Not really, you have just contributed to a cloud capitalist by spending your time and attention here while successfully fooling yourself with your statement
I think the majority of ‘ordinary people’ are fair minded and have a strong sense of justice and are happy to look out for their fellow man. I applaud anyone taking the time to watch this debate. The future lies in our hands and more importantly in the hands of the young and they need to be informed. This is a real conversation. Thank goodness there is a platform for it to air on.
I cant stop gushing over this whole conversation. The sincerity,camraderie,humor,ironical benevolent disagreements(even insults) all come together to inspire me to read and understand more and also conduct myself with people in more dignified ways.
He sometimes understands some words differently, idk if thats because of a language barrier. One time he corrected a reporter when he was just greeting him xD
@JanuFlorido In this case, it is not because of the language barrier, but because of his dogmatism. He is a psychoanalyst, and psychoanalysis has been etatist from its beginning.
@@dillegitante Well I should clarify that I'm not an academic, so I have no idea of a lot of stuff. Videos like this appear in my feed while I clean the dishes and lately, I have received a lot of videos about Zizek. He has a strange speech pattern that is similar of mine when I interpreted a sentence wrong or don't remember what word I have to use (I'm not an English speaker).
The understanding here is Zizek states, Musk is a pure neoliberal. Yanks means, yes, but through attempting to be the perfect neoliberal musk has actually taken part in doing something different to neoliberalism 1980-2008/16 , the technofeudalism
Slavoj Zizek, Yanis Varoufakis, Come to Termez, Uzbekistan, let's quantum use this situation, change the life cycle route, get in touch with other perspectives, Central Asian, for example.
I agree with Zizek (the one and only) : Nobody in this world with a sane brain and equipped with a minimum of the ability to obsrve and process what he has seen, believes in religious doctrines. However 90% of the world population is after bliss, the release from the misery he finds himself in and talked into the need for an after life existence, by practicing rituals showing a strong tie to superstitious systems of believe. When an ideology of salvation turns into a bond chaining the individual even tighter to the misery he intends to escape. BiG LoL and yet people totally refuse to relinquish their childish attitudes regarding their being here.
Well, he can say he's not interested in the Land debate... but he already agreed to do it, on the Theory Underground channel, a year ago from yesterday!
_Let it go, you guys! Anyway, haven't you all moved on to stuff like Tarot Reading and such?_ Srsly though - is there much point beyond it being _'two people I like'?_ Likely outcome would be talking past each other. For example, look at the meet-up that Douglas Lane kindly organized between Terry Pinkard and Z a few years ago; Hegel as common ground between them? No, not really.
@@torquemaddertorquemadder2080 Tbf, from how unprepared Peterson was with familiarising himself with Zizek's work, it was pretty much a debate between 'two people who are very popular in the mainstream of philosophy/cultural analysis''
Great point differentiating between real and formal freedom. I see that mistake made still even by very committed people, without understanding where does it lead and how much support it alienates. Another major mistake is this: since hegemonic imperialist interests utilises as justification some tropes like democracy and human rights, it is implicitly interpreted by some on the left that these things doesn't have essential value-a very grievious and collosal error. Also, of critical theory and Horkheimer being close to euro Atlantic estab, had to be. Critical theory is post Marxist theory for a reason-it is basically anti corporate critique of western society and culture minus the real Marxist program to do anything about it. So, naturally Horkheimer was close to estab. Excellent discussion.
Clearly, central planning has had a bad reputation in recent history, but as shown by China, the CCP is getting a whole lot right, mainly through effective, long-term planning.
I hate the lack of rational planning in America. If I could kick a butt for every problem in America that could have been avoided by rational planning I would be kicking butt from sun up to sun set.
to be honest central planning has had throughout modern history amazing achievements. The USSR went from feudal state to an industralized one, chine did the same. Of course there were miscalculations in the process, but overcoming hundreds of years of underdevelopement in decades is unbelievably impressive. "western" countries will never be able to compete with china without some central planning.
