good red isn't just a dead red, but one who's been immolated alive.
He's a Hegelian. They have this framework for explaining a point that's really fucking obtuse and impossible to follow. I don't know nearly enough about it but apparently all their tangents serve a purpose lmao
@@Aman-qr6wi that's a confident "no" you're popping off with dawg. Hegelian dialectics is a method to find the truth in a point by examining shit from a bunch of different angles and narratives. That's why Slavoj can often sound non-sensical, he brings up a fuckton of points that are related to the idea he's trying to explain but he's not great at making the connections crystal clear. Read any of his books and it's indistinguishable from the way he speaks
It frustrates me to watch Zizek's videos, because sometimes he says interesting things, but he is constantly changing the topic and rambling, as if it weren't hard enough to understand him already...
@@alefluizadriano Haha, you know, I just finished reading Žižek's Like A Thief In Broad Daylight a couple of months and I have to say that while he is more focused in his writing, he still tends to go off on tangents and explain himself in a bit of a confusing way. But you're right, he's a better writer than a speaker.
@@bernhardalbrechtgroeneveld4500 "Two problems tend to plague older intellectuals. One is the inability to stay on topic and the other is the inability to leave it."
When he says ''my friend Fred Jameson'' and ''my friend Alain Badiou'' I immediately imagine a game night with them where they try to sabotage monopoly rules
I feel like the host isn't familiar with the way Zizek talks. He keeps looking at the audience in desperation. Zizek: "You know why I'm a communist?" Host: "Why?" Z: Well, I'll tell you a joke. It's hilarious really. You know what they say about Milanovic Abramovichistan's commentary on Ethiopia's revolution in 1854? Host: *nervously looks at audience Z: They say he got his ontological arguments confused with that of the Armenian genocide. Host:..
I think he often struggles with the fact that his mind is faster than his ability to express himself and that’s why he jumps so quickly between topics and thoughts
He's not actually "struggling", at least not in that sense... It's just the way it is when you were never emotionally well-developed. There is later nothing there to be conscious of. It is why he tends to speak on auto-pilot mode vaguely and in pseudo-intellectual mannerism where there exists no passion, nor actual knowledge, but mere autism. However, that is the problem in general with a Marxist substance.
English is my second language and after 2 videos i started to undertand perfectly his broken english and so on, so on. Once i hear Adele on a radio program and i coudn't get nothing
Slavoj is like every Yugoslav I have ever known: everyone in the office avoids commenting about Jody's appearance, and then one day they hire Vladimir, who on his first day walks in looking around like he fell from Mars and on meeting Jody says 'Whay is wrong with your face? Big mole right there."
I just spent the majority of my evening profusely apologizing to my sister-in-law after my Yugoslav mother said to her "you look good...you're getting nice and fat" And then I happened to come upon your comment 😂
Maybe one of you can help me out here: I've now seen quite a bit of Zizek. He always goes to great lengths to critizise the failures of one system or another, but I've never heard a statement of him where he actually details what he would prefer instead. In the clips I've watched he always talks about what he doesn't want, without ever saying what he wants. So... what *does* he want?
Having seen quite a bit of him myself as well, I don't think that is a question he really attempts to answer, at least not on a practical level for a large society. He only criticizes and points out the flaws of society and various philosophies, like you said. He has often said that he is a pessimist (even in this video), and I think he basically points out various flaws in the present socioeconomic structure and the processes they will lead to, without knowing a way to correct to them or believing that they can be stopped. In short, he is not someone one should look to if searching for proposed solutions.
@@axoltl1 Those solutions must be searched by every one of us y'know, that's the use of a society itself, if only ''philosophers'' give ansewers then everything was losed beforehand
I used to get frustrated trying to follow Z's train of thought but I've give that up. Now I just enjoy how entertaining this dude is. It's a great one man show, like Spalding Gray.
@@KozelPraiseGOELRO i think he is a bit confused himself to be honest. Whats probably missing from his equation is that bad, aswell as stupid people exist, and that theyre different in nature to us. also the strong connotations that come with words and the importance they play in life, because we're such highly suggestible social creatures.
the point of the talk wasn't to give a be all end all explanation on his reasons for being a communist. it was to showcase how socialism is a dead term, and why he doesn't like to refer to himself as a socialist.
No english subtitles so I wrote a transcript. Please let me know where I made a mistake and I will fix it! "Uh, on the one hand I remain a communist in one sense. You know who for me is the saddest person? I wonder if you would agree. Habermas, you know, you're too young to remember, his, Habermas's reaction to German unification. Habermas's primordial fear was the idea that, maybe the west can learn something from East German disciplines. That's why Habermas coined this horrible term nahollende revolution. For him, Poland, Holland, Czech Republic, is Germany, was just to translate, usually it's translate, a catch-up revolution. They should join the west, they just want what we have. I don't think this works. I think that the reason of all this confused protests that we are going today, yellow vests, Chile, whatever you want. It's precisely, this is the final death of Fukuyama. That is to say, ah no it's easy to laugh at Fukuyama, but they claim till now 99% even of the left is there, I know where Fukuyama leftists. They basically thought, you know even, I spoke with people like, he's too corrupted by Putin now, I don't like him, but ah, only Verstow. He told me, listen Capitalism is the only thing that works, and, we just have to make it a little bit more you know- women's rights, gay rights, healthcare and so on and so on. But that for me left, left, Fukuyama-ism. You accept the system. I think that this confused practice coming today, it make it clear that no, liberal capitalism is not the ultimate forum. It will not work. And besides, that's why I spoke about all those problems. Uh, just three today. Uh, migrants, ecology, digital control. None of them could be solved in liberal capitalists frame. It's clear that ecology, okay, it's good of course to play the capitalist's game, to attack small polluters, but, the catastrophe that are waiting, maybe you know this story, I love it, uh my good friend Jean-Pierre Dupuy, an excellent..you should invite him here, the best theorist of catastrophe that I know, told me he was there as part of some European community delegation, two days after Fukushima. He told me that, for a couple of hours, the Japanese government was in total panic, it looked that they will have to evacuate the entire Tokyo area, 30 million people. Then, maybe they didn't have to, maybe they [garbled], I didn't care, but what I want to say, it's clear that we are facing problems better. Neither market, nor state, the way we'll have it today, will be able to do it. And that for me, the space for something that I prefer that to call communism, not socialism. Because today everybody is a socialist. I read an interview, Bill Gates is a socialist. Socialism means today, yeah, what you said, but not too much egotism, we should take care of you know. It's out there, and so on and so on. So, so, again, no, be accurate but don't forget just that we lack, and I quote here my Marxist friend Fred Jameson. We still lack what Jameson calls cognitive mapping. Kind of a global narrative in a good sense, I'm never a post-modernist, we need big global narratives, what goes on today. You know what for me is the true tragedy of today? China. Let's admit, no, well people say, communists always screwed up the economy. I tell them, sorry, do I hear you correctly? Was there ever in the history of humanity, I exaggerate a little bit but not a lot, such an economic triumph as China in the last 40, 50 years. Hundreds of millions better, were raised from poverty and so on. And how did they do it? The European left really hated two things, always, unbridled market competition, and strong authoritarian state. The Chinese precisely combined these two, you know. So what I, and, this is the future. India is much worse than China of course. Turkey, Putin, a new authoritarian capitalism is coming up, and I'm just a pessimist. And I think that, if you ask me what will happen, I'm so sad to say this. I wonder if you have a, I mean, I get engaged. Do you remember when there were elections half a year ago, when, unfortunately the left guy lost in Colombia? I supported the guy, he even thanked me with a letter. He almost won, the leftist candidate. So, I do get involved, but I still think that I don't have this old Marxist