Sadly it's just a re-release from a couple a years ago. 😢 BUT! Happily there legitimately is new Zizek, he just wrapped up his latest American tour. He did a panel with Norman Finkelstein, a discussion with Cornel West, a lecture at Seton, and probably some other things I don't know 😆 this was all this month April 2024
Yes because those are not mutually exclusive things! Just as the feminist movement showed us women are not either sexual creatures or mothers, they are both and more. 😊
he is the only living "intellectual" that continually blows my mind. that first observation about the "sexual identity biological determinists" fearing the teaching of "trans propaganda" is so unique. (never heard nor thought of that point before) also when he was talking about "neurolink"/brain transplants" (in an old talk he did) how the real fear is not "that people will know each other's thoughts, but that: how will we know if our own thoughts are truly ours?" was again an amazing/unique take on a over saturated talking point.
Absolutely. I've been studying him since 2012 and he never ceases to blow my mind with his incredible knowledge and insight. But make no mistake, his talks are just the tip of the iceberg. The true cream is in his books.
Right from the start Zizek is off the mark. "Why do people then have such an issue with aspects of T claims (sure, he says LGBTQ+, but the reality is that gays and lesbians are not the ones making demands about changing laws, redefining words etc., that's all on the T activists) - the issue is that demanding feelings should override physical realities in legal matters, single-sex spaces etc. A male claiming he "feels like a woman" cannot even define WHAT that supposed feeling is, what he is basing his evaluation on, what standard he is measuring himself against to conclude he "isn't actually a man but is instead a woman", even though being a man simply means being an adult human male, it says absolutely nothing about how anyone should behave, dress, think - except to the brainwashed activist, who thinks there are some sort of rules for how men or women are allowed to be, because they think living up to the sexist stereotypes in society associated with either sex are some sort of real boundaries and requirements for being a man or woman - and they then take this egregiously distorted understanding and project it unto others, acting as if society/other people is what is restricting them, never realising that it is they themselves doing the restricting, but because this is happening at a subconscious level and they refuse to engage in therapy or question their own beliefs in any way they are essentially running away from the actual solution, stuck in the very left-hemisphere perspective of thinking if they only push even more in the direction they are going they will "win" or find happiness etc. Demanding that "feeling like a woman" should grant a MALE individual access to female privileges, spaces, activities, IS an unreasonable demand, and it IS very literally a narcissistic demand that an individual's feelings should allow them to disregard physical reality, a self-centred delusional belief that they are somehow above the physical facts of life and should not have to be restricted by physical reality - it is total nonsense and should be called out as such.
A feature of the ecological disaster is that some people who are capable of abstract thought overthink their individual responsibility, while powerful capitalist machinations manipulate most people who are incapable of abstract thought into causing this dreadful, wasteful mass extinction event. The people who need to watch and understand this video the most will never watch it, and even if they did, they wouldn't understand it, and its influence would be drowned out by the marketplace.
The movie 'Arrival' to me is anything but a B-production. If Zizek wouldn't be such a _one track_ observer, I am convinced he would love the movie at a closer look. Let me tell u why : the underlying story line mainly is about the ability of language to transcend linear time. Here we could have a nice speculative discussion on _retroactivity_ and a serious attack on predetermination ideology would be within grasp. But we cannot expect too much depth from Zizek here bcs he rarely has enough time to develop his themes further. Or which is more likely, he in best Zizekian tradition of critique, hasn't even seen the movie in order not to spoil his fantasies about it 😄
Great point! Arrival is a beautiful, serious film that condenses complex ideas about the structure and possibilities of language to fit a two hour narrative but doesn’t cop out with typical Hollywood non-science. It may take more than one viewing to really get it, it did for me. Which was ok because it is so visually and aurally beautiful and the acting is good. The heptapods are the most unique extra-terrestrials in the history of cinema.
