Let's be glad that we still have political philosophers like Zizek, he shows that the very essence of marxist thought is still here whilst proven to be falsifiable. Marxism can and should be reformed according to different times. Let's preserve what basis marx has laid out for us and use it wisely. If we are to ignore marxist thought then as he points out, we are simply capitalists with a human face.
***** let me guess, you hate foreigners, don't you? you believe people should stay put where they are born, right? different skin colors shouldn't mix, according to you, right? also it quite so happens that marxism is mostly famous for trying to bring an end to state and capitalism. One more thing: we love culture, but you are right about the rest, we do believe all these things (religion, patriotism, distinct races, nations…) belong to the dustbin of history…
farrelliux So tell me, what reforms does Marxism need? I'm not trying to imply Marxism has all the answers, I'm genuinely interested! While I'm wary of revisionism (which is something entirely different than trying to further Marxist theory, revisionism is to marxism like intelligent design is to darwinism), Marxism can never fall into dogmatism.
***** "Marxism is a state capitalistic ideology that sees culture, religion, patriotism and ethnicity as a source of perversity" What are you talking about?
***** He's merely drawing attention to the fact that you are so mistaken that your statement appears ridiculous. I don't know why news hasn't broken to you yet, but Marxism is out to abolish the state and capitalism, not join the two. You are sort of right about religion and patriotism. Marxists are not intolerant to religion in general, sometimes they fight their worldly representatives, but Marxists are mostly people which hope that in free societies, people will see through religion on themselves. What they see as a perversity is the popularized version of religion so widely disseminated, which is merely an ideology full of lies keeping the people down and presenting them with a pie and the sky. Patriotism in the sense of putting one nation above the rest is merely a perversity to Marxists. However, Marxists love culture, people like Adorno, Benjamin or indeed Zizek can't stop talking about it. They are critical of many aspects of mainstream and elite culture, but that is just because they want to save it from becoming an instrument of subjection. And by Marxists, I mean people like myself.
***** oh, so you're not a conservative? this is exciting, what are you? you're against democracy, both major bourgeois political philosophies (conservatism and liberalism) and you hate capitalism but love Jesus, so my guess is: fascist? Or are you some other kind of anti-modern reactionary? Oh, and you're right, I'm a demon from hell and I do want world domination, no catching me by surprise that way, buddy. But how on earth I'm a sectarian?
zizek's ability to present his arguments in a practical method is like awesome, he provides meaningful, simple examples which easily explains his ideas without insulting the listener which says more about where he comes from rather then a school of thought he practices, I guess this is more for Slovenians, whatever you teach your children to produce this guy, the world needs more of it.
This is one of the most impressive of presentations by the Slovenian polymath on Marxism and Communism in the present international context. Also, Dr Zizek is quite strongly emphatic here on the historical importance of Europe and the concept of modernization. Compared to this lecture, again, almost all his later talks are much more Hegelian and Lacanian, with less and less emphasis made on the role of Marxism and Communism in the process of the emancipatory changes that are, as he yet underscores, quite inevitable.
Zizek is a wonderful speaker and an certainly an accomplished politician and philosopher. One thing he is not, however, is a hope-bringer. I would very much like to hear your rebuttal on this.
Its been only once I have seen zizek live. He was reading a book while waiting on a pedestrian crossing for a green light. When the pedestrian light actually turned green this huge mass of people crossed the street, but zizek didn't move. He stood there dwelling in that book as he would be in the comfort of his living room. The light turned red again, and i just said to myself, well thats a man that doesn't allow himself to be bothered.
the question once and again is what it is to be re-volucionary, how we embrace such a word and how we are constraint by ideological right forces, always towards a better world
This is really restorative laughter upon laughter that somehow the universal can still shine through the particular for being singular. Well done Zizek.
The historic evolution of PRIVATE PROPERTY RELATIONSHIP of alienation,exploitation,suffering and the emergence of CLASS,STATE,FAMILY as the template of control and suppression for MINORITY RULE is the fractal nature of our limited mode of interacttion.
In the sense that he helped change the way we see ourselves yes. I dare say many of Freud's ideas where silly, but the basic Idea that all people have drives and impulses that they dont have conscious awareness of or full control over is still valid and relevant (and not sufficiently acknowledged in this speech).
A simple task to unveil this distinction: Ask a Philosophy student to unveil Nietzsche’s arguments then ask him the same for Hegel’s or Kant’s... At that split-second difference, many difficulties may “spontaneously” appear.