reliance. We know the general situation, we just need to mobilize the people. No! People are getting mobilized outside our scope, you know, like, take yellow vests in France, where my friend Alain Badiou, proposed a wonderful formula. You know what his answer to yellow vests, he said, in french, "Tout ce qui bouge n'est pas rouge". All that moves is not necessarily red. You know, that's, we live in such confused time, where what was still 20, 30 years ago, a sign of active left, social movements, even obscenity, agressivity, protests, is taken over by the right. And, the big temptation of the left is to play the law and order card. For example, in my own is, beloved president, I refer to him now as SG. I don't use the term Trump. SG. You know why? He repeat-SG, he repeatedly referred to himself as stable genius, you know. And so, as Trump would have put it, a shithole of a country Slovenia, well, it's horrible. Of course one has to prosecute hate speech in someone. But this desperate move of the left in my country, now, they're all of a sudden for police investigation, punish them, and so on and so on. Nothing against, I certainly don't want to defend the human rights of whatever racists. And just think that if you focus on this it means, again, the lack of a certain positive vision, and so on and so on. You know, what we should not forget, I was really furious when, ah, after Trump won three publishers approached me, "We need your psycho analysis. Would you like to do a psycho analysis of Trump, no?" I said no! Trump is doing something which is in some crazy sense, rational from his standpoint. He addresses, cause, I think the only way psycho analysis is needed, is the total stupidity of democratic party liberal reaction to Trump. They, there you need psycho analysis you know? So no, I hope, and you know why, I'm not a total pessimist, not in the religious sense, but in the political sense, miracles happen. Although they screwed it up, fine, but who would have thought that sireza, something like sireza is possible? Who would, ah, who would have, things happen, things happen here and there. Again, uh, Morales, Linera, were interesting, I think they are a couple. Because Morales, okay, I don't mean in a racist way, he was traditional, blah blah, all that, but Linera is a top intellectual you know. I always like, that's the condition of the left, this false opposite to overcome then. That's why, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, no, ah, said something wonderful recently, when she supported Bernie Sanders, she said, "Yes I support him not in spite of him being an old white man, but because he is an old white man." Because, this is the worse false opposition, to say that we need this young marginal, no, Bernie got this. You know who are Bernie's voters in Vermont? I know, I go often there, because my friends there run the only department in United States where lakenyans are in power. His voters are precisely the people who otherwise would have voted for Trump. These impoverished, middle cla-lower middle class farmers, this axis is crucial. The leftist plan in United States shouldn't be this clean from a position. Let's be more moderate to get the center. No! Let's get to us some of the Trump voters who are disappointed. So no, I am not a total pessimist. The point that you emphasized, listen, let me finish with an anecdote which is my most beloved anecdote from Marx. You know in 1800...70, 71, a Paris commune, ah, for a moment it appeared falsely we know now...[garbled]... European revolution. And Marx wrote in a letter to Angles in a panic, you know, "My god they want a revolution now, I didn't get finished capital" and so on. "Why can't they wait?" I think we should not be ashamed of this trust in theory, we need theory, we need to understand what goes on. Migo, you are more Stalinist than me, you call this democratic discussion, you know. One guy, probably you gave him the question...[garbled]... you know. Thanks very much, I talk too much, I know, I am grateful to you."
@@comradebroosk9396 no liberals calling themselves socialists aren’t socialists that’s part of Zizek point people who aren’t socialist are using the label and poisoning it
@@bloodcamarosexmagik4223 The point he's making is just that there are radical distinctions in the end goals of today's "socialists" and communists, much like during Lenin's time between social democratic factions and what became "Marxist" radical factions.
The irony is, Liberal capitalism only worked when communism gave it leverage. As in the good cop/ bad cop routine - better embrace social democracy or else the Reds will beat the living daylights out of you. You need us to keep those lunatics at bay. Keynes said 'in the long run, we're dead' well if capitalism thinks it's immortal, it's never going to change. Which is a classic triad - Capitalism thesis, Communism antithesis - Social Democracy synthesis. Once the antithesis dissolves, the synthesis does too - and we're back to thesis, In fact the good cop, bad cop routine has spun over to the other side of the spectrum, now it's a case of Neo Liberals saying to the Left - better support us, or the neo-fascists are going to stomp all over you. Hence the Left vote for Macron, support Merkel, choose Biden over Bernie etc etc out of fear of the Right.
Well also figure bernie wasn't our pick either Comrade. The man was just going to create Bourgeois Socialism and still have the proletariat under the dictatorship of the capitalist vanguard.
@@ReckerFidelWOLF Sure, but is real socialism possible in America? Sometimes you have to face reality. But one thing's for sure, without a strong Marxist pressure, the ruling class of America ain't gonna embrace bourgeois socialism. So keep up the good work comrade. Even if communism can't take over the West, it can improve the West,
@@JAMAICADOCK Very much agreed on that one. Due to they amount of influence and also the amount capital that has been reinforced in the West. A vanguard would be necessary for the improvement of lives. Either way, until socialism has been realized by the common individual that is when I can pick up my rifle. Good day Comrade.
@StAnthony a return to reactionary nationalism was always going to happen once the Soviet Union fell. Liberals fooled themselves that they had triumphed with the fall of communism. Rather they'd just let the genie of fascism out of the bottle again. As first seen in Yugoslavia, then Afghanistan, until now where the whole world seems to be marching right But inevitably reactionary nationalism has nothing really to offer, other than war, racism, religion etc. That can't last forever. But it will take a country, a developed country - to take up the mantle of communism, to put fascism back in its box. Which is not going to happen anytime soon. Hard lessons will have to be learned. The Left will come to realize that social democracy, socialism just don't come about naturally, they have to be fought for. And in many countries, particularly the developing world, and the old Second World, harsh measures will have to be taken to suppress the forces of reaction.
And that there are alwys facts, like he said global consciousness wich the society lacks so there's no other way around to things that shouldn't be done in other ways
As unstintingly irreligious as he was, Karl Marx was not an atheist. He was a staunch opponent of supernatural belief, yet neither did he embrace agnosticism as the position of claiming no answer to the question whether or not God exists. Marx combined the Judeo-Christian concern for social justice with a scientific analysis of the structures of injustice and laid the basis for a science of revolution which would free humanity from those structures. Sources: Wiley Online Library. CSUB
By assuming the autonomy of the individual, capitalism grants dignity to the poor. By affirming people's right to their own labor, regardless of their position on the economic ladder, capitalism offers the poor the means to improve their own well-being. Source: FTE Org 9:06
@@ConcedoNulli Marx apparently never shook off his thick Trier accent, which made him a figure of fun for jealous intellectuals in his later life in Berlin and Cologne. 3:07 [The Local]
No one knows what he is talking about, but the "intellectuals" would never admit it so they put him on a pedestal. "You're too stupid to understand this man's enormous slobbering brain." Yeah... sure.
He's abit unfocused in this one. General trends and subjects in his talks are pointing out hypocrisy among the liberal left and liberal left cultural dogmas that are questionable.
Most are overstrained with what Z. says. Their historical and political source of information is the comedy channel. Mockery is hip these days. 🇺🇸 heritage introduced by sitcoms 🙄 .•°
the guy looking off into the distance mouthing conversations was a bit distracting also found the mood a bit odd, like he'd smile and joke with someone in the audeince adn then turn to slavoj and the smile would disappear and treat him with skepticism right away and then kinda shut him down at the end
Ah, I see how people call Zizek a charlatan. He has no train of thought. His speech is like the car of an investigator. He goes from idea to philosopher to a tangential story to another tangential story and back to ideas and so on and so on, always bouncing around topics. He also reminds me of a lost couple driving from landmark to landmark.
