@Johnny Deep I don't think you have read Marx or Lenin, they both explained why that happened through the lens of historical materialism. The revolution from feudalism to capitalism will always be a bourgeois revolution.
@Johnny Deep They explained how the revolution got coopted by the bourgeoisie to become the ruling class of France instead of the aristocracy. Marxism uses historical materialism as lens to view history through. Through that lens we come to the conclusion that in a feudalist society with a rising bourgeoisie the bourgeoisie will always usurp the revolution of the working class (which in this stadium of history could not be socialist yet) to become the main holders holders of power. Trotsky claimed otherwise and said feudalist societies can in fact go from feudalism to socialism but no marxist takes his words seriously. So Marx basically stated that before you can have a socialist revolution a bourgeois capitalist revolution is necessary as this is the material progression of history.
@@CZcamschannel-xp1tx I think it's mostly about things outside of your control. For instance, you could say call of duty sucks due to microtransactions, but unless you're a dev your only sway is the decision to buy or not. If you don't want microtransactions, there's a limit to what the consumer can do individually, and furthermore if you want them to go away, you'd have to 1, mass mobilize gamers and boycott it as a social movement, or 2, pass legislative limitations to what publishers and devs can do in terms of how and what they make money with in their intellectual properties, thereby creating institutional checks and balances. If you want better games, you could argue that everyone should be a dev, but that's not really a solution since there's only so many people with the resources, time and aptitude for that task to be fulfilled, which seems like an unproductive endeavor. Instead of shifting the blame to not having good devs on gamers, wouldn't it make more sense if gamers as a community took proactive stances through political action to change the boundaries of what devs can do or what kinds of in-game transactions are viable and which should not be present?
I mean, Slovenia is right near Transylvania so it makes sense. Slovenia is also where Melania Trump is from btw. It would be fun to watch the two of them have a philosophical discussion in their native language, lol.
I am assuming most of the people commenting are from the USA, saying "right wing this... left wing that.. and so on and so on". This is such a reductive way of looking at politics. It seems to me that Zizek takes a more pragmatic approach to each individual issue. (Not trying to diss Americans, but you do only have two political parties :))
@First Last Most of America's left is Auth right leaning centrists and at most they are true centrists. America's right is the most Auth right you can get. There really exist no 'left' in America
@First Last Churchills *astard child. A child that was incubated for a few decades b4 it went global in the 70s with the rise of the New Right and their "third position".
Zizek without trying, explains the central class argument patronizing the singer of the song Common People. As she wants to do things "like common people do", fetishizing her projection of the life of the common people, or Indian people or black people so on and so on. Which ironically removes their independent agency in their narrative at the same time.
@@piereb1748 I think Ash explains their take on this very well, there is little in the above narrative that is difficult to get ones head around. In simple terms, Ash is saying that the white liberal is so attached to the concept of equality, that they lose all perspective and reasoning, which makes them about as useful as a chocolate tea pot. Zizek, I agree, is very difficult to follow, but well worth the concentration.
Pulp's song "Common People" hits the nail on the head, but since Jarvis Cocker is middle/upper-middle-class people berated him for not being "common people" and talking out of his hat. But yes, the lyrics of the song perfectly fit this contemporary liberalism that just wants to play pretend with the status quo.
........... You see this is why the Right should shut up about race issues. As soon as they talk about it, their inner prejudices and hate comes to the surface.
@@garylake1676 I mean the physical direction right, as opposed to the left direction........... Obviously I mean the right as in the political right wing dumbass.
@@tomschneider7788 Annoying? It's not like it's up to him and it's not like the people complaining wouldn't be doing the same thing if they had that condition. Instead of being thankful people just love to complain.
I think he’s right about focusing on systemic over the everyday racism. BUT everyday racism still needs to be pointed out, because the everyday is what legitimises and reinforces the systemic. They feed eachother.