I, for one, am really interested in some of Slavoj's ideas but one particular and general feature about him really stands out to me: He is a typical continental phisolopher in the almost same sense and breath as Nietzsche was: He has many creative solutions and interesting ideas but he never (or rarely) goes rigidly skin-deep into the distinctive nature of these abstract categories the same way someone like Spinoza or Kant would.
Moussavi is not a free-market supporter, he is for some privatization with strong government regulation. In the eighties he was an outspoken proponent of a collectivistic economy.
@Klllakmet My problem with that is that asking the right questions and stating the obvious can be awfully close to one another. All war is started with the hope that things will change and ended with the bitter realization that they haven't. At this point
The reform is the enlightenment of the working class. The flash of insight that comes with the realization of one's own alienation. Once this insight occurs, everything else follows.
Can somebody help me? I'm translating this entire speech into spanish to share it with some friends who were extremely interested to understand it. But I just want to know what does he say at the beggining, it is really hard to understand for me. Until the part where he says "I would like to begin with Adorno..." Well.. THANKS A LOT to all of you in advance, and thanks @adycousins for sharing this amazing stuff!
"take things into their own hands" Well, yes, but, the more you delve into the reality of Iranian life & Iranian politics, the more you see how the U.S. exacerbates problems. Stephen Kinzer's book on the '53 coup against Mossadegh is particularly revealing in this respect. Hell, the introduction alone is worth reading. In it, Akbar Ganji (imprisoned for 6 yrs by the gov for criticising it) states US military threats give the gov "a freer hand in repressing Iran's budding civil society."
Interesting observation. Apparently, during Greco-Roman antiquity the beard was that which defined philosophers against 'normal' folk - maybe it has something to do with that. I know that I feel more special when I have a beard.
Here's a sincere question: What is one specific idea from Zizek that you can explain which has led you to some new action or some clear understanding about an issue? ... I've never heard Zizek mention anything specific about technology, so I assume he doesn't program, but I could be wrong.
@rockit353 I don't consider myself a communist, but conservative what concerns culture, identity, nature,... and progressive what concerns economy. With our feet in our own roots, and with our eyes towards the future and growth.
@truevoice08 I'll try again, it seems I'm being unclear. The part of Bohm-Bawerk's theories that are deemed correct is that he said that workers cannot be paid the full future values of their labours given that their earnings from working are payment, not investment. However, some of the people who supposedly exploit workers really ARE workers, because they increase the value of the products developed by conventional workers. A new "line" between exploiter and exploited must thusly be drawn.
@Tfrne It's either you contradict yourself or do not fully understand Bohm-Bawerk's argument which you admittedly agree with. Wages are discounted from their 'full value' not by the discretion of the employer but by differences in time preference. There is nothing stopping the worker from waiting for the realization of proceeds in which time he receives his full value. If I am wrong and capital investment lowers wages then you should be happy that capital is leaving the US for China.
@checkmeta I concur completely, though with the caveat that unregulated capitalism leaves the rest of us at the mercy of the rich. We ought therefore to place social concerns at the heart of government and the most vulnerable as our highest priority. Democracy isn't about protecting vested interest and wealth, it's about representing people. Our society has many flaws and we need novel, innovative solutions to them, not tired and failed ideas from past centuries. That's what we should debate.
@Tfrne "labourers generally have a greater need to be paid immediately, they can't afford to speculate on their earnings" Again, this is because of differences in time preference. You need to get comfortable with the reality of natural inequality. I don't see how being greedy makes one undeserving of profit nor do I see any qualifier for exceptions in the discounting of marginal revenue product. I believe in the freedom of the investor NOT to reinvest his profits. Do you?
@IiiERT 500 BILLION Dinar notes. I once felt as you do - that the inequities of unrestrained capitalism could be corrected by Marxist governance. Now I feel we'd merely be replacing one curruptable system with another. I was an activist for a long time before I realised that no-one was listening and that is we really want change we must operate within democratic systems. The swing towards the right in my country sickens me, but merely enforces my belief we failed to make our case.
@mistarcraw: Thanks for replying, it's a shame people are downvoting me instead of engaging, after all, this is a Zizek video... I am saying this because of the way he answered some questions. For example, Tariq Ali sees opportunities in the new movements in Latin America, I don't entirely agree with him either (I don't see many positive things in Chavez) but then Zizek mocks him directly. He's also been known to provoke only to get people to listen.
he talks about his eurocentrism and he's dead on. there are universalities, but as far as rational progress goes it doesn't matter whether it springs forth from the dead heart of capital or some bourgeois liberal capital democracy, it's relevant and should be integrated when fully developed. such as the zero, paper, etc. it's innovation. perhaps zizek would answer this in a different, more satisfactory way. i don't recall where he addressed this issue however.