Are his books any better? I am binge watching his videos and he's always so goddamn volatile,if not suspicious, like he wants to take everyone POV and washing it into a version that he likes.
Simone His books are pretty good but also complex. “The Sublime Object of Ideology” is literally a masterpiece and his best book. ”Sex and the Failed Absolute” is also pretty recent and fun to read but again a complex philosophical book.
I think people focus too much on how he talks, but if you get over that, there's a lot you can learn from him. He likes to jump around when he talks, but if you are familiar with his writings, it's pretty easy to understand what he's talking about. I used to have a problem with him, but now I don't.
@@LeonWagg it's not the way he talks, my problem is that his intentions are pretty clear, authoritarian, which is fine, and his fans are liberal leftists. To me is an enigma, how those types are attracted to his philosophy.
Simone ”liberal leftists” lol Most of Zizek's work is an attack on liberals, identity politics, political correctness, and so on. Liberals hate him because he advocates for radical left-wing politics and not liberal bourgeois reform. Zizek’s philosophy is fascinating even if you disagree with his politics, you can still learn a lot from reading him.
i think another important point he makes is that we should begin (again!) to look at all the struggles in societies in terms of a class struggle. it is easy to forget that because everything seems to be so complicated in our society, but essentially, we have the duty to pull workers and people of the lower classes in general towards class thinking and ultimately real socialism. unfortunately, as history showed many times, it is dangerous to not fight for the lower classes and leave them for the right (think trump).
When every conflict is viewed in terms of class struggle, some groups must be demonized based on their success. This is the reason the U.K. Labour Party is rife with antisemitism.
I couldnt disagree more... I think every attempt to pursue socialism or communism should be considered terrorism. World has experienced enough of it. Only duty you have to pursue is the ones you choose. So your duties towards ´´lower class´´ is just dangerous ideology. You think with socialist government the class struggle would disappear? I dont think so - sure it would made the poorest struggle less, because in socialism everybody gets equal shit, but the middle class would be literally robbed and the higher class would be practically untouchable.
we wont know for sure, only speculations. maybe its coke, maybe a tick or he is allergic to something. perhaps hes nervous; because when Im nervous, my nose itches sometimes like hell, too. (and it wont stop and it embarrasses me infront of ppl) but yes, i think its coke
We need a follow-up !!! AOC now has flipped to support Joe Biden, and I want to hear Zizek's ideas how this was cooking in the stove already, and what to do about this catastrophic situation. Biden will resist the war-lobbies much less than Trump.
I would just love to have a talk with him. The man is so fucking smart and unapologetic in his thinking. A true role model to look up to (philosophically speaking
@@Morrowindur you not calling people -ists does not mean they still arent, by that logic we can defeat capitalism by just not buying things, and then you die because you needed food but didnt want to buy the seeds or the tools to hunt, assuming you even knew how to garden or hunt, these things dont get dealt with by ignoring but by confronting them thru action and speech, and to confront sometimes you have to call people the -ists they are or even participate in a capitalist system till it can be changed
@@duman173 That is not the same logic at all. You can have two people calling themselves capitalists, communists or what have you and have them disagree on different political issues. If someone calls themselves a socialist for example, I can't possibly (shouldn't be able to) know what their opinion is on every kind of political/social matter. That is just absurd to me. It just doesn't make sense that large numbers of people would have the exact same opinon on all kinds of political matters if they are truly freethinking individuals. We are talking about very complex topics here. Only with conversation can (should) we manage to figure out where another person is standing on a certain issue. Putting people into boxes, in my opinion, is a huge part of the problem that we are dealing with today. I really don't see the necessity for labeling other than to divide people into groups and create resentment between them. Having discussions about problems is all you need. No 'ist' is required. Just my humble opinion.
@@Morrowindur i agree, but only to the extent of not being to reductive of the reality we live in. As you said the complexicity of not only the topics but our own individual takes on said topics make the idea of labels somewhat ridiculous concept, but that is precisely why said labels are born, althou reductive of themselves, they serve the purpose of more easily identifying ourselves to one another, the label itself is not enough if not followed by discourse in order to truly be able to understand ourselves and others thru interractions. I respect your opinion, and share it to some extent, althou i do disagree they are not required but see them instead as not sufficient, and that we shouldn't allow ourselves to be content with the labels themselves but recognise that without them the mechanisms of communication would be far more complicated and stifling to the possabilty of discourse and understanding. As to the point i made it was that such labels are useful until we can change our understanding and communication to where they are truly no longer needed but until then they serve a purpose which cant be undone simply by not using them.
"Miracle happens". He mentioned this on November 2019 and by late December, we started to have the corona outbreak leading to the disclosure of the huge lack of incompleteness on the Other.
did anybody catch the name of the dude slavoj mentioned at 2:27? is he actually a catastrophe theorist? the dude that was there two days after fukushima?
I love to watch his tics, and hear his spitting and strange accent. It adds some kind of comedy to his speeches, which is unintended but just makes his speech more engaging. I also feel that I can understand him even while I'm a Spanish man listening to a Slovenian man speaking in English (with no subtitles). Unfortunately some people will seriously use this as an argument to discredit him.
@@euso2008 nothing is liberal democracy, a life of a migrant will never going to be equal to a life of a co-oprate owner. If everyone are truly equal in democracy you would never even think that a co-operate owner provide job and a worker does work that's why they have different importance. After all both are human bodies with flesh and blood
I don't know how the algorithm got me this jewel of a video, but all of this is spot on. I mean, if even an all time Pinochet supporter and human rights violations apologist can call himself a "social democrat" you know the concept of socialism is getting diluted to a ridiculuos degree.
If you want to get Zizek's 'I WOULD PREFER NOT TO' t-shirt you can do so here:
i-would-prefer-not-to.com
UA-cam thinks he's speaking Dutch.
did you manage to catch the name of the catastrophe theorist he mentioned??
@@whatyousaydere en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Pierre_Dupuy
@@javierfernandez1126 Thanks dude :)
HAAHHAAHAHHAAHAH
Ourtube
Love him or hate him, Zizek is LITERALLY spitting
goated comment lol
He's perfect.
He's particularly dangerous during this pandemic.
And so on
Too much cocaine
All of the comments regarding Zizek's tics remind me of a quote by Confucius: "When a wise man points at the moon, the imbecile examines the finger."
Most of the visitors around here a hopelessly overstrained and unable to listen anyway .
Not to speak about discussing the topics Z. addresses 🙄
Revolution is the replacement of one illusion with another
one Syndicate with another
Germany 🇩🇪 best example .•°
I can listen to what he's saying and also take a few steps back so the spit doesn't land on my face.
Give them time to be enlightened at least they are here. It takes time.
@@meyoumicha true
Pure ideology
the biggest argument he makes here is that socialism has become defined by things like social democracy (capitalism with social welfare programs) or just general social progressivism, but this is something that even self-identified socialists criticize. i don't think that the dilution of the term socialism means that leftists can no longer use the term, just means that the way the general public thinks of socialism isn't totally accurate. the same can easily be said for communism. it would be far more accurate to title this talk "why i call myself a communist and not a socialist" rather than "why i'm a communist but _not_ a socialist"
Thanks, this was helpful
You saved me from writing a post. Thanks.
drac ! So basically he’s a socialist but he calls himself a communist because of the negative connotations of social democracy and capitalist things and some revisionist Marxist things ?