I hate the way you frame these videos. Clickbait, rhetorical titles, and using meme-based imagery like "Big Red" to try to slant Žižek in a direction that he does not actually speak to. To wit: He does not identify "real racism" in this video, nor does he contrast it from "white liberal racism"; he identifies several forms of racism, ALL of which he asserts to be "real". He is discussing the subtleties involved in our assessment of racism, and you're doing him a disservice by trying to reduce his discourse to a simplistic "us vs them" rhetoric.
Well by framing him in a memeatic way he might convert some chuds into socialists, if you wanna gain supoort you have to reel em in with something they wanna hear and then make them learn something new.
@@superduperfreakyDj I daresay Žižek isn't a good starting point if you're looking to "convert" people-his points are generally quite nuanced and complicated, and are likely to fly over the heads of many who don't put in the effort to really read (or listen) between the lines of what he's saying.
AMAZING. I have had to put an Australian dude in his place a couple of years ago because he tried to BS me (an African who has lived across 3 continents) about the exceptional grandeur of "Aboriginals"; to which I replied "there is lot to learn from EVERY culture." That shut him up and made him walk off.
The problem is, we’re pretending there’s a difference between stealing purses for having been “robbed”, and clutching them for having been robbed. Both are simply reacting to lived reality.
Americans, this is not talking about your left-right divide but the liberal and conservative views in general. Not everything is about America. America is not the default.
@@davideanes3425 Lmao, do you think America is the default of the world. We are annoyed by your toxic division and interpolitics affecting the world. We who lived in safe countries that are not divided are baffled by some of the stuff that is going on in your country. You are not the default, you are the exception because no country has ever been so developed and so backwards at the same time.
@@DrakesdenChannel We are the default. You are the passive receptors of our unyielding inter-politics that dictate what you do and how you think. Lmao, if you're so annoyed you should do something about it.
It’s kind of hard to say that America isn’t the default to some degree when essentially the last century has pivoted politically and economically on the United States. Not saying that’s a good thing, don’t get me wrong, but it’s hard to say that American politics aren’t the most important on a global scale. 🤷♂️
We've all been slowly socially engineered to these points and more so coming to ahead these days with the emotional culture and quick feeling of gratitude for doing something 'compassionate'. Compassion and empathy have become weaponised, and feeling over fact is king. The creation of the emoji could be looked at in regard to this for the quick release of 'feeling good' by a reaction and not a debate.
These comments are always hilarious to me because it shows how unaware people are of how often people killed each other over the most minor disagreements 😂
The whole problem with the white woman clutching her purse story is that it assumes racism that might not be there. We would have to know if the woman would have done the same thing if a white man the same size had been behind her. What about a smaller Black man? Men of different races dressed differently? And he mentions that the woman might have been robbed by a Black man and that this could have triggered her response -- but then he dismisses that idea and goes back to assuming racism.
Agreed, it's a matter of perceived danger. Check out google image search, for 'white gang member' and 'black gang member' and the former gives you dudes who are tattooed up to their eyeballs and look like they've been on meth since Auschwitz 1944. The latter has a lot relatively normal looking black kids in hoodies and hip hop gear. Then google for a 'black guy in a suit'.
I grew up in the 90's in a multicultural suburban rough neighbour. I had best friends who were black and black girlfriends. Still, if you walked at night and saw a group of young black males with hoodies coming towards you, you just wouldn't cross the street if you were an idiot. These survival instincts are natural to people and they shouldn't sum you up as being racist. I even asked a black friend at the time if it was ok to do it and he replied: "Don't be an idiot and stay on their path. Just cross the street. I will still be your friend".
I have had it happen that I was at a cash register in a big city. I thought to myself: "I should not leave my bag unprotected at my back". So, I turned my bag towards the front. As I do this, I see a black person behind me. Being exposed to the narrative of racism, I could not help but wonder if that person now thought me a racist. Racism is in the eye of the beholder. Even if it is not only in the eye of the beholder.
This is a trait of "virtue signalling" people with a Messiah-complex, not a factual reality. Stop interviewing people with 3rd-hand experience of racism (i.e people who have read it only in books, seen it in films and heard it in songs) and this problem will be solved. Most ethnic minorities don't give a sh!t whether people worship them or not. They just want to be able to live their lives without being caricatured by Mainstream media or fetishised by attention-seeking missionaries.