@sherlockhaimes Here we are not in the same platonic sense of Idea, which is "there is an ideal form that should be achieved and from where everyhting was taken" but rather in the sense that because it is an idea it can be reinvented. Reinvention is not reform because it does not relate to the previous form of organization, only with the previous atittude in a much nietzschean way..
29:30 I haven't heard Zizek explicitly criticize anarchists like Noam Chomsky their communes, and historical events like the Spanish Revolution. Is there any clip where he is less vague about the subject?
(...) in the way that, although not strictly logical in its thought sequences, their assertions usually go deep enough into the matter, mixing the word play habilities and erudition of the continental humor and expressivity with the will to delve skin-deep into the abstraction and unveil more its philosophical potential per se than its privileged lireracy through the eruption of erudite metaphors and jokes with a somehow accessible content underneath.
he's one of the rare theoreticians in academy who still thinks politics are class based and proves them so. in a land of apathy and postmodern masturbatory anti intelligance (and mis-understanding of poststructuralism as anti activism) he is important. i think his position can be helpful in movements.
It seems I can't post links here. Check out: Rasmus Elling 'Who is a reformist' Hamid Dabashi 'Looking in the wrong places' Hamid Dabashi 'Left is wrong on Iran' Reese Erlich 'Iran and Leftist confusion'
I wonder whether a struggle will get people anywhere. If you have any links of Zizek explaining why he is a Marxist more clearly and not by telling us the problems with capitalism I would be very interested.
because the list for the 20th/21st centuries is like 4x as long as the one for the 19th century and way longer than any before, and there were more brilliant men back then...humanity's standards have become disturbingly low...
as heidegger pointed out in his critique of neitzsche a mere inversion of platonism is still a form of platonism-the real issue is how to move beyond it. this form of innocent contradiction hides a deeper aporia for the tension between theory and praxis not resolved by the latest versions of left theory. both zizek and badiou have infact resorted to variants messianic christianity as a route out of this perennial issue for radical left politics
@Samanmotlagh He does not provide a formula or a definition but charges each community to identify its own voids and recognize their capacity to severe the head of the alienating power of capitalism. Bottom line he is a motivational speaker, who recognizes the power of increased consciousness, established great ideas and the present moment. He is directing us to fertile soil. How and what we plant is up to the individual community. Right?
I also don't get what exactly he proposes as an alternative. This is the problem with Zizek, he isn't clear about how another ideological system would improve things. He is VERY clear with his criticism of the American left which is easy to agree with but what current ideology comes closer to whatnhe believes?
@Intelectual95 I concur - the man is indeed a pseudo intellectual of the vaguest variety. I recall also that he has somewhat elastic ideals and was a fervent convert to democracy and free market economies when the balkan communist dream fell apart in the early 90's. Marxism today is a fashion accessory, it's hard to take its advocates seriously.
@rockit353 Ok, now i understand :) And i agree! I am anti capitalist. But what i think lacks in communism is Romantic beauty. As he says himself in this clip, 'we should not look at ancient authentic systems". He's right up to a point, but where do we find our identity then? I think culture and identity are also important for a people to be happy. Mass immigration is also a result of capitalism. Not the immigrants are wrong, but the capitalist governments.
@AnotherWayFilms How exactly is capitalism, "anti-democratic"? I would love to hear you explain this :) Btw, how do you think capital is formed? I would love to hear you explain this,too :)
Alguien podria traducir al español el discurso completo, por favor, lo agradeceria mucho. hay una traducción por allí pero es de un fragmento solamente y con este tipo hay que escuchar de donde para entender a donde quiere llegar, Gracias. Somebady could plis translate the full speech to Spanish, I'll be really thanksful. There's a translate fragment but with this guy you have to now where he start to know where he's going. My english is good but with he's accent a can't understand fully this!
Thank you, for the article. without falling into support for this brutal regime, one has to acknowledge the facts, iranians, like any other people, will have to take things in their own hands.