Normally the other way round but okay
we can debate all day the meaning of words, and those meanings may evolve even as we talk. I dont think zizek is very concerned here with what labels we apply to ourselves, but is instead using those words as a tool to draw attention to an actually very real, objective, and concrete phenomena on the left: the tendency to subconsciously take elements of bourgeois society for granted. zizek likely isnt very concerned with whether he's called a socialist or a communist. hes only making a generalization in order to make his point. you can call yourself a socialist or communist or anything while still taking pains to challenge your unconscious bourgeois assumptions of the world.
@@keyan1219 not quite, I took more of it to mean he calls himself a communist because he is a communist and that socialism now means more than it did in the marxist definition. Keep in mind that Marx and Engels usually used the words interchangeably. Nowadays people who want M4A could call themselves socialists. His story about Fukuyama relates how Fukuyama thought that liberal democracy is the highest form of government to the new “left fukuyamaists” (or self-titled socialists) now think that -something that is more accurately described as- social democracy is the last/highest form of government. If Bill Gates is a socialist Zizek is a communist
If this guy gets Covid... *God help us all...*
How will we know if he has it?
Probably won’t die...most people dont
I had covid ....covid is not what you think....most people experience little to no symptoms
@@anticringepill1313 i'm glad to hear that 👍
@De Secondant, Montesquieu what ? 😄
"Countries like India, Turkey, Putin"
Ok, so apparently now my country does not even have a name and I am a citizen of Putin XD
Ukraine or Russia?
@@ariestheram9326 Russia, but considering current situation and my anticipation of war I can literally be called a citizen of Putin as my opinion as well as the opinion of the majority of people is not worth a thing in this country's decision-making process
@@glaszataj5126 i'm here by chance but i was just thinking your first comment didn't age very well and then i saw your reply lmaooo...hang in there buddy..
@@polidott nu inteleg de ce multi rusi se considera comunisti dar tin cu Putin...ieu nu ma consider comunist dar desigur stiu ca un Adevarat Comunist ar trebui sa fie total contra Putin si Rusia actuala (imi cer scuse pentru evenctualele erori gramaticale, nu am facut scoala in Romania)✊🇮🇹🇺🇦
At least you don't inhabit a bird 🤪
i always love it when he calls the hosts stalinists.
@UnusualBug Nah, I think he sees some value in stalinism, he said:
“You know what would be really interesting to do? Don’t denounce me as a Stalinist but, for example - it’s my old temptation - to rewrite Star Wars… presenting Palpatine and Darth Vader as good progressive egalitarian centralist fighting reactionary feudalists, all the Jedi bullshit. It would tell a completely different story, from the others point of view. What do they [Jedi] stand for? All that, ‘Republic’, what strange of Republic is when you have a Princess, knights, kings and so on? No, Palpatine the Emperor and Darth Vader, they are my good progressive Bonapartist revolutionaries trying to get rid of the old world.” - Slavoj Zizek
Lenin has denounced left communists in "Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder", I feel like people who have actually read a lot of theory become tankies.
@UnusualBug Ok, I'm no expert on marxism, but proponents of marxism changing their views as more marxist writers contributed, and as the history of socialist countries evolved should be no surprise, nobody is espousing orthodox marxism nowadays.
Its hilarious that he has been doing it for years in every interview, conference, debate
@@werrkowalski2985 I'm sorry that's actually a hilarious comment, I always think about how the plot of Star Wars only "works" because we wholly accept that one side is evil and the other is good (and they are also presented to us this way). If their motivations were switched but tactics remained the same, Palpatine and Vader could easily be the vanguard of a new, egalitarian, peace loving, revolutionary state. There's plenty enough cracks in the Republic to demand change, if Palpatine and Vader were not openly fascist, you could almost see the Jedi as just foot soldiers of a decaying, neoliberal regime.
@@rollinginthedeep6900Can you apply that to Hitler and Germany in the 30's too?
How can you quit a meeting with Zizek? He's a legend! Just let him talk until the campus police drags him out.
We need more universities to make communism great again.
@@laurier3348 by saying "great again" one would presume that communism was great at some point in history. I don't think a person defending that view would stand any chance in a serious debate.
Joseph Cro communism as an emancipatory project has always been great. Zizek is a ”serious” intellectual, and I am sure he will defend communism as a concept.
@@LeonWagg thats reasonable, one could debate about that, but saying "make communism great again" should piss of any real communist worth his salt
Communism brings poverty and oppression.
Always been like that.
Communism only blooms in the protected bubbles of universities.
Looks like a Christmas dinner and they are forced to listen to the single drunk uncle that travel around the world with a bicycle
To be honest, that would make my Christmas dinner much better.
@@boskopils4153 I agree with you
Perfect description
Lmao. Perfect description
Thats intriguing af
I'm a Zizekian Sniffalist.
😂
😂
Sniffler"s of all countries UNITE!!😉
Im a marxist-leninist-maoist-obamaist-bidenist-zizekist. at me bruvvvvv
CkHomrade
Slavoj Zizek: You are too young, you won't remember.
Also Slavoj Zizek: German Unification
Elrond: I was there Slavoj, I was there 3000 years ago
That made me laugh.
the german unification happened 130 years ago or so
I just read again, after being alerted to Alejandros comment, and it made me laugh again, good one man
@@alejandroreguera8222 no it happened 3000 years ago .
@@alejandroreguera8222 Zizek refers to re-uninification post-1989
Zizek's critique of this 'new left' reminds me a lot of the distinction Engels made between Scientific and Utopian Socialism. Democratic liberalism is just wearing the guise of leftism and yet we are surprised to see it consistently fail and be the object of ridicule. So removed are these Utopian capitalist reformists (or left Fukuyamaists, as he brands them) from an understanding of material realism that they can never hope to achieve any kind of substantial change in ecology, equality or power hierarchies. The idea that liberalism can stand up to authoritarian capitalism in the 21st Century is just ludicrous.
@Alex Kither, You hit the nail on the head!
@Nacht Aktiv .... in disguise
@szs voc I don't understand your point. Could you rephrase it?
@Nacht Aktiv I believe its one gigantic part that exists alongside, In the U.S. at least, with neoconservativism - Manifest Destiny and the psychopath mixture with right wing Christianity.
libertarianism is the solution
I cant help but feel that at least part of Zizek's appeal is in trying to figure out what the hell he is talking about.
"Precisely"
I can understand him fine, just imagine every spit is an "s" and he basically ("basically") sounds normal.
@@al3xa723 Now try to understand how anything he says follows from the last topic.
@@matusmotlo3854 The key is to realize that it doesn't matter, he says he a communist and the only good red isn't just a dead red, but one who's been immolated alive.
@@evanl8656 Enjoy getting a minimum wage spent fully on rent and groceries, working at a shitty 9-5 job, kid.
How does he manage to have so many intelligent points which are so utterly unrelated to his previous? Its pure stream of consciousness
He's a Hegelian. They have this framework for explaining a point that's really fucking obtuse and impossible to follow.
I don't know nearly enough about it but apparently all their tangents serve a purpose lmao
D i a l e c t i c
@@bbHoodski no, lol. Basically his native language is not english. Language plays the most important role in philosophy. Like Ludwig wittgstein said.
@@Aman-qr6wi that's a confident "no" you're popping off with dawg.
Hegelian dialectics is a method to find the truth in a point by examining shit from a bunch of different angles and narratives.
That's why Slavoj can often sound non-sensical, he brings up a fuckton of points that are related to the idea he's trying to explain but he's not great at making the connections crystal clear.
Read any of his books and it's indistinguishable from the way he speaks
@@bbHoodski and that different angle may be 'language' itself.