"Overcoming underdevelopment" to arrive at what? A "modern primitive" state, which now has morphed into digital ethnography - a study of digital natives. There's no escape from "underdevelopment."
for the non-greeks admiring the man on the left here: Varoufakis’s strategies and rhetoric during his tenure as Finance Minister were shaped by his broader economic theories and critiques of the Eurozone rather than the lived realities of the average Greek citizen. His push for a potential Grexit (Greek exit from the Eurozone) was viewed by many as a high-risk gamble that could have plunged Greece into deeper financial chaos, leading to severe short-term consequences like bank runs, hyperinflation, and even greater economic hardship for ordinary Greeks.
Thoroughly enjoyed the conversation. Reminded me to ALWAYS be on one's toes and that being pessimistic in this day and age is a luxury we cannot afford.
I don't follow the point about freedom v. justice on the left. Maybe someone can elucidate it for me, but it just seems like semantics. If your problem with justice is that there can be many conceptions of it, and that some of those conceptions are oppressive (like everyone in their right place), then I think we could say the same thing about freedom. The Harris campaign came out swinging by reappropriating the concept of freedom, but the point was to contrast the democratic conception of freedom to the republican conception. Can we say why the democratic conception should be preferred without appealing to some other virtues in the process, such as justice? I think any of these abstract ethical concepts have various interpretations on both the left and the right. If Yanis's point is that this variety of meanings renders the concept of justice meaningless, then why is freedom not similarly undermined?
That is true of both, but to different degrees. Freedom has a broad meaning, but it nevertheless has at its core the concept of not being bound by external factors. Justice has at its core the concept of morally correct states of affairs. Since morality, I would argue, is such a contested phenomenon with no fact of the matter, justice is susceptible to a broader range of construal than is freedom.
Freedom is a recurring theme with Lacan, hence with Žižek. He gives that word a lot of meaning behind it, which in turn makes it more definable and universal than justice. Unfortunately one needs to know a bit about it to get a deeper and more meaningful vision of this very brief discussion (I don't know much about it myself).
I believe in realisme as a third alternativ, but how you see the world depends on the timeline you use. If you see the world in short term you're probably optimistic if you see long term you're probably a pessimist.
Imagine your life’s romantic partner (however it is) says: - “I give you every kind of freedom - do whatever you want or wish…!” Would it _really_ empower you - or create a sense of abandonment or detachment in a precarious void of “free choice”? Now, imagine your elected government offering _exactly the same thing_ for at least 40 years… 🙄
I really don't like categorizing what "i am" politically, socially, or philosophically. So these days i just try to make common ground with everyone and keep it at that. I don't and reel in those that do wanna complain/argue about those things
He says we need to fail and was obviously reffering to the time before he departed from SYRIZA saying that they took the wrong route. They didn't love taking the garbage out but they had to do a lot of it. He's bitter to this day about it but he was and will forever be wrong. Kids were literally falling unconscious in schools from hunger and we had record breaking numbers of businesses closing. If no one took the garbage out a lot of people would have suffered but his ego won't ever let him admit that. I can appreciate him as a thinker but as a politician he's terrible
Central planning is a mistake every time. The problem with it is that you can build the most enticing system ever with the best motivations behind it; until some more cunning, meaner and resourceful entity highjacks that system for the worst objectives you wanted to avoid.
Mind Begs the Question: ▪︎If a Semitic State practice ▪︎Superior Race ideology,Dehumanization,Starvation,Gassing (White Phosphorus),Concentration Camps,Pogroms,Ethnic Cleansing,etc ▪︎Hold trigger to Nukes ▪︎Greater Threat to World - Nazi State or Semitic State?
@Degros44 And what exactly does "the war ends" mean? Does Israel suddenly leave palestinian territory alone? Do they stop forcing palestinians from their homes? Do they give back all the stolen land? Do they fix all the infrastructure, such as the many hospitals they bombed into rubble? The next time a little palestinian child throws a stone at an idf soldier will he be shot to death or not? And on that topic what of all the hundreds of palestinian children they have "detained", what of them? I'm not a supporter of hamas but I think your reduction of what would happen if they surrendered down to "the war ends" frankly means jack shit.