Lenin, Stalin & Brezhnev were passengers on a train which inexplicably broke down. "Comrades" said Lenin, "Let us unite & push the train to our destination" Stalin replies "No, lets shoot the driver & set an example!" Finally Brezhnev says, "There is really no need for all this fuss, lets just draw the blinds and pretend that the train is moving" After 70 yrs of this the other passengers made their own way home. - a potted history of the USSR as told by a Russian ex-party member.
@GlobalAlternateMedia I think that you will find that not all Communists are Marxist. The communism of the Soviet Union was Leninist-Marxist, and not Communist in the strictly Engels-Marx sense. That being said, it is indeed true that most of the ideals of Lenin and Trotsky did not come into being in the real USSR. My point about the Soviet Union to Johnny75416 was simply that it did see many industrial and technological innovations throughout its existence.
13:37 "What are Biogenetics, if not an attempt to deprive us of our genetic legacy?" That's quite a statement and would ignore our basic freedom to question, to understand and learn more about ourselves. ... some good ideas thought, some other, even if funny, may become scary. It is dangerous when ideas are too fixed.
I haven't read through your entire exchange here, but you should know that Ahmedinejad comes from the countryside of Iran where he was born into poverty. He has enormous support amongst Iran's less-well-to-do. Phil Wilayto's 14 June 2009 AlterNet article "Iran's 'Stolen' Election" reveals that the protests broadcast around the world took place in the wealthier parts of Tehran, during which time there were no protests in the poorer parts of Tehran. The media: guilty by ommission.
Zizek appeals to those who want words and not evidence ... Zizek would make a great programmer and could probably be contributing to a field of knowledge that is actually making a difference in this world, versus trying to read the world through a fixed system of Lacanian and Hegelian analysis. In my youthful 20s, this seemed enticing. Now, it's so painfully clear how lacking in substance and any real facts about the world he wants to change ...
@Tfrne Bohm-Bawerk's argument implies that capitalists deserve their profit. If he is right (which he is) then there is no such thing as exploitation. It's not subjective.
Please does anyone know the scholar Alex who Slavoj made constant reference to during his lecture? (I get the impression that Alex must have spoken before Slavoj).
This is very philosophical talk in which I felt to be lost couple of times. In principle I can agree with parts about challenging authority like Julian Assange did by asking and questioning our governments. In the same time we all as a part of democracy we should be involved in every piece of declaration or agreement our government is doing including war and we should be asked for yes or no, not the rich men from Wallstreet. Why we dont use internet for that? Why there isnt mass IT democracy???
@ChibiOlia I follow him clearly (at least his words- if not always his thinking). I don't know why people have trouble; he's very good for an eastern European.
When talking about communism vs capitalism - its often overlooked that it was a mixture of freemarkets and socialism that won hearts and minds in Eastern Europe and not unfettered freemarket capitalism. If it was a straight fight between 19th Century capitalism and 20th century communism - the latter would have won. Capitalism survived the virus of communism because it inoculated its self with the vaccine of Keynesian socialism. If capitalism reverts back to form - communism will make a comeback
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
I love how he always starts his conclusions at the middle of the talks.
One of the signs that he doesn't know what he is talking about.
2024 and this speech is still one of my favorites.
Let's be glad that we still have political philosophers like Zizek, he shows that the very essence of marxist thought is still here whilst proven to be falsifiable. Marxism can and should be reformed according to different times. Let's preserve what basis marx has laid out for us and use it wisely. If we are to ignore marxist thought then as he points out, we are simply capitalists with a human face.
***** let me guess, you hate foreigners, don't you? you believe people should stay put where they are born, right? different skin colors shouldn't mix, according to you, right? also it quite so happens that marxism is mostly famous for trying to bring an end to state and capitalism. One more thing: we love culture, but you are right about the rest, we do believe all these things (religion, patriotism, distinct races, nations…) belong to the dustbin of history…
farrelliux So tell me, what reforms does Marxism need? I'm not trying to imply Marxism has all the answers, I'm genuinely interested! While I'm wary of revisionism (which is something entirely different than trying to further Marxist theory, revisionism is to marxism like intelligent design is to darwinism), Marxism can never fall into dogmatism.
***** "Marxism is a state capitalistic ideology that sees culture, religion, patriotism and ethnicity as a source of perversity"
What are you talking about?