It frustrates me to watch Zizek's videos, because sometimes he says interesting things, but he is constantly changing the topic and rambling, as if it weren't hard enough to understand him already...
Exactly! He often starts talking about something interesting only to change the topic mid-sentence and never to come back to it.
The solution in simple: read Zizek; his books are great!
@@alefluizadriano Haha, you know, I just finished reading Žižek's Like A Thief In Broad Daylight a couple of months and I have to say that while he is more focused in his writing, he still tends to go off on tangents and explain himself in a bit of a confusing way. But you're right, he's a better writer than a speaker.
That is actually a thing a lot of academics tend to do. At least those who are philosophically inclined.
@@bernhardalbrechtgroeneveld4500 "Two problems tend to plague older intellectuals. One is the inability to stay on topic and the other is the inability to leave it."
When he says ''my friend Fred Jameson'' and ''my friend Alain Badiou'' I immediately imagine a game night with them where they try to sabotage monopoly rules
I feel like the host isn't familiar with the way Zizek talks. He keeps looking at the audience in desperation.
Zizek: "You know why I'm a communist?"
Host: "Why?"
Z: Well, I'll tell you a joke. It's hilarious really. You know what they say about Milanovic Abramovichistan's commentary on Ethiopia's revolution in 1854?
Host: *nervously looks at audience
Z: They say he got his ontological arguments confused with that of the Armenian genocide.
Host:..
I think he often struggles with the fact that his mind is faster than his ability to express himself and that’s why he jumps so quickly between topics and thoughts
He's not actually "struggling", at least not in that sense...
It's just the way it is when you were never emotionally well-developed.
There is later nothing there to be conscious of.
It is why he tends to speak on auto-pilot mode vaguely and in pseudo-intellectual mannerism where there exists no passion, nor actual knowledge, but mere autism.
However, that is the problem in general with a Marxist substance.
It's cocaine. Notice how much he sniffs and rubs his nose.
@@vladivanov5500hes not on coke, hope that was a sarcasm
@@vladivanov5500 its his way of dealing with his swift brain. Einstien used to touch his hair!
Sounds like he has ADHD, lol (I myself have it). The thoughts are DEFINITELY faster than our ability to put them into words.
Sure glad he chose to be an academic rather than a Subway sandwich-artist!
Yes!! Thats proof there is divine order in the universe!
@@skirmisherfront1498 Truly. It is right and just that, "Marxist philosopher" appeared to him on Indeed before he got to Subway's listing.
I’m eating subway rn and they got my order wrong. ( it was online )
The interviewer seems to have absolutely no idea who this man is. 😂
Or what he talks about - its the harder part :D
I thought exactly the same, wich is very sad
@@krystofcisar469 It's cause he's a communist and communists aren't people.
Can see Slavoj is following the Coronavirus guidelines very well.
He has the itchiest nose in history
Say It Don't Spray It Zizek
This was done way before the corona virus
@@stalinjoesph700 wooooooooosh
Please god make this man live forever.
Where?
John Doe
seethe more, you sad man
@John Doe I'm glad the world is not run by people like you.
@GreyGeek actually that depends on what you believe in, the vikings believed that hell is in fact, cold
@GreyGeek eh good point
Maybe subtitles would make him a little easier to understa, nope.
You just get used to it, the more you listen to him.
I'm Bosnian and he's Slovenian. I listen to him without an issue and then at some point I just realise he's speaking English. Yes, this is our accent.
@ⰄⰓⰄⰀ Idk how many people you've talked to but it's generally just what they learn at school.
I'm Brazilian and everytime I try to listen to Zizek my eyes fill with tear of frustration cuz I barely can understand his words
English is my second language and after 2 videos i started to undertand perfectly his broken english and so on, so on.
Once i hear Adele on a radio program and i coudn't get nothing
Utterly absurd that this critique of liberalism is sponsored by PriceWaterhouseCooper (PWC)
Lmfao, unreal
And it was ....but...
I'm happy for us to platform them, provided they platform us. We shouldn't stoop to their level.
It means that the ruling class are still confident in their propaganda and violence to keep them in power
@@kennethdavidson6508 lol
It means they are going to use political theory as a trojan horse for further authoritarianism for normies
>mentions lacanians
>2 people immediately leave
You meet someone, you talk, you bring up lacan, they leave
this is just eating soup but without the soup
NO SOUP FOR YOU
@Alexander Cone based
haahahahahahahaahahaha
This man is on a whole different fucking dimension of Hegelian thought, I can’t even make sense of that title
Slavoj is like every Yugoslav I have ever known: everyone in the office avoids commenting about Jody's appearance, and then one day they hire Vladimir, who on his first day walks in looking around like he fell from Mars and on meeting Jody says 'Whay is wrong with your face? Big mole right there."
I just spent the majority of my evening profusely apologizing to my sister-in-law after my Yugoslav mother said to her "you look good...you're getting nice and fat"
And then I happened to come upon your comment 😂
He’s such a fucking maniac and I love him for it
youtube captions got no chance on this man
Why I’m a communist... because under communism there will be free tissue.
Lol
Venezuela disagrees
@@dead_knigh1 vuvuzela
But then he wont be able to get Colombias finest flake.
@@skirmisherfront1498 He has Tourette's. He has never seen cocaine, much less used it. Cocaine is an American thing.
"All that moves isn't always red."
Good phrase.
Maybe one of you can help me out here:
I've now seen quite a bit of Zizek. He always goes to great lengths to critizise the failures of one system or another, but I've never heard a statement of him where he actually details what he would prefer instead. In the clips I've watched he always talks about what he doesn't want, without ever saying what he wants.
So... what *does* he want?
Having seen quite a bit of him myself as well, I don't think that is a question he really attempts to answer, at least not on a practical level for a large society. He only criticizes and points out the flaws of society and various philosophies, like you said. He has often said that he is a pessimist (even in this video), and I think he basically points out various flaws in the present socioeconomic structure and the processes they will lead to, without knowing a way to correct to them or believing that they can be stopped. In short, he is not someone one should look to if searching for proposed solutions.
@@axoltl1 Those solutions must be searched by every one of us y'know, that's the use of a society itself, if only ''philosophers'' give ansewers then everything was losed beforehand
The role of critic. It's eternal.
I have the answers, put me in power, everything will be fine.
I hope you can see the irony in your statement.
I used to get frustrated trying to follow Z's train of thought but I've give that up. Now I just enjoy how entertaining this dude is. It's a great one man show, like Spalding Gray.
The trick is not to follow his train of thought, but to find his moments of insight and listen to how he justifies them.
He is too smart yet too confusing in my opinion.
@@KozelPraiseGOELRO i think he is a bit confused himself to be honest. Whats probably missing from his equation is that bad, aswell as stupid people exist, and that theyre different in nature to us. also the strong connotations that come with words and the importance they play in life, because we're such highly suggestible social creatures.
He didn't explain what it means to call himself a communist. Just a typical Zizek ramble.
the point of the talk wasn't to give a be all end all explanation on his reasons for being a communist. it was to showcase how socialism is a dead term, and why he doesn't like to refer to himself as a socialist.
@@mateostenberg Dude literally couldn't stay on topic for three seconds,
@@deryaalkan5766 sure, but that's an argument for zizek, not me
@@neomcdoom tbf that's fitting given communism fails after about 3 seconds
@@malachymoreland7417 communism has never been practiced or implemented lol
Donald Duck is his speech therapist.
HAHA
HAHA
He is a great man but, I would never shake his hand
I feel like this one lacks enough gesturing, fidgeting, and nose touching.
"you should invite him, the best theorist of catastrophies that I know.."