Lets be clear: The left is about an economic reform platform, the right is about traditionalism, and perhaps their reimagining of it, and both have moderate and radical wings ---->>> the post moderns are about tearing down anything, the anarchist are also, about tearing down everything, the minarchists and libertarians are about severe limits to government. However, since most people in most modern developed societies and countries are basically some sort of moderate, absolutely anything else is usually regarded as radical. Also it is good to note, the Soviets thought of themselves also as "conservatives" and the west as "liberal horrible capitalism." But yet again we're getting a little lost in terms. The moreover point being these terms can and do shift. Perhaps even significantly, depending usually msot often who's in power or if not who's got a bigger megaphone.
The problem with racism in America revolves around misplaced thoughts that have the potentiality to create violent outcomes, and repeated loss of life. It is unjust because this underlying problem is built in preexisting institutions that we live on. The lady in his example is just as entitled to her fear as one is entitled to their opinion. Yes you are free to have that opinion, but it does not make it true or justified.
About those indians with fad informers in NY, here in Brazil we host many of those typical peruvian folk band. Just like the La Muerte Peluda in South Park. In my city there is one of those bands that I love utterly deep. Both vocal supporters dress like mohawk, the lead singer dress like an apache biker and they do peruvian covers from songs like My Heart Will Go On and Hotel California.
I love what he has to say, but it is very difficult to listen to due to all the hisses and pops etc... Please add english closed captions for silent viewing and for the hearing impaired...
Many use American Indian in a more formal sense. An American Indian movement was created decades ago. There are American Indian license plates for cars. There were several issues with Native American. The largest was the fact that it was pushed by a handful of people on university campuses who deemed Indian politically incorrect & offensive on behalf of all. This was offensive to people that had spent generations identifying as Indian, and it did not go over well with many. The most common response was, “my ancestors lived & died as Indians, and I will too”. I grew up beside the Cherokee Indian Reservation. That’s what it still says on the sign. The police department is the Cherokee Indian Police Department. There is a Museum of the Cherokee Indian. Most have an American Indian license plate. They don’t need people on campuses, that have obviously not spent any time near a reservation, dictating their identity to them. If you know the tribe/band name that always remains a good go to if having more generalized conversations about a group. In the day to day people just call each other by their names. 😉
There is a similar issue with the term Latinx today. It’s something primarily being used by a tiny group of white people on Uni campuses or 3rd - 4th generation kids removed from the language & culture. The overwhelming majority of Latinos polled despise the term. It makes their skin crawl. Universities have long needed to ditch their attempts to redefine a group of people based on topics they discuss in a classroom. They seem unable to realize that a name they come up with on the fly to discuss large swaths of people in class does not = the only politically correct option that everyone should immediately start using (trust me / it will change again, and again, again as they continue to make the same stupid mistakes) when addressing people.
He makes a good point that I agree with, but I feel the example he gave of individual racism makes it seem as though there’s a justification at the individual level for individual racism. I feel it would’ve been better to tie the fear that makes individuals behave in racist ways, to the indoctrination of racism by the system. The white woman walking down the street is scared of the black guy because the system has created and perpetuated stereotypes of black people as criminals, regardless of whether black people are really criminals or not. As much as it’s not the white lady’s fault that she feels what she feels, it’s also not the fault of the black man nor of black people either. Nor is her fear justified by the fact that some black people commit crimes. All credit is due to the system, for the fear, the racism (which includes the creation and dissemination of stereotypes as facts) and the crime.
Yes, I agree, there are some inconsistencies with Slavoj rhetoric, but I think it comes from an outsiders point of view, he is a white man and his opinions of observing are going to be bias. I tend not to agree on certain things, racism is racism and what you are saying is exactly the problem, what Slavoj says perpetuates individual racism that reinforces systemic racism.
I think that's exactly his point. As he says, people tend to individualize a problem that is systemic. The system created racism, it's ingrained in American culture, therefore the average individual perpetrates the racism whether they want to or not.