People, for God's sake, stop forcing this stupid debate between Slavoj and Nick Land down our throats like that. I'm 100% with Slavoj here. Accelerationism is boring and Nick Land is not interesting enough. This is a worthless debate proposal. Stop it already.
I don't think that they refer to the system of government of the Soviet Union - or any historical or contemporary so-called communist state for that matter - when using the term 'communism'.
Communism = large-scale international cooperation in order to tackle today's greatest communal problems (like ecology, for instance). It has little to do with our classical 20th century notion of communism.
What a time to be alive and listen to such intellectual discussions for free.
Not really, you have just contributed to a cloud capitalist by spending your time and attention here while successfully fooling yourself with your statement
Nothing
is free
Being active here, clicking, you have already paid. That is technofeudalism in motion.
@@BrownCreature It is if you give it willingly
Everything
is free
I think the majority of ‘ordinary people’ are fair minded and have a strong sense of justice and are happy to look out for their fellow man. I applaud anyone taking the time to watch this debate. The future lies in our hands and more importantly in the hands of the young and they need to be informed. This is a real conversation. Thank goodness there is a platform for it to air on.
I cant stop gushing over this whole conversation. The sincerity,camraderie,humor,ironical benevolent disagreements(even insults) all come together to inspire me to read and understand more and also conduct myself with people in more dignified ways.
A big smile of a video
I could watch this for hours and hours
Thanks for posting up the whole thing and not pay-walling it, H2A.
God I love these two men
Absolutely amazing, enjoyable and learning experience.
Damn it, Varoufakis stopped the discussion just as it was getting really good!
His final statement is priceless. Chapeau!
Yanis becoming practically a Roman Emperor.
Great Christmas present!
I laughed out loud at the ending. Amazing talk overall
Zizek: Musk is a pure neoliberal.
Varoufakis: Not really.
Zizek: I agree.
He sometimes understands some words differently, idk if thats because of a language barrier. One time he corrected a reporter when he was just greeting him xD
@JanuFlorido In this case, it is not because of the language barrier, but because of his dogmatism. He is a psychoanalyst, and psychoanalysis has been etatist from its beginning.
@@dillegitante I believe that could mean quickly agree to disagree
@@dillegitante Well I should clarify that I'm not an academic, so I have no idea of a lot of stuff. Videos like this appear in my feed while I clean the dishes and lately, I have received a lot of videos about Zizek. He has a strange speech pattern that is similar of mine when I interpreted a sentence wrong or don't remember what word I have to use (I'm not an English speaker).
The understanding here is Zizek states, Musk is a pure neoliberal. Yanks means, yes, but through attempting to be the perfect neoliberal musk has actually taken part in doing something different to neoliberalism 1980-2008/16 , the technofeudalism
Great question!
Brilliant.
Slavoj is brilliant. I could listen to him ramble for hours.
He realy hates old communist so not communist
Slavoj Zizek, Yanis Varoufakis, Come to Termez, Uzbekistan, let's quantum use this situation, change the life cycle route, get in touch with other perspectives, Central Asian, for example.
Would you like a visit from a group of American Communists?
@Victoria-Enzula )))
@@Victoria-Enzula yeah, why not let them speak in different audiences
I agree with Zizek (the one and only) : Nobody in this world with a sane brain and equipped with a minimum of the ability to obsrve and process what he has seen, believes in religious doctrines.
However 90% of the world population is after bliss, the release from the misery he finds himself in and talked into the need for an after life existence, by practicing rituals showing a strong tie to superstitious systems of believe.
When an ideology of salvation turns into a bond chaining the individual even tighter to the misery he intends to escape.
BiG LoL and yet people totally refuse to relinquish their childish attitudes regarding their being here.
Well, he can say he's not interested in the Land debate... but he already agreed to do it, on the Theory Underground channel, a year ago from yesterday!
_Let it go, you guys! Anyway, haven't you all moved on to stuff like Tarot Reading and such?_
Srsly though - is there much point beyond it being _'two people I like'?_ Likely outcome would be talking past each other. For example, look at the meet-up that Douglas Lane kindly organized between Terry Pinkard and Z a few years ago; Hegel as common ground between them? No, not really.
@@torquemaddertorquemadder2080 Tbf, from how unprepared Peterson was with familiarising himself with Zizek's work, it was pretty much a debate between 'two people who are very popular in the mainstream of philosophy/cultural analysis''
Lol, MAKE SURE YOU HOLD HIM TO IT !!
Great point differentiating between real and formal freedom. I see that mistake made still even by very committed people, without understanding where does it lead and how much support it alienates. Another major mistake is this: since hegemonic imperialist interests utilises as justification some tropes like democracy and human rights, it is implicitly interpreted by some on the left that these things doesn't have essential value-a very grievious and collosal error.
Also, of critical theory and Horkheimer being close to euro Atlantic estab, had to be. Critical theory is post Marxist theory for a reason-it is basically anti corporate critique of western society and culture minus the real Marxist program to do anything about it. So, naturally Horkheimer was close to estab. Excellent discussion.
Clearly, central planning has had a bad reputation in recent history, but as shown by China, the CCP is getting a whole lot right, mainly through effective, long-term planning.
China is a corporatist state, stop being stupid
I hate the lack of rational planning in America. If I could kick a butt for every problem in America that could have been avoided by rational planning I would be kicking butt from sun up to sun set.
to be honest central planning has had throughout modern history amazing achievements. The USSR went from feudal state to an industralized one, chine did the same. Of course there were miscalculations in the process, but overcoming hundreds of years of underdevelopement in decades is unbelievably impressive.
"western" countries will never be able to compete with china without some central planning.
"Overcoming underdevelopment" to arrive at what? A "modern primitive" state, which now has morphed into digital ethnography - a study of digital natives. There's no escape from "underdevelopment."
Absolutely superb
for the non-greeks admiring the man on the left here:
Varoufakis’s strategies and rhetoric during his tenure as Finance Minister were shaped by his broader economic theories and critiques of the Eurozone rather than the lived realities of the average Greek citizen. His push for a potential Grexit (Greek exit from the Eurozone) was viewed by many as a high-risk gamble that could have plunged Greece into deeper financial chaos, leading to severe short-term consequences like bank runs, hyperinflation, and even greater economic hardship for ordinary Greeks.
Eno tora eimaste coble e? 😂
At last, with this video there's hope. I found something smarter than ChatGPT
Pessimists are the true optimists
Thoroughly enjoyed the conversation. Reminded me to ALWAYS be on one's toes and that being pessimistic in this day and age is a luxury we cannot afford.
I don't follow the point about freedom v. justice on the left. Maybe someone can elucidate it for me, but it just seems like semantics. If your problem with justice is that there can be many conceptions of it, and that some of those conceptions are oppressive (like everyone in their right place), then I think we could say the same thing about freedom. The Harris campaign came out swinging by reappropriating the concept of freedom, but the point was to contrast the democratic conception of freedom to the republican conception. Can we say why the democratic conception should be preferred without appealing to some other virtues in the process, such as justice? I think any of these abstract ethical concepts have various interpretations on both the left and the right. If Yanis's point is that this variety of meanings renders the concept of justice meaningless, then why is freedom not similarly undermined?
That is true of both, but to different degrees. Freedom has a broad meaning, but it nevertheless has at its core the concept of not being bound by external factors. Justice has at its core the concept of morally correct states of affairs. Since morality, I would argue, is such a contested phenomenon with no fact of the matter, justice is susceptible to a broader range of construal than is freedom.
Freedom is a recurring theme with Lacan, hence with Žižek. He gives that word a lot of meaning behind it, which in turn makes it more definable and universal than justice. Unfortunately one needs to know a bit about it to get a deeper and more meaningful vision of this very brief discussion (I don't know much about it myself).
freedom has a much richer history in marxism and philosophy than justice
has zizek read spengler?
I believe in realisme as a third alternativ, but how you see the world depends on the timeline you use. If you see the world in short term you're probably optimistic if you see long term you're probably a pessimist.
Imagine your life’s romantic partner (however it is) says:
- “I give you every kind of freedom - do whatever you want or wish…!”
Would it _really_ empower you - or create a sense of abandonment or detachment in a precarious void of “free choice”?
Now, imagine your elected government offering _exactly the same thing_ for at least 40 years… 🙄
Ace.
I really don't like categorizing what "i am" politically, socially, or philosophically. So these days i just try to make common ground with everyone and keep it at that. I don't and reel in those that do wanna complain/argue about those things
Central and democratic planing is posible. But without the facism AI.
It is the "Flores-Modell"!!
And so on
Why can't Zizek finish a single coherent sentence?
Because he is crazy!
15:21
are these guys new techno-oligarchs?
You sort of figure out each opinion from looking at the thumbnail 😂😂
Obama said NASA must be privitised. Darn have to rewind.
But, Slavoj, sometimes with no theory, no direction, action can lead to invention.
He says we need to fail and was obviously reffering to the time before he departed from SYRIZA saying that they took the wrong route. They didn't love taking the garbage out but they had to do a lot of it. He's bitter to this day about it but he was and will forever be wrong. Kids were literally falling unconscious in schools from hunger and we had record breaking numbers of businesses closing. If no one took the garbage out a lot of people would have suffered but his ego won't ever let him admit that. I can appreciate him as a thinker but as a politician he's terrible
Pessimism is not a choice now
"Bla bla bla capitalism, NO, techno feudalism"
Central planning is a mistake every time. The problem with it is that you can build the most enticing system ever with the best motivations behind it; until some more cunning, meaner and resourceful entity highjacks that system for the worst objectives you wanted to avoid.
Mind Begs the Question:
▪︎If a Semitic State practice
▪︎Superior Race ideology,Dehumanization,Starvation,Gassing (White Phosphorus),Concentration Camps,Pogroms,Ethnic Cleansing,etc
▪︎Hold trigger to Nukes
▪︎Greater Threat to World - Nazi State or Semitic State?
You know if Hamas surrenders, the war ends tomorrow right?
Mind Begs the Question:
▪︎Fighting those who chant D3ath to Jews slogans - Heroism
▪︎Fighting those who chant D3ath to Arabs slogans - Terrorism?
@Degros44 And what exactly does "the war ends" mean? Does Israel suddenly leave palestinian territory alone? Do they stop forcing palestinians from their homes? Do they give back all the stolen land? Do they fix all the infrastructure, such as the many hospitals they bombed into rubble? The next time a little palestinian child throws a stone at an idf soldier will he be shot to death or not? And on that topic what of all the hundreds of palestinian children they have "detained", what of them? I'm not a supporter of hamas but I think your reduction of what would happen if they surrendered down to "the war ends" frankly means jack shit.
@@Degros44 Hamas is part of that Semitic State. Didn't watch the whole talk?
They can't complete a single thought or sentence that makes any sense. Hope their books are better organized.
He looks like "You know Who" 😂 He dont like that joke , Blocked me on Twitter 😂
Whatever alternative paradigma you theorize about, in practice we will always be thrown back on our archetypes.
Guest n01 sniffing, provocation towards Žižak
I agree, the left needs new theory.
Why so
People, for God's sake, stop forcing this stupid debate between Slavoj and Nick Land down our throats like that. I'm 100% with Slavoj here. Accelerationism is boring and Nick Land is not interesting enough. This is a worthless debate proposal. Stop it already.
Communism will save the environment? How did that work out for the Aral Sea?
I don't think that they refer to the system of government of the Soviet Union - or any historical or contemporary so-called communist state for that matter - when using the term 'communism'.
Communism = large-scale international cooperation in order to tackle today's greatest communal problems (like ecology, for instance). It has little to do with our classical 20th century notion of communism.
@@TheBausOfAll But that's actually existing communism.
They are talking about Marxist vision of communism. Not Soviet version or East German version of it. It’s completely different honestly
@@Nhiimusic Again, the Soviet version was actually existing communism. You sounds like an anarcho-capitalist.
Yanis should have a chat/interview with Jordan Peterson
There is nothing to talk about. Jordan will just jam the bandwidth with word salad, while other side struggles to not walk out.
Yeah, hard no on that one. Peterson is a clown.
The racist idiot?
Embarrassing
brutal bs to be honest with you... brutal bs