^_^
made my day
who did he say was the best "theorist of catastrophes"? I've rewound it a hundred times and still can't tell.
@@augustspies4355 Jean-Pierre Dupuy
Would be great if he’d finish a thought or two 😂
and so on and so on
😂😂😂😂😂
Cocaine does that to you.
Then people would realize he is a fraud who isn’t actually saying anything.
@@a5dr3 You mean if they did cocaine?
No english subtitles so I wrote a transcript. Please let me know where I made a mistake and I will fix it!
"Uh, on the one hand I remain a communist in one sense.
You know who for me is the saddest person? I wonder if you would agree.
Habermas, you know, you're too young to remember, his, Habermas's reaction to German unification.
Habermas's primordial fear was the idea that, maybe the west can learn something from East German disciplines. That's why Habermas coined this horrible term nahollende revolution. For him, Poland, Holland, Czech Republic, is Germany, was just to translate, usually it's translate, a catch-up revolution. They should join the west, they just want what we have. I don't think this works. I think that the reason of all this confused protests that we are going today, yellow vests, Chile, whatever you want. It's precisely, this is the final death of Fukuyama. That is to say, ah no it's easy to laugh at Fukuyama, but they claim till now 99% even of the left is there, I know where Fukuyama leftists. They basically thought, you know even, I spoke with people like, he's too corrupted by Putin now, I don't like him, but ah, only Verstow. He told me, listen Capitalism is the only thing that works, and, we just have to make it a little bit more you know- women's rights, gay rights, healthcare and so on and so on. But that for me left, left, Fukuyama-ism. You accept the system. I think that this confused practice coming today, it make it clear that no, liberal capitalism is not the ultimate forum. It will not work. And besides, that's why I spoke about all those problems. Uh, just three today. Uh, migrants, ecology, digital control. None of them could be solved in liberal capitalists frame. It's clear that ecology, okay, it's good of course to play the capitalist's game, to attack small polluters, but, the catastrophe that are waiting, maybe you know this story, I love it, uh my good friend Jean-Pierre Dupuy, an excellent..you should invite him here, the best theorist of catastrophe that I know, told me he was there as part of some European community delegation, two days after Fukushima. He told me that, for a couple of hours, the Japanese government was in total panic, it looked that they will have to evacuate the entire Tokyo area, 30 million people. Then, maybe they didn't have to, maybe they [garbled], I didn't care, but what I want to say, it's clear that we are facing problems better. Neither market, nor state, the way we'll have it today, will be able to do it. And that for me, the space for something that I prefer that to call communism, not socialism. Because today everybody is a socialist. I read an interview, Bill Gates is a socialist. Socialism means today, yeah, what you said, but not too much egotism, we should take care of you know. It's out there, and so on and so on. So, so, again, no, be accurate but don't forget just that we lack, and I quote here my Marxist friend Fred Jameson. We still lack what Jameson calls cognitive mapping. Kind of a global narrative in a good sense, I'm never a post-modernist, we need big global narratives, what goes on today. You know what for me is the true tragedy of today? China. Let's admit, no, well people say, communists always screwed up the economy. I tell them, sorry, do I hear you correctly? Was there ever in the history of humanity, I exaggerate a little bit but not a lot, such an economic triumph as China in the last 40, 50 years. Hundreds of millions better, were raised from poverty and so on. And how did they do it? The European left really hated two things, always, unbridled market competition, and strong authoritarian state. The Chinese precisely combined these two, you know. So what I, and, this is the future. India is much worse than China of course. Turkey, Putin, a new authoritarian capitalism is coming up, and I'm just a pessimist. And I think that, if you ask me what will happen, I'm so sad to say this. I wonder if you have a, I mean, I get engaged. Do you remember when there were elections half a year ago, when, unfortunately the left guy lost in Colombia? I supported the guy, he even thanked me with a letter. He almost won, the leftist candidate. So, I do get involved, but I still think that I don't have this old Marxist reliance. We know the general situation, we just need to mobilize the people. No! People are getting mobilized outside our scope, you know, like, take yellow vests in France, where my friend Alain Badiou, proposed a wonderful formula. You know what his answer to yellow vests, he said, in french, "Tout ce qui bouge n'est pas rouge". All that moves is not necessarily red. You know, that's, we live in such confused time, where what was still 20, 30 years ago, a sign of active left, social movements, even obscenity, agressivity, protests, is taken over by the right. And, the big temptation of the left is to play the law and order card. For example, in my own is, beloved president, I refer to him now as SG. I don't use the term Trump. SG. You know why? He repeat-SG, he repeatedly referred to himself as stable genius, you know. And so, as Trump would have put it, a shithole of a country Slovenia, well, it's horrible. Of course one has to prosecute hate speech in someone. But this desperate move of the left in my country, now, they're all of a sudden for police investigation, punish them, and so on and so on. Nothing against, I certainly don't want to defend the human rights of whatever racists. And just think that if you focus on this it means, again, the lack of a certain positive vision, and so on and so on. You know, what we should not forget, I was really furious when, ah, after Trump won three publishers approached me, "We need your psycho analysis. Would you like to do a psycho analysis of Trump, no?" I said no! Trump is doing something which is in some crazy sense, rational from his standpoint. He addresses, cause, I think the only way psycho analysis is needed, is the total stupidity of democratic party liberal reaction to Trump. They, there you need psycho analysis you know? So no, I hope, and you know why, I'm not a total pessimist, not in the religious sense, but in the political sense, miracles happen. Although they screwed it up, fine, but who would have thought that sireza, something like sireza is possible? Who would, ah, who would have, things happen, things happen here and there. Again, uh, Morales, Linera, were interesting, I think they are a couple. Because Morales, okay, I don't mean in a racist way, he was traditional, blah blah, all that, but Linera is a top intellectual you know. I always like, that's the condition of the left, this false opposite to overcome then. That's why, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, no, ah, said something wonderful recently, when she supported Bernie Sanders, she said, "Yes I support him not in spite of him being an old white man, but because he is an old white man." Because, this is the worse false opposition, to say that we need this young marginal, no, Bernie got this. You know who are Bernie's voters in Vermont? I know, I go often there, because my friends there run the only department in United States where lakenyans are in power. His voters are precisely the people who otherwise would have voted for Trump. These impoverished, middle cla-lower middle class farmers, this axis is crucial. The leftist plan in United States shouldn't be this clean from a position. Let's be more moderate to get the center. No! Let's get to us some of the Trump voters who are disappointed. So no, I am not a total pessimist. The point that you emphasized, listen, let me finish with an anecdote which is my most beloved anecdote from Marx. You know in 1800...70, 71, a Paris commune, ah, for a moment it appeared falsely we know now...[garbled]... European revolution. And Marx wrote in a letter to Angles in a panic, you know, "My god they want a revolution now, I didn't get finished capital" and so on. "Why can't they wait?" I think we should not be ashamed of this trust in theory, we need theory, we need to understand what goes on. Migo, you are more Stalinist than me, you call this democratic discussion, you know. One guy, probably you gave him the question...[garbled]... you know. Thanks very much, I talk too much, I know, I am grateful to you."
You a real one🙏🏿🙏🏿🙏🏿
Beautiful. Thank you!!
Can someone subtitle everything he says? I genuinely miss some of the things he says.
use the playback speed button 0.75x he sounds normal.
@Seán English what is the name of the catastrophe theorist?
I recommend you watch some other videos of him, you'll get used to his voice
@@bakshindersingh3933 Jean Pierre Dupuy
The auto-generated English subtitles are good for a laugh.
If Sylvester was a real person.