***** He's merely drawing attention to the fact that you are so mistaken that your statement appears ridiculous. I don't know why news hasn't broken to you yet, but Marxism is out to abolish the state and capitalism, not join the two. You are sort of right about religion and patriotism. Marxists are not intolerant to religion in general, sometimes they fight their worldly representatives, but Marxists are mostly people which hope that in free societies, people will see through religion on themselves. What they see as a perversity is the popularized version of religion so widely disseminated, which is merely an ideology full of lies keeping the people down and presenting them with a pie and the sky. Patriotism in the sense of putting one nation above the rest is merely a perversity to Marxists. However, Marxists love culture, people like Adorno, Benjamin or indeed Zizek can't stop talking about it. They are critical of many aspects of mainstream and elite culture, but that is just because they want to save it from becoming an instrument of subjection. And by Marxists, I mean people like myself.
***** oh, so you're not a conservative? this is exciting, what are you? you're against democracy, both major bourgeois political philosophies (conservatism and liberalism) and you hate capitalism but love Jesus, so my guess is: fascist? Or are you some other kind of anti-modern reactionary? Oh, and you're right, I'm a demon from hell and I do want world domination, no catching me by surprise that way, buddy. But how on earth I'm a sectarian?
i've listened to this lecture like a zillion times and it always owns
the delivery on that joke was quality
“How can you be a revolutionary today” - at the core of what motivates someone
zizek's ability to present his arguments in a practical method is like awesome, he provides meaningful, simple examples which easily explains his ideas without insulting the listener which says more about where he comes from rather then a school of thought he practices, I guess this is more for Slovenians, whatever you teach your children to produce this guy, the world needs more of it.
Years later, and this is still relevant and insightful analysis into ideology and its function in global capitalism.
This is one of the most impressive of presentations by the Slovenian polymath on Marxism and Communism in the present international context. Also, Dr Zizek is quite strongly emphatic here on the historical importance of Europe and the concept of modernization. Compared to this lecture, again, almost all his later talks are much more Hegelian and Lacanian, with less and less emphasis made on the role of Marxism and Communism in the process of the emancipatory changes that are, as he yet underscores, quite inevitable.
one of my favourite speeches by now. srsly
38:10 never seen Zizek this sincerely emotional and vulnerable
His ball analogy has officially made him the coolest philosopher ever.
Zizek is a wonderful speaker and an certainly an accomplished politician and philosopher. One thing he is not, however, is a hope-bringer. I would very much like to hear your rebuttal on this.
This video made my day. Thank you!
Its been only once I have seen zizek live.
He was reading a book while waiting on a pedestrian crossing for a green light.
When the pedestrian light actually turned green this huge mass of people crossed the street, but zizek didn't move. He stood there dwelling in that book as he would be in the comfort of his living room. The light turned red again, and i just said to myself, well thats a man that doesn't allow himself to be bothered.
the question once and again is what it is to be re-volucionary, how we embrace such a word and how we are constraint by ideological right forces, always towards a better world
Splendid speech especially towards the end. Bravo.
I'm spending my new year's watching this Slavoj Zizek speech lol!
i love him as well
GREAT LECTURE WORTH LISTENING TO MORE THAN ONCE THANK YOU!
I love Slavoj Žižek thank yopu so much for the post
This is really restorative laughter upon laughter that somehow the universal can still shine through the particular for being singular. Well done Zizek.
What happened ? Was it a natural FORCE coming over me ?
Yes, my friend. Twas an early Zizek lecture.
Great stuff 🤓💪🥇
The amount of views this video has makes me happy.
Very few people can do what Zizek does. i am constantly blown away. he is an animal
I may not agree with him about everything, but I do love this man. "His voice will get suddenly higher" Hahah, bless you Zizek!
Excellent: "...an ominous moment of awareness." Thanks for uploading.
If it's genuine enlightenment, it doesn't matter who realizes it.
When one seeks emancipation, one seeks it on behalf of everyone who is oppressed.
He deserves his spontaneous applause. Delightfully insightful and original is the Zizek!
The historic evolution of PRIVATE PROPERTY RELATIONSHIP of alienation,exploitation,suffering and the emergence of CLASS,STATE,FAMILY as the template of control and suppression for MINORITY RULE is the fractal nature of our limited mode of interacttion.
I've never seen Zizek speak with this kind of conviction before.
In the sense that he helped change the way we see ourselves yes. I dare say many of Freud's ideas where silly, but the basic Idea that all people have drives and impulses that they dont have conscious awareness of or full control over is still valid and relevant (and not sufficiently acknowledged in this speech).