It's pretty weird how right-wingers assume Zizek is somehow "secretly right-wing" when he attacks liberal, individualistic takes on racism. Maybe his speech lacks depth, as he glosses over how media and culture over-potrays black crime, causing people to over-react. (while some liberal media nowadays falls to the pittrap on the other end, as Zizek again retells his take on the "angle-like others") Ultimately the discussion should not be about single racist tropes or actions of individuals. The very moment somebody asks " was this person racist?", the nature of racism is missed. No worker exists outside society, and the culture affects all of us - unless we are talking about sombody actively and knowingly building false conscience, the answer is that we all are racist, and the only way to change that is trough changing the power dynamics and culture of society. The example about the girls in collage campus is a perfect illustration of this: the only way to stay "pure" is to never interact with minorities, that is the only way one can achieve the liberal goal of changing materially nothing, but just never thinking anything racist. Outside of that sanctuary of liberal elite, material change has to happen in order to end racism
I agree with you. Just because you are considered "left wing" doesn't mean when you criticize the "left" doesn't mean you're on the "right." I would be considered "right" but I don't agree with everything on the "right" such as the anti lockdown protests. And I feel as even though political correctness is considered "left" I feel like a lot of people on the "left" disagree with it.
@First Last I actually didn't understand wha you said. Am I the original commentor? If so why did you adress me that way? Also if you are talking about me are you saying my statement is obvious and I am simple? If I am could you tell me how one could be less simple?
@First Last Okay sorry just wanted to clarify that. I'm not used to that type of vocabulary on here and I thought you were addressing me that way since intelligent people tend to do that. Again sorry, I got caught off guard and just got curious not offended.
Zizek essentially implying that prejudice is a rational analysis of the socioeconomic differences between people therefore we shouldn't fixate on these prejudices however I disagree as they do transcend into institutions and need to be addressed with awareness. I agree on not focusing on the moral culpability as every group holds prejudices however when one demographic is in overly represented in institutions such as the judiciary those prejudices have effect. Resolving the root oppression is important I agree, it reduces prejudices and naturally allows more representation however these perceptions such as the example he gave of the women with the purse are still harmful.
I get what he is saying about bourgeois idealization of tribal cultures. There's a difference between being patronizing and taking issue with how western culture imposed a hypocritical and oppressive form of Christianity on indigenous cultures. Also, there are plenty of tribal leaders in North America that oppose western ideals, and for good reason. Of course, anyone who lives without modern comforts and protections would envy those with them, but the question is how to incorporate these things without imposing ideals.
I don't know I can agree with everything he says. I mean, I was pretty pissed when disney changed live-action Mulan's story to fit the hollywood / PRC approved model. I rather the story be authentic - northern nomadic chinese girl against steppe raiders.
Did that celebration of the authentic other start with the French writer Michel de Montaigne who celebrated the "purity" of native Americans giving rise to the Noble Savage notion... Montagne claimed that Indians at least eat their opponents dead while in the West we eat them alive
It has nothing to with middle, its just about worse and good ways to criticise society. His materialistic critic is also radical, but in an emancipative way.
@@wiesenthal4688 Thanks for responding but can you elaborate a bit. I am saying that he comments on how subtlety is lost because of polarised things have become. It is hard to make a subtle point to large crowds.
you can see the fact that he’s hegelian very transparently through his approach to analyzing issues; imo he never really muddles about in the “middle,” it’s more of a “zooming out” to see the whole picture. like yes, you’re still looking at both sides so to speak, but rather than pitting them against one another and choosing one, you recognize each is incomplete on its own
If you want to get Zizek's 'I WOULD PREFER NOT TO' t-shirt you can do so here:
i-would-prefer-not-to.com
Damn how does he keep his hand so still
Lol
Lol
AND HE IS NOT TOUCHING HIS NOSE!!!
@@robertoberserker3138 and so on and so on.....
It moves a bit at 6:32
04:03 rare triple so on
lmao
@Dimitrij Fedorov
Please tell me you have a link
The gift that keeps on giving.
bask in its glory comrades
And 10:09
Zizek is harder on the left because he wants it to grow
@Johnny Deep French Revolution bad?