@@shannonwalker6944squids are unique aliens and language time travel is scientific is what you just said in many words. I agree the movie itself was beautiful in sound, visuals and acting. However to say there was a deep message or even a level of intellectual engagement is quite laughable. Let art be art.
I love that movie! it's a fact that learning to speak a new language does change our way of thought. That movie highlighted that idea to a whole new level.
At 31:33 I stopped watching because he won't just finish the thought about Arendt, after teasing it twice. He did it deliberately and I am offended and refuse to submit to this aggression.
The Venice Bienalle curators choose only artists that gives them traction in their own carriers ....Is all about money and a better job ...they are just political puppets ...nothing more ..
Zizek is wrong about Hindu Indian identity being violent compared to South Asian (particularly Pakistani) Muslim identity. India is a *secular* Republic, while Pakistan is an Islamic "Republic" (which has had multiple military coups over a less than 80 years existence so far). India has had an increase in it's non-Hindu percentage of the population (particularly Muslim), while Pakistan is over 96% Muslim even though it had a sizeable Hindu minority that has been persecuted into obscurity.
I wonder where he buys his apples, in case he eats any, cause it doesn't look so; I buy organic and they aren't rotten, but of course he has the right as anybody else to prefer poison; this has nothing to do with defending the bulshit idea that Nature is something harmonic and originaly immaculate; and what is his sugestion?! that we keep planting Monsato transgenic soy, eating meat and perhaps join Ellon Musk in the colonization of Mars?! or perhaps some crazy plan of Bill Gates?!! by the way, he was quite right about Biennale's ideology, but to take Lucaks as a great reference in the area of literary studies just shows his own weakness in alike areas!!
I agree with Zizek when he agrees with Kierkegaard, in saying that it is not simply a matter of going "I went and consulted all the arguments for religion, and Christianity was the most persuasive one", you ultimately have to already see the argument-for Christianity in order to believe it. I simply think the same logic also applies to his transphobic rhetoric, that it is not a matter of him consulting the Freudian or Hegelian perspective and arriving at some crucial logical contradiction that the trans community has failed to consider, he ultimately must see the argument-for transphobia before he narrativizes about the suicides of trans people.
No one can be "born in the wrong body", our brains ARE our body just as much as any other part of it. We are the sex we are, regardless of what our personal relationship is with the sexist stereotypes in society. "Trans" ideology, is regressive and sexist, as there is no "correct way" of being a boy or girl, man or woman, all those terms do is indicate sex and stage of maturity - decoupling sex and gender and trying to make gender into this ludicrous concoction of personality and sexist stereotypes is beyond regressive - it actively harms people who buy into it - the idea that there is something wrong with a kid's body that needs to be chemically altered because they believe living up to sexist stereotypes is some real measure of whether they are a boy or a girl (and man or woman for adults obviously), is insanity. I have asked hundreds of "activists" and "allies" to explain what they are measuring themselves against to determine that they have a need to transition - NOT ONE person has been able to articulate what that is - not one person is able to distance themselves sufficiently to realise that THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such utter nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense, THAT IS WHAT CAUSES ALL THE DISTRESS, THIS FABRICATION OF A FRAMEWORK WHICH DISTORTS REALITY. No one - NO ONE - in the movement has been able to explain or articulate what this supposed "womanly essence" or "manly essence" is that they feel/know/need to transition in order to represent etc. actually is - yet you all actively believe in it and push for it to be accepted. That is ludicrous.
Don't listen to zizek on organic. GMOs are good. Organic means pesticide and herbacide free, meaning there aren't products used that deteriorate the soil's ecosystems and microbial environment
I've been hearing a lot about how organic doesn't mean pesticide free, it just means "better" pesticides. If you have info you could forward I'm always on the hunt to make better sense of this as it confuses me immensely.
I lost my shit at "I am for theoretical reasons opposed to the term gender;" I literally started clapping and smiling as I awaited the Master's new refutation
Can’t teach on old dog new tricks, been listing to oldboy for years, since my teenage years, but I think he’s a bit like a stuttering record at this point.
I'm getting disheartened after the initial euphoria of listening to his lectures and interviews etc. He keeps saying the same anecdotes and jokes and posing the same concerns and questions in the last several years and I keep waiting for him to start to develop proposals to take the ideas further but it hasn't gotten any closer, it seems. I'm sure this is probably partly the nature of being in a time where the speaking circuit gets recorded and posted over and over again but it's hard to reconcile with the example of Lacan, for example, who just showed up a number of times and each time produced banger after banger.
Nós de Lacan são topológicos, não vejo nenhuma aplicação territorial ou de urbanismo. Também veja a crítica de D&G ao sistema de nós, eles chamam de elos. E por que? é uma aplicação analítica do inconsciente, particularmente prefiro a esquizoanalise. Tanto para territórios existenciais como os outros 3 functores.
For as much as i like him, he is kinda wrong in assuming that every gender transition involves some kind of personal trauma, and Freud was wrong in various aspects.
@farrider3339 i mean, i can only provide personal anecdotes, since proofs are a matter of logic and math, but i know (most of my frieds are lgbt) trans people who grew up in very supportive homes and schools, and i really didn't saw any signs of trauma, and i really don't have any positive reason to believe there was trauma for them. The same goes for the transition process, which for most of them never involved any surgery or other traumatic experiences. In addition to that, even if i grant that most gender transitions in general do involve trauma, i would argue that this trauma is often due to unsupportive environments and other factors.
Maybe he was stating trauma in a broader sense. Even with the proper support, a gender transition is full of micro traumas. The sense of "being in a wrong body" per si is traumatic in a sense
Feeling like you are the wrong gender is traumatizing for anybody. Of course transitioning stems from personal trauma. Transitioning is trauma in itself, given the physical and biological procedures the body is put through to. You might say it's a means to and end. But that's irrelevant
@@gabri41200 as I unterstand trauma and human psyche, one has to look deeper. The idea of identity itself already is traumatic since it is supposed to be something reliable in a highly volatile environment. We have to start asking here. Zizek himself does NOT "believe" in identity, same way I looked through the charade of the introduction of identity. And we all know that trying to solve the ambiguity of identity on a biological level by changing sides or stating 'no side' doesn't solve the issue at its core. And to be even more provocative : a supportive environment can trigger another trauma. Which one ? That of recognition and integration. Sorry, I don't have time now to develop this further.
![ARGENTINA vs. PERÚ [1-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xtI25ENDDSY/mqdefault.jpg)
Babe wake up new Zizek
Sadly it's just a re-release from a couple a years ago. 😢 BUT! Happily there legitimately is new Zizek, he just wrapped up his latest American tour. He did a panel with Norman Finkelstein, a discussion with Cornel West, a lecture at Seton, and probably some other things I don't know 😆 this was all this month April 2024
*nose honk*
4 month old but still Žižek
Is your babe the eternal void of the comments section?
@@scoon2117that’s how I think the comment was meant to be read, us being lost men, incels and so on and so on
Zizek talks about perversions, sex and dirty politics, but he cannot help coming through as a sweet and kind father figure.
Yes because those are not mutually exclusive things! Just as the feminist movement showed us women are not either sexual creatures or mothers, they are both and more. 😊
Grooming the young to give up.
@@ShonMardanigive up what, exactly?
@@princegobi5992 Give up resisting.
@@ShonMardani verkürzt
he is the only living "intellectual" that continually blows my mind. that first observation about the "sexual identity biological determinists" fearing the teaching of "trans propaganda" is so unique. (never heard nor thought of that point before) also when he was talking about "neurolink"/brain transplants" (in an old talk he did) how the real fear is not "that people will know each other's thoughts, but that: how will we know if our own thoughts are truly ours?" was again an amazing/unique take on a over saturated talking point.
Absolutely. I've been studying him since 2012 and he never ceases to blow my mind with his incredible knowledge and insight. But make no mistake, his talks are just the tip of the iceberg. The true cream is in his books.
Right from the start Zizek is off the mark. "Why do people then have such an issue with aspects of T claims (sure, he says LGBTQ+, but the reality is that gays and lesbians are not the ones making demands about changing laws, redefining words etc., that's all on the T activists) - the issue is that demanding feelings should override physical realities in legal matters, single-sex spaces etc. A male claiming he "feels like a woman" cannot even define WHAT that supposed feeling is, what he is basing his evaluation on, what standard he is measuring himself against to conclude he "isn't actually a man but is instead a woman", even though being a man simply means being an adult human male, it says absolutely nothing about how anyone should behave, dress, think - except to the brainwashed activist, who thinks there are some sort of rules for how men or women are allowed to be, because they think living up to the sexist stereotypes in society associated with either sex are some sort of real boundaries and requirements for being a man or woman - and they then take this egregiously distorted understanding and project it unto others, acting as if society/other people is what is restricting them, never realising that it is they themselves doing the restricting, but because this is happening at a subconscious level and they refuse to engage in therapy or question their own beliefs in any way they are essentially running away from the actual solution, stuck in the very left-hemisphere perspective of thinking if they only push even more in the direction they are going they will "win" or find happiness etc.
Demanding that "feeling like a woman" should grant a MALE individual access to female privileges, spaces, activities, IS an unreasonable demand, and it IS very literally a narcissistic demand that an individual's feelings should allow them to disregard physical reality, a self-centred delusional belief that they are somehow above the physical facts of life and should not have to be restricted by physical reality - it is total nonsense and should be called out as such.
I've been saying the same for years. Glad he caught up.
@ambientjohnny you wrote that on the internet, not sure if you realised.
@@DJWESG1 Nice argument you got there teenager.
When the universe treats hard, necessary choices like they are easy, it creates unmeasurable doubt.
Pure genius.
👨🌾
Pure cocaine.
🎉
@@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858 cocaine and ideology
There are good teachers and there are great teachers.
Not gonna lie, I really love eco brutalist architecture, and a world where that was normal would make me happy
Nature. What kind of Nature ? Naturally this is a question we like to avoid.
A feature of the ecological disaster is that some people who are capable of abstract thought overthink their individual responsibility, while powerful capitalist machinations manipulate most people who are incapable of abstract thought into causing this dreadful, wasteful mass extinction event. The people who need to watch and understand this video the most will never watch it, and even if they did, they wouldn't understand it, and its influence would be drowned out by the marketplace.
Cynical but true
Hyped for the dude that got to tell him “windshield wiper”. Glorious small moment
I’m convulsing, collapsing in the throes of ecstatic joy - OLD FRIEND!!!
The movie 'Arrival' to me is anything but a B-production. If Zizek wouldn't be such a _one track_ observer, I am convinced he would love the movie at a closer look. Let me tell u why : the underlying story line mainly is about the ability of language to transcend linear time. Here we could have a nice speculative discussion on _retroactivity_ and a serious attack on predetermination ideology would be within grasp.
But we cannot expect too much depth from Zizek here bcs he rarely has enough time to develop his themes further. Or which is more likely, he in best Zizekian tradition of critique, hasn't even seen the movie in order not to spoil his fantasies about it 😄
Great point! Arrival is a beautiful, serious film that condenses complex ideas about the structure and possibilities of language to fit a two hour narrative but doesn’t cop out with typical Hollywood non-science. It may take more than one viewing to really get it, it did for me. Which was ok because it is so visually and aurally beautiful and the acting is good. The heptapods are the most unique extra-terrestrials in the history of cinema.
@@shannonwalker6944squids are unique aliens and language time travel is scientific is what you just said in many words.
I agree the movie itself was beautiful in sound, visuals and acting. However to say there was a deep message or even a level of intellectual engagement is quite laughable.
Let art be art.
@@Coach-Solar_Hound Maybe having studied linguistics changed my experience from yours.
@@shannonwalker6944 What were the memorable non-surface linguistic concepts which the movie discussed?
I love that movie! it's a fact that learning to speak a new language does change our way of thought. That movie highlighted that idea to a whole new level.
At 31:33 I stopped watching because he won't just finish the thought about Arendt, after teasing it twice. He did it deliberately and I am offended and refuse to submit to this aggression.
But wait a minute! ...What if your refusal to watch was the very submission you had disavowed ?
What are the main books from zizeck that include these ideas ?
I wonder if 500 years from now, historians will remark about this guy and mention him constantly honking his nose?
prof brodsky had his ass pinned ngl
The Venice Bienalle curators choose only artists that gives them traction in their own carriers ....Is all about money and a better job ...they are just political puppets ...nothing more ..
Aqui tem a direita, posso ser perseguido.
Zizek is wrong about Hindu Indian identity being violent compared to South Asian (particularly Pakistani) Muslim identity. India is a *secular* Republic, while Pakistan is an Islamic "Republic" (which has had multiple military coups over a less than 80 years existence so far). India has had an increase in it's non-Hindu percentage of the population (particularly Muslim), while Pakistan is over 96% Muslim even though it had a sizeable Hindu minority that has been persecuted into obscurity.
where is this from?
Princeton in 2022 as part of a lecture series on "Universality & its Glitches".
I wonder where he buys his apples, in case he eats any, cause it doesn't look so; I buy organic and they aren't rotten, but of course he has the right as anybody else to prefer poison; this has nothing to do with defending the bulshit idea that Nature is something harmonic and originaly immaculate; and what is his sugestion?! that we keep planting Monsato transgenic soy, eating meat and perhaps join Ellon Musk in the colonization of Mars?! or perhaps some crazy plan of Bill Gates?!! by the way, he was quite right about Biennale's ideology, but to take Lucaks as a great reference in the area of literary studies just shows his own weakness in alike areas!!
Paradoxo do terceiro homem. Observe, please.
I agree with Zizek when he agrees with Kierkegaard, in saying that it is not simply a matter of going "I went and consulted all the arguments for religion, and Christianity was the most persuasive one", you ultimately have to already see the argument-for Christianity in order to believe it. I simply think the same logic also applies to his transphobic rhetoric, that it is not a matter of him consulting the Freudian or Hegelian perspective and arriving at some crucial logical contradiction that the trans community has failed to consider, he ultimately must see the argument-for transphobia before he narrativizes about the suicides of trans people.
No one can be "born in the wrong body", our brains ARE our body just as much as any other part of it. We are the sex we are, regardless of what our personal relationship is with the sexist stereotypes in society. "Trans" ideology, is regressive and sexist, as there is no "correct way" of being a boy or girl, man or woman, all those terms do is indicate sex and stage of maturity - decoupling sex and gender and trying to make gender into this ludicrous concoction of personality and sexist stereotypes is beyond regressive - it actively harms people who buy into it - the idea that there is something wrong with a kid's body that needs to be chemically altered because they believe living up to sexist stereotypes is some real measure of whether they are a boy or a girl (and man or woman for adults obviously), is insanity.
I have asked hundreds of "activists" and "allies" to explain what they are measuring themselves against to determine that they have a need to transition - NOT ONE person has been able to articulate what that is - not one person is able to distance themselves sufficiently to realise that THEY are the ones with a regressively sexist idea of what it means to be a boy/girl or man/woman and that that is the issue causing all the problems - their own misunderstanding and severely limited perspective/sexist misunderstanding of what sexist stereotypes/"gender norms" actually entail - they are not rules, they are not real boundaries, they are regressive ideas and generalisations - no one needs to live up to any such utter nonsense or feel comfortable with those stereotypes to be a boy/girl/man/woman - all those terms represent, and all they should represent, is sex and stage of maturity - by creating this whole "gender identity" nonsense, THAT IS WHAT CAUSES ALL THE DISTRESS, THIS FABRICATION OF A FRAMEWORK WHICH DISTORTS REALITY.
No one - NO ONE - in the movement has been able to explain or articulate what this supposed "womanly essence" or "manly essence" is that they feel/know/need to transition in order to represent etc. actually is - yet you all actively believe in it and push for it to be accepted. That is ludicrous.
What community??
catastrophe = event (Badiou)
1:29:00
Don't listen to zizek on organic. GMOs are good. Organic means pesticide and herbacide free, meaning there aren't products used that deteriorate the soil's ecosystems and microbial environment
So organic and GMO is ideal.
I've been hearing a lot about how organic doesn't mean pesticide free, it just means "better" pesticides. If you have info you could forward I'm always on the hunt to make better sense of this as it confuses me immensely.
I lost my shit at "I am for theoretical reasons opposed to the term gender;" I literally started clapping and smiling as I awaited the Master's new refutation
Can’t teach on old dog new tricks, been listing to oldboy for years, since my teenage years, but I think he’s a bit like a stuttering record at this point.
I'm getting disheartened after the initial euphoria of listening to his lectures and interviews etc. He keeps saying the same anecdotes and jokes and posing the same concerns and questions in the last several years and I keep waiting for him to start to develop proposals to take the ideas further but it hasn't gotten any closer, it seems. I'm sure this is probably partly the nature of being in a time where the speaking circuit gets recorded and posted over and over again but it's hard to reconcile with the example of Lacan, for example, who just showed up a number of times and each time produced banger after banger.
Tissue
OR PARADOX OF MENTIROSO
he's talking at the start of the video, what the hell
Nós de Lacan são topológicos, não vejo nenhuma aplicação territorial ou de urbanismo. Também veja a crítica de D&G ao sistema de nós, eles chamam de elos. E por que? é uma aplicação analítica do inconsciente, particularmente prefiro a esquizoanalise. Tanto para territórios existenciais como os outros 3 functores.
For as much as i like him, he is kinda wrong in assuming that every gender transition involves some kind of personal trauma, and Freud was wrong in various aspects.
Worth debating. Can you prove that personal trauma isn't involved ? I claim, for most gender transitions this is factually true.
@farrider3339 i mean, i can only provide personal anecdotes, since proofs are a matter of logic and math, but i know (most of my frieds are lgbt) trans people who grew up in very supportive homes and schools, and i really didn't saw any signs of trauma, and i really don't have any positive reason to believe there was trauma for them. The same goes for the transition process, which for most of them never involved any surgery or other traumatic experiences. In addition to that, even if i grant that most gender transitions in general do involve trauma, i would argue that this trauma is often due to unsupportive environments and other factors.
Maybe he was stating trauma in a broader sense. Even with the proper support, a gender transition is full of micro traumas. The sense of "being in a wrong body" per si is traumatic in a sense
Feeling like you are the wrong gender is traumatizing for anybody. Of course transitioning stems from personal trauma. Transitioning is trauma in itself, given the physical and biological procedures the body is put through to. You might say it's a means to and end. But that's irrelevant
@@gabri41200 as I unterstand trauma and human psyche, one has to look deeper. The idea of identity itself already is traumatic since it is supposed to be something reliable in a highly volatile environment. We have to start asking here. Zizek himself does NOT "believe" in identity, same way I looked through the charade of the introduction of identity. And we all know that trying to solve the ambiguity of identity on a biological level by changing sides or stating 'no side' doesn't solve the issue at its core. And to be even more provocative : a supportive environment can trigger another trauma. Which one ? That of recognition and integration. Sorry, I don't have time now to develop this further.