Slovenian Sylvester the Cat; thufferin thuccotash
Lol
Lmfao!!!
"sufferin succotash"
Yes Sylvester the cat!! Suffering sucutash!!!🐈🐱
"The goal of socialism is communism"
-Vladimir Lenin
It’s not antisocialism on an ideological level but in the fact that socialism as a term is used by so many it’s lost meaning among people
Most socialists today have more in common with Bernstein than Lenin.
@@comradebroosk9396 no liberals calling themselves socialists aren’t socialists that’s part of Zizek point people who aren’t socialist are using the label and poisoning it
@@brendanmccabe8373 the label is poison. All Marxism is poison.
@@bloodcamarosexmagik4223 The point he's making is just that there are radical distinctions in the end goals of today's "socialists" and communists, much like during Lenin's time between social democratic factions and what became "Marxist" radical factions.
The irony is, Liberal capitalism only worked when communism gave it leverage. As in the good cop/ bad cop routine - better embrace social democracy or else the Reds will beat the living daylights out of you. You need us to keep those lunatics at bay.
Keynes said 'in the long run, we're dead' well if capitalism thinks it's immortal, it's never going to change.
Which is a classic triad - Capitalism thesis, Communism antithesis - Social Democracy synthesis. Once the antithesis dissolves, the synthesis does too - and we're back to thesis,
In fact the good cop, bad cop routine has spun over to the other side of the spectrum, now it's a case of Neo Liberals saying to the Left - better support us, or the neo-fascists are going to stomp all over you.
Hence the Left vote for Macron, support Merkel, choose Biden over Bernie etc etc out of fear of the Right.
Well also figure bernie wasn't our pick either Comrade. The man was just going to create Bourgeois Socialism and still have the proletariat under the dictatorship of the capitalist vanguard.
@@ReckerFidelWOLF Sure, but is real socialism possible in America? Sometimes you have to face reality.
But one thing's for sure, without a strong Marxist pressure, the ruling class of America ain't gonna embrace
bourgeois socialism. So keep up the good work comrade.
Even if communism can't take over the West, it can improve the West,
@@JAMAICADOCK Very much agreed on that one. Due to they amount of influence and also the amount capital that has been reinforced in the West. A vanguard would be necessary for the improvement of lives. Either way, until socialism has been realized by the common individual that is when I can pick up my rifle. Good day Comrade.
Biden was hardly up to choice, but it's partly Bernies fault that he wasn't strong enough.
@StAnthony a return to reactionary nationalism was always going to happen once the Soviet Union fell. Liberals fooled themselves that they had triumphed with the fall of communism. Rather they'd just let the genie of fascism out of the bottle again. As first seen in Yugoslavia, then Afghanistan, until now where the whole world seems to be marching right
But inevitably reactionary nationalism has nothing really to offer, other than war, racism, religion etc. That can't last forever.
But it will take a country, a developed country - to take up the mantle of communism, to put fascism back in its box. Which is not going to happen anytime soon. Hard lessons will have to be learned.
The Left will come to realize that social democracy, socialism just don't come about naturally, they have to be fought for. And in many countries, particularly the developing world, and the old Second World, harsh measures will have to be taken to suppress the forces of reaction.
"Why I Season My Cutting Board, NOT My Steak
"
I wish all of his videos had subtitles.
Zizek is impossible to argue against precisely for that reason, that he holds no open positions
That’s the Hegelian in him
And that there are alwys facts, like he said global consciousness wich the society lacks so there's no other way around to things that shouldn't be done in other ways
I love listening to him (except when I'm eating). He does have some great points and ideas.
In 2020 this man and his speech pattern is an existential threat to humanity.
As unstintingly irreligious as he was, Karl Marx was not an atheist. He was a staunch opponent of supernatural belief, yet neither did he embrace agnosticism as the position of claiming no answer to the question whether or not God exists.
Marx combined the Judeo-Christian concern for social justice with a scientific analysis of the structures of injustice and laid the basis for a science of revolution which would free humanity from those structures.
Sources: Wiley Online Library. CSUB
"A dog whistle won't harm your dog when used properly." 2:08
By assuming the autonomy of the individual, capitalism grants dignity to the poor. By affirming people's right to their own labor, regardless of their position on the economic ladder, capitalism offers the poor the means to improve their own well-being.
Source: FTE Org
9:06
he's an existential threat to humanity based on his belief systems alone #BIGFACTS
@@ConcedoNulli Marx apparently never shook off his thick Trier accent, which made him a figure of fun for jealous intellectuals in his later life in Berlin and Cologne. 3:07 [The Local]
Watching Zizek speak in the time of COVID-19 is truly nerve-racking. The face touching and coughing shot my anxiety through the roof 😓
Tf 😂😂
Just stay 6ft away from the screen.
Dude the guy is tweaked out of his mind and yet somehow still sober.
I didn't know Sylvester the cat was real.
HAHAHA!!!! That is gold! Now I am going to think of only Sylvester whenever I come across his videos
@@dexternepo ua-cam.com/video/PkhPuH8G5Hg/v-deo.html
The interviewer looks quite concerned
I can’t follow what he’s talking about at all.
No one knows what he is talking about, but the "intellectuals" would never admit it so they put him on a pedestal. "You're too stupid to understand this man's enormous slobbering brain." Yeah... sure.
@@LosMachinesTV aww did he say something you didn't like?
@@ermellino3578 awwww did I say something you didn't like?
@@LosMachinesTV I laughed so hard at that
He's abit unfocused in this one.
General trends and subjects in his talks are pointing out hypocrisy among the liberal left and liberal left cultural dogmas that are questionable.
My favorite part is...ahem: " spllsshhhpf blithurrpfs spithulllprsh!"
I read more comments about what is seen , how he looks (how he speaks, his gestures, etc) and prejudices than about what he's saying.
Most are overstrained with what Z. says.
Their historical and political source of information is the comedy channel.
Mockery is hip these days.
🇺🇸 heritage introduced by sitcoms 🙄 .•°
@@farrider3339 It is true! and it's going to get worse and worse
the guy looking off into the distance mouthing conversations was a bit distracting also found the mood a bit odd, like he'd smile and joke with someone in the audeince adn then turn to slavoj and the smile would disappear and treat him with skepticism right away and then kinda shut him down at the end
I love that whenever he switches topics out of nowhere or go on a tangent the interviewer scratches his head.
Here for comments
I hope Slavoj doesn't get COVID-19. He touches his face quite a lot. But I love him.
8:54 Deleuzeans leaving to destroy Vermont
Why is the timelapse Ponyboy by Sophie?
"I'm a human, but i am not a mammal"
more like 'I'm a man, not an animal'
Who do you main?
Highlights: 3:46- 4:46 5:43- 6:04
We have some really big brain commentators I see.
@4:21 what did he say the first of the two thing is ? Un-something Market competition ?
Unbridled
Strong opening sniffs.
Ah, I see how people call Zizek a charlatan. He has no train of thought. His speech is like the car of an investigator. He goes from idea to philosopher to a tangential story to another tangential story and back to ideas and so on and so on, always bouncing around topics. He also reminds me of a lost couple driving from landmark to landmark.
Are his books any better? I am binge watching his videos and he's always so goddamn volatile,if not suspicious, like he wants to take everyone POV and washing it into a version that he likes.
Simone His books are pretty good but also complex. “The Sublime Object of Ideology” is literally a masterpiece and his best book. ”Sex and the Failed Absolute” is also pretty recent and fun to read but again a complex philosophical book.
I think people focus too much on how he talks, but if you get over that, there's a lot you can learn from him. He likes to jump around when he talks, but if you are familiar with his writings, it's pretty easy to understand what he's talking about. I used to have a problem with him, but now I don't.
@@LeonWagg it's not the way he talks, my problem is that his intentions are pretty clear, authoritarian, which is fine, and his fans are liberal leftists.
To me is an enigma, how those types are attracted to his philosophy.
Simone ”liberal leftists” lol Most of Zizek's work is an attack on liberals, identity politics, political correctness, and so on. Liberals hate him because he advocates for radical left-wing politics and not liberal bourgeois reform. Zizek’s philosophy is fascinating even if you disagree with his politics, you can still learn a lot from reading him.
Syriza in GR is exactly the reason to be a total pessimist. They turned their back to the movement and they became one with the establishment.
I love zizek with all of my heart but I cant for the life of me interprate his lectures. Anyone know a good way to get used to accents?
the end was so good i love ol slavoj and his sense of humor
i think another important point he makes is that we should begin (again!) to look at all the struggles in societies in terms of a class struggle. it is easy to forget that because everything seems to be so complicated in our society, but essentially, we have the duty to pull workers and people of the lower classes in general towards class thinking and ultimately real socialism. unfortunately, as history showed many times, it is dangerous to not fight for the lower classes and leave them for the right (think trump).
When every conflict is viewed in terms of class struggle, some groups must be demonized based on their success. This is the reason the U.K. Labour Party is rife with antisemitism.
I couldnt disagree more... I think every attempt to pursue socialism or communism should be considered terrorism. World has experienced enough of it. Only duty you have to pursue is the ones you choose. So your duties towards ´´lower class´´ is just dangerous ideology. You think with socialist government the class struggle would disappear? I dont think so - sure it would made the poorest struggle less, because in socialism everybody gets equal shit, but the middle class would be literally robbed and the higher class would be practically untouchable.
@@krystofcisar469 you are a coward
Slavoj doing Slavoj. God love 'im.
Admiration for a clearly mentally unstable person.........
When was this
Was he speaking about Alexander Dugin on 1:18?
Bloody hell, the sniffing is out of control, Zizek has to stop doing coke, but maybe it's his secret to understand Hegel
good ol' flour
as much as I would like it to be, it's not coke :/ it's just how he is, a form of Tourette syndrom I think....
@@struki84 no man. Unfortunately its coke.
@@federamone2297 right because you know that for a fact... gimme a break...
we wont know for sure, only speculations. maybe its coke, maybe a tick or he is allergic to something. perhaps hes nervous; because when Im nervous, my nose itches sometimes like hell, too. (and it wont stop and it embarrasses me infront of ppl) but yes, i think its coke
We need a follow-up !!!
AOC now has flipped to support Joe Biden, and I want to hear Zizek's ideas how this was cooking in the stove already, and what to do about this catastrophic situation.
Biden will resist the war-lobbies much less than Trump.
Biden is an imperialist.
"Things happen here and there" The Goat Quote
I would just love to have a talk with him. The man is so fucking smart and unapologetic in his thinking. A true role model to look up to (philosophically speaking
I’m a tiredist tired of all the ‘ists’
i doubt its possible to avoid them
@@arthurheidt6373 It is actually quite easy to do it. You just stop using them.
@@Morrowindur you not calling people -ists does not mean they still arent, by that logic we can defeat capitalism by just not buying things, and then you die because you needed food but didnt want to buy the seeds or the tools to hunt, assuming you even knew how to garden or hunt, these things dont get dealt with by ignoring but by confronting them thru action and speech, and to confront sometimes you have to call people the -ists they are or even participate in a capitalist system till it can be changed
@@duman173 That is not the same logic at all. You can have two people calling themselves capitalists, communists or what have you and have them disagree on different political issues. If someone calls themselves a socialist for example, I can't possibly (shouldn't be able to) know what their opinion is on every kind of political/social matter. That is just absurd to me. It just doesn't make sense that large numbers of people would have the exact same opinon on all kinds of political matters if they are truly freethinking individuals. We are talking about very complex topics here. Only with conversation can (should) we manage to figure out where another person is standing on a certain issue. Putting people into boxes, in my opinion, is a huge part of the problem that we are dealing with today. I really don't see the necessity for labeling other than to divide people into groups and create resentment between them. Having discussions about problems is all you need. No 'ist' is required. Just my humble opinion.
@@Morrowindur i agree, but only to the extent of not being to reductive of the reality we live in.
As you said the complexicity of not only the topics but our own individual takes on said topics make the idea of labels somewhat ridiculous concept, but that is precisely why said labels are born, althou reductive of themselves, they serve the purpose of more easily identifying ourselves to one another, the label itself is not enough if not followed by discourse in order to truly be able to understand ourselves and others thru interractions.
I respect your opinion, and share it to some extent, althou i do disagree they are not required but see them instead as not sufficient, and that we shouldn't allow ourselves to be content with the labels themselves but recognise that without them the mechanisms of communication would be far more complicated and stifling to the possabilty of discourse and understanding.
As to the point i made it was that such labels are useful until we can change our understanding and communication to where they are truly no longer needed but until then they serve a purpose which cant be undone simply by not using them.
when he said "things happen here and there".... i really felt it
"Miracle happens". He mentioned this on November 2019 and by late December, we started to have the corona outbreak leading to the disclosure of the huge lack of incompleteness on the Other.
Wow, I can't believe Zizek even knows about my country (Colombia), that's an honor!
Of course he would know about Colombia.
The FARC has warranted observation/criticism/praise for a long time.
@奉行三民主義"擁護反共 they are kind of unpopular so they don't need to destroy them
He wrote a letter endorsing Petro in the 2018 elections, i was there, it was beautiful...
How can someone belive in Fukujamas Theories after reading Karl Popper?
He’s really tough to listen too
did anybody catch the name of the dude slavoj mentioned at 2:27? is he actually a catastrophe theorist? the dude that was there two days after fukushima?
I believe he said "Jean-Pierre Dupuy".
Closed captions dosent work 😂
I love to watch his tics, and hear his spitting and strange accent. It adds some kind of comedy to his speeches, which is unintended but just makes his speech more engaging. I also feel that I can understand him even while I'm a Spanish man listening to a Slovenian man speaking in English (with no subtitles). Unfortunately some people will seriously use this as an argument to discredit him.
I don't care about any of this besides that chair, that's a cool chair.
well that CERTAINLY cleared a lot up
I just wish I could understand him.
The absolute legend
He never misses
It's too bad these terms have been so diluted and smeared. We almost need to invent a new word.
Slavoj Zizek is brilliant!
I am not against communism if it was in the framework of democracy not totalitarianism which has always been the case
All systems are totalitarian when under threat, including liberal "democracies".
Chris Kokolios what do you think neoliberal capitalism is? Democracy?
@@euso2008 nothing is liberal democracy, a life of a migrant will never going to be equal to a life of a co-oprate owner. If everyone are truly equal in democracy you would never even think that a co-operate owner provide job and a worker does work that's why they have different importance. After all both are human bodies with flesh and blood
V G anything with elections is democracy
@@kokomanation what's the point when gov won't listen to people but cooperates.
I don't know how the algorithm got me this jewel of a video, but all of this is spot on. I mean, if even an all time Pinochet supporter and human rights violations apologist can call himself a "social democrat" you know the concept of socialism is getting diluted to a ridiculuos degree.
who's the pinochet supporter?
Who was the "best theorist of catastrophes" that he mentioned?
Jean-Pierre Dupuy
@@LeonWagg Thanks!
Estoy viendo este video mientras "The Gumbo Variatons" suena en el fondo. Me gusta.