@Johnny Deep I don't think you have read Marx or Lenin, they both explained why that happened through the lens of historical materialism. The revolution from feudalism to capitalism will always be a bourgeois revolution.
@Johnny Deep They explained how the revolution got coopted by the bourgeoisie to become the ruling class of France instead of the aristocracy. Marxism uses historical materialism as lens to view history through. Through that lens we come to the conclusion that in a feudalist society with a rising bourgeoisie the bourgeoisie will always usurp the revolution of the working class (which in this stadium of history could not be socialist yet) to become the main holders holders of power. Trotsky claimed otherwise and said feudalist societies can in fact go from feudalism to socialism but no marxist takes his words seriously. So Marx basically stated that before you can have a socialist revolution a bourgeois capitalist revolution is necessary as this is the material progression of history.
@GluttonousDragon such argument
@Johnny Deep yet capitalism relies on violence and the threat of.
Socialism did creat the atomic bomb, but it was a capitalist that used it.
I’ve listened to this on headphones and i got Zizek’s drool on my sholder.
😆😆😆
Sexy
@@luislaracuente sexy indeed
Lol I needed a towel
😆😆😆
“I’m always distressed when something that’s part of a systemic problem is turned into a individual moral problem.”
@Lianna Theodros I'm not entirely sure, but pertinent to Hegelian social justice/political, yes haha
What do you mean with systemic problems?
Perfectly said, its lines like this take make him so on-point
@@CZcamschannel-xp1tx I think it's mostly about things outside of your control.
For instance, you could say call of duty sucks due to microtransactions, but unless you're a dev your only sway is the decision to buy or not. If you don't want microtransactions, there's a limit to what the consumer can do individually, and furthermore if you want them to go away, you'd have to
1, mass mobilize gamers and boycott it as a social movement, or
2, pass legislative limitations to what publishers and devs can do in terms of how and what they make money with in their intellectual properties, thereby creating institutional checks and balances.
If you want better games, you could argue that everyone should be a dev, but that's not really a solution since there's only so many people with the resources, time and aptitude for that task to be fulfilled, which seems like an unproductive endeavor.
Instead of shifting the blame to not having good devs on gamers, wouldn't it make more sense if gamers as a community took proactive stances through political action to change the boundaries of what devs can do or what kinds of in-game transactions are viable and which should not be present?
@@potatoheadhaoy the intelectual gamer kicking in. Love the hypothesis 😂
He sounds like Count Dracula trying to talk during dinner 🧛🏻♂️
Sounds like count and Sylvester the cat had a baby 😅
Fascinating!
@elimar008 yup and apparently vice in my recommendations agrees with you
I mean, Slovenia is right near Transylvania so it makes sense. Slovenia is also where Melania Trump is from btw. It would be fun to watch the two of them have a philosophical discussion in their native language, lol.
I love the petty(in a good way) jokes about Slavoj's affect and so on and so on.
CZcams automatically generates subtitles in Dutch while Zizek speaks English. Good.
Autotranslate back to english and you unlock a new meaning
I get a lot of italian in his videos
I am assuming most of the people commenting are from the USA, saying "right wing this... left wing that.. and so on and so on". This is such a reductive way of looking at politics. It seems to me that Zizek takes a more pragmatic approach to each individual issue.
(Not trying to diss Americans, but you do only have two political parties :))
...and both parties are in the authoritarian right quadrant of the political spectrum
the democrats and republicans are two broken wings of the same dirty bird.
They so draught in that dynamic they can't see the world other than the optics of red vs blue
@First Last Most of America's left is Auth right leaning centrists and at most they are true centrists. America's right is the most Auth right you can get. There really exist no 'left' in America
@First Last we wish they were authleft
He's fantastic. I thought, in my ignorance, I was right wing, until he made me realise I'm just not a liberal.
you cant just not-be-something, you also have to be something.
@@apokos8871 Can be left wing without the white liberal midder/upper class progressivism.