A simple task to unveil this distinction: Ask a Philosophy student to unveil Nietzsche’s arguments then ask him the same for Hegel’s or Kant’s... At that split-second difference, many difficulties may “spontaneously” appear.
i had a debate with Slavoj about the future of europe and Slovenia and there were many point that we agree to!
Go Slavoj! Glad not everyone has switched off yet..
we love you
I, for one, am really interested in some of Slavoj's ideas but one particular and general feature about him really stands out to me: He is a typical continental phisolopher in the almost same sense and breath as Nietzsche was: He has many creative solutions and interesting ideas but he never (or rarely) goes rigidly skin-deep into the distinctive nature of these abstract categories the same way someone like Spinoza or Kant would.
note to self: take action
Moussavi is not a free-market supporter, he is for some privatization with strong government regulation. In the eighties he was an outspoken proponent of a collectivistic economy.
@Klllakmet My problem with that is that asking the right questions and stating the obvious can be awfully close to one another. All war is started with the hope that things will change and ended with the bitter realization that they haven't. At this point
@oihhow
"Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again." - Andre Gide ;)
The reform is the enlightenment of the working class. The flash of insight that comes with the realization of one's own alienation.
Once this insight occurs, everything else follows.
Can somebody help me? I'm translating this entire speech into spanish to share it with some friends who were extremely interested to understand it.
But I just want to know what does he say at the beggining, it is really hard to understand for me. Until the part where he says "I would like to begin with Adorno..."
Well.. THANKS A LOT to all of you in advance, and thanks @adycousins for sharing this amazing stuff!
Zizek! It is so inspiring to hear him speak.
"take things into their own hands"
Well, yes, but, the more you delve into the reality of Iranian life & Iranian politics, the more you see how the U.S. exacerbates problems. Stephen Kinzer's book on the '53 coup against Mossadegh is particularly revealing in this respect. Hell, the introduction alone is worth reading. In it, Akbar Ganji (imprisoned for 6 yrs by the gov for criticising it) states US military threats give the gov "a freer hand in repressing Iran's budding civil society."
damn you comrade. I was hoping no one would ever notice my mistake :(
Interesting observation. Apparently, during Greco-Roman antiquity the beard was that which defined philosophers against 'normal' folk - maybe it has something to do with that. I know that I feel more special when I have a beard.
Here's a sincere question: What is one specific idea from Zizek that you can explain which has led you to some new action or some clear understanding about an issue? ... I've never heard Zizek mention anything specific about technology, so I assume he doesn't program, but I could be wrong.
it's a shame that the vid is not subtitled. he talks very fast >
a fiery speech by a fiery speaker... top class.
@rockit353 I don't consider myself a communist, but conservative what concerns culture, identity, nature,... and progressive what concerns economy. With our feet in our own roots, and with our eyes towards the future and growth.
wow just gotta love this man!
@truevoice08 I'll try again, it seems I'm being unclear. The part of Bohm-Bawerk's theories that are deemed correct is that he said that workers cannot be paid the full future values of their labours given that their earnings from working are payment, not investment. However, some of the people who supposedly exploit workers really ARE workers, because they increase the value of the products developed by conventional workers. A new "line" between exploiter and exploited must thusly be drawn.
I love this man.
@Tfrne It's either you contradict yourself or do not fully understand Bohm-Bawerk's argument which you admittedly agree with. Wages are discounted from their 'full value' not by the discretion of the employer but by differences in time preference. There is nothing stopping the worker from waiting for the realization of proceeds in which time he receives his full value. If I am wrong and capital investment lowers wages then you should be happy that capital is leaving the US for China.
@checkmeta I concur completely, though with the caveat that unregulated capitalism leaves the rest of us at the mercy of the rich. We ought therefore to place social concerns at the heart of government and the most vulnerable as our highest priority. Democracy isn't about protecting vested interest and wealth, it's about representing people. Our society has many flaws and we need novel, innovative solutions to them, not tired and failed ideas from past centuries. That's what we should debate.
@Tfrne "labourers generally have a greater need to be paid immediately, they can't afford to speculate on their earnings" Again, this is because of differences in time preference. You need to get comfortable with the reality of natural inequality. I don't see how being greedy makes one undeserving of profit nor do I see any qualifier for exceptions in the discounting of marginal revenue product. I believe in the freedom of the investor NOT to reinvest his profits. Do you?
@IiiERT 500 BILLION Dinar notes. I once felt as you do - that the inequities of unrestrained capitalism could be corrected by Marxist governance. Now I feel we'd merely be replacing one curruptable system with another. I was an activist for a long time before I realised that no-one was listening and that is we really want change we must operate within democratic systems. The swing towards the right in my country sickens me, but merely enforces my belief we failed to make our case.
@mistarcraw: Thanks for replying, it's a shame people are downvoting me instead of engaging, after all, this is a Zizek video...
I am saying this because of the way he answered some questions. For example, Tariq Ali sees opportunities in the new movements in Latin America, I don't entirely agree with him either (I don't see many positive things in Chavez) but then Zizek mocks him directly.
He's also been known to provoke only to get people to listen.
he talks about his eurocentrism and he's dead on. there are universalities, but as far as rational progress goes it doesn't matter whether it springs forth from the dead heart of capital or some bourgeois liberal capital democracy, it's relevant and should be integrated when fully developed. such as the zero, paper, etc. it's innovation.
perhaps zizek would answer this in a different, more satisfactory way. i don't recall where he addressed this issue however.
@sherlockhaimes Here we are not in the same platonic sense of Idea, which is "there is an ideal form that should be achieved and from where everyhting was taken" but rather in the sense that because it is an idea it can be reinvented. Reinvention is not reform because it does not relate to the previous form of organization, only with the previous atittude in a much nietzschean way..
To be a revolutionary today means to combine Philosophy with Theology and Physics.
29:30 I haven't heard Zizek explicitly criticize anarchists like Noam Chomsky their communes, and historical events like the Spanish Revolution. Is there any clip where he is less vague about the subject?
(...) in the way that, although not strictly logical in its thought sequences, their assertions usually go deep enough into the matter, mixing the word play habilities and erudition of the continental humor and expressivity with the will to delve skin-deep into the abstraction and unveil more its philosophical potential per se than its privileged lireracy through the eruption of erudite metaphors and jokes with a somehow accessible content underneath.
he's one of the rare theoreticians in academy who still thinks politics are class based and proves them so. in a land of apathy and postmodern masturbatory anti intelligance (and mis-understanding of poststructuralism as anti activism) he is important. i think his position can be helpful in movements.
Test, please ignore
test
*Test, please ignore*
test
It seems I can't post links here.
Check out:
Rasmus Elling 'Who is a reformist'
Hamid Dabashi 'Looking in the wrong places'
Hamid Dabashi 'Left is wrong on Iran'
Reese Erlich 'Iran and Leftist confusion'
I wonder whether a struggle will get people anywhere. If you have any links of Zizek explaining why he is a Marxist more clearly and not by telling us the problems with capitalism I would be very interested.
From my perspective
My guess is that, power struggles will continue.
Darwin and Freud where not mentioned once.
because the list for the 20th/21st centuries is like 4x as long as the one for the 19th century and way longer than any before, and there were more brilliant men back then...humanity's standards have become disturbingly low...
as heidegger pointed out in his critique of neitzsche a mere inversion of platonism is still a form of platonism-the real issue is how to move beyond it. this form of innocent contradiction hides a deeper aporia for the tension between theory and praxis not resolved by the latest versions of left theory. both zizek and badiou have infact resorted to variants messianic christianity as a route out of this perennial issue for radical left politics
@Samanmotlagh He does not provide a formula or a definition but charges each community to identify its own voids and recognize their capacity to severe the head of the alienating power of capitalism. Bottom line he is a motivational speaker, who recognizes the power of increased consciousness, established great ideas and the present moment. He is directing us to fertile soil. How and what we plant is up to the individual community. Right?
I also don't get what exactly he proposes as an alternative. This is the problem with Zizek, he isn't clear about how another ideological system would improve things. He is VERY clear with his criticism of the American left which is easy to agree with but what current ideology comes closer to whatnhe believes?
@Intelectual95 I concur - the man is indeed a pseudo intellectual of the vaguest variety. I recall also that he has somewhat elastic ideals and was a fervent convert to democracy and free market economies when the balkan communist dream fell apart in the early 90's. Marxism today is a fashion accessory, it's hard to take its advocates seriously.
I never understood cult leaders until I listened to Zizek. He could lead me off a cliff and I would probably think I was bringing down capitalism.
@rockit353 Ok, now i understand :) And i agree! I am anti capitalist. But what i think lacks in communism is Romantic beauty. As he says himself in this clip, 'we should not look at ancient authentic systems". He's right up to a point, but where do we find our identity then? I think culture and identity are also important for a people to be happy. Mass immigration is also a result of capitalism. Not the immigrants are wrong, but the capitalist governments.
@AnotherWayFilms How exactly is capitalism, "anti-democratic"? I would love to hear you explain this :)
Btw, how do you think capital is formed? I would love to hear you explain this,too :)
Alguien podria traducir al español el discurso completo, por favor, lo agradeceria mucho. hay una traducción por allí pero es de un fragmento solamente y con este tipo hay que escuchar de donde para entender a donde quiere llegar, Gracias.
Somebady could plis translate the full speech to Spanish, I'll be really thanksful. There's a translate fragment but with this guy you have to now where he start to know where he's going. My english is good but with he's accent a can't understand fully this!
this guy is on wikipedia's list of western philosophers....i think they need to raise a few bars
thanks for this up
Thank you, for the article.
without falling into support for this brutal regime, one has to acknowledge the facts, iranians, like any other people, will have to take things in their own hands.
@NetworkHuman
It is a proposal of a society that very few people would enjoy living in.
Lenin, Stalin & Brezhnev were passengers on a train which inexplicably broke down. "Comrades" said Lenin, "Let us unite & push the train to our destination" Stalin replies "No, lets shoot the driver & set an example!" Finally Brezhnev says, "There is really no need for all this fuss, lets just draw the blinds and pretend that the train is moving" After 70 yrs of this the other passengers made their own way home. - a potted history of the USSR as told by a Russian ex-party member.
According to the video's description, his namee is Alex Callinicos :)
@GlobalAlternateMedia I think that you will find that not all Communists are Marxist. The communism of the Soviet Union was Leninist-Marxist, and not Communist in the strictly Engels-Marx sense.
That being said, it is indeed true that most of the ideals of Lenin and Trotsky did not come into being in the real USSR. My point about the Soviet Union to Johnny75416 was simply that it did see many industrial and technological innovations throughout its existence.
thanx for the video!
but what happened to the homepage? why is it "closed"?
13:37 "What are Biogenetics, if not an attempt to deprive us of our genetic legacy?" That's quite a statement and would ignore our basic freedom to question, to understand and learn more about ourselves. ... some good ideas thought, some other, even if funny, may become scary. It is dangerous when ideas are too fixed.
I haven't read through your entire exchange here, but you should know that Ahmedinejad comes from the countryside of Iran where he was born into poverty. He has enormous support amongst Iran's less-well-to-do.
Phil Wilayto's 14 June 2009 AlterNet article "Iran's 'Stolen' Election" reveals that the protests broadcast around the world took place in the wealthier parts of Tehran, during which time there were no protests in the poorer parts of Tehran. The media: guilty by ommission.
Zizek appeals to those who want words and not evidence ... Zizek would make a great programmer and could probably be contributing to a field of knowledge that is actually making a difference in this world, versus trying to read the world through a fixed system of Lacanian and Hegelian analysis. In my youthful 20s, this seemed enticing. Now, it's so painfully clear how lacking in substance and any real facts about the world he wants to change ...
@Tfrne Bohm-Bawerk's argument implies that capitalists deserve their profit. If he is right (which he is) then there is no such thing as exploitation. It's not subjective.
Please does anyone know the scholar Alex who Slavoj made constant reference to during his lecture? (I get the impression that Alex must have spoken before Slavoj).
wow blog of this article is very nice and wonderful . seriously i like that post
The level of commentary in the comments, considering how sharp the lecture is, is quite low. There's a lot of work to be done.
Only so much more obviously correct now than it was then.
this is gold
This is very philosophical talk in which I felt to be lost couple of times. In principle I can agree with parts about challenging authority like Julian Assange did by asking and questioning our governments. In the same time we all as a part of democracy we should be involved in every piece of declaration or agreement our government is doing including war and we should be asked for yes or no, not the rich men from Wallstreet. Why we dont use internet for that? Why there isnt mass IT democracy???
@ChibiOlia I follow him clearly (at least his words- if not always his thinking). I don't know why people have trouble; he's very good for an eastern European.
Fantastic talk
I think that is fair evidence of why not everyone should vote.
When talking about communism vs capitalism - its often overlooked that it was a mixture of freemarkets and socialism that won hearts and minds in Eastern Europe and not unfettered freemarket capitalism. If it was a straight fight between 19th Century capitalism and 20th century communism - the latter would have won. Capitalism survived the virus of communism because it inoculated its self with the vaccine of Keynesian socialism. If capitalism reverts back to form - communism will make a comeback