@First Last all leftists? really? even you? even all the examples i can bring of actual socialists that dont do as you claim?
@First Last Churchills *astard child. A child that was incubated for a few decades b4 it went global in the 70s with the rise of the New Right and their "third position".
@First Last amazing , the power of symbols.
I can still hear him touching his nose every five seconds.
@Crazy Swayze what else could you eat?
@Crazy Swayze you forgot dick
@Crazy Swayze why are u gae
@Crazy Swayze you are gae
@Crazy Swayze IM CRYING 😂😂😂😂😂 this damn thread is hilarious
When the audio goes to Zizek, it changes to 240p lmao
Still love him tho
Zizek without trying, explains the central class argument patronizing the singer of the song Common People. As she wants to do things "like common people do", fetishizing her projection of the life of the common people, or Indian people or black people so on and so on. Which ironically removes their independent agency in their narrative at the same time.
@@piereb1748 I think Ash explains their take on this very well, there is little in the above narrative that is difficult to get ones head around.
In simple terms, Ash is saying that the white liberal is so attached to the concept of equality, that they lose all perspective and reasoning, which makes them about as useful as a chocolate tea pot.
Zizek, I agree, is very difficult to follow, but well worth the concentration.
Pulp's song "Common People" hits the nail on the head, but since Jarvis Cocker is middle/upper-middle-class people berated him for not being "common people" and talking out of his hat. But yes, the lyrics of the song perfectly fit this contemporary liberalism that just wants to play pretend with the status quo.
........... You see this is why the Right should shut up about race issues. As soon as they talk about it, their inner prejudices and hate comes to the surface.
@@goethe3116 When you say 'the right', please define what 'the right; actually is?
@@garylake1676 I mean the physical direction right, as opposed to the left direction........... Obviously I mean the right as in the political right wing dumbass.
“Something beautiful happened to me, beautiful in the horrible sense”
LOL relatable
I was tested positive (COVID19) after hearing to Zizek.
You mean after you listened to Zizek.
Stood to close to the spit
@@ditchweed2275 it's close enough.
Underrated comment
Jesus Christ I had to wear my 95 mask
He has spoken before about the issue of "tolerance" being the goal of the left rather than the actual problems which lead to the supposed intolerance
04:03 10:09
"and so on" X3
(Trinity achieved, now I'm complete)
By the way, this is the greatest channel ever (and so on)
Still waiting on the 4-by-4 combo: "and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on"
Well, this is not as good as the natural combo but.. czcams.com/video/04-FEHw4USw/video.html
"A great Hollywood feel'm".....lol.
Slavoj is always a big breath of fresh air, but never moreso than right now.
I love this guys politics but Jesus it sounds like he's drowning in gallons spit.
Don't forget the snot. :D
There's at least 10 guys saying the same thing as you on all his videos.
@@SS-pq9ci Because it is quite obvious and for many people annoying.
@@tomschneider7788 Annoying? It's not like it's up to him and it's not like the people complaining wouldn't be doing the same thing if they had that condition.
Instead of being thankful people just love to complain.
I was hoping to hear him introduce himself
Honestly listening to him gives me hope for humanity. He is a voice of reason and he really says some great stuff that resonates with me
I think he’s right about focusing on systemic over the everyday racism. BUT everyday racism still needs to be pointed out, because the everyday is what legitimises and reinforces the systemic. They feed eachother.
Systemic racism is a conspiracy theory without scientific evidence for its existence.
@@cube2fox ??? What ? Do you literally live under a rock
@@synkronized Can you cite any evidence?
imagine Slavoj in the role of Neo in this capitalistic matrix. Him and The architect having the long awaited discussion.
Lol! Architect’s face would melt.
I hate the way you frame these videos. Clickbait, rhetorical titles, and using meme-based imagery like "Big Red" to try to slant Žižek in a direction that he does not actually speak to. To wit: He does not identify "real racism" in this video, nor does he contrast it from "white liberal racism"; he identifies several forms of racism, ALL of which he asserts to be "real". He is discussing the subtleties involved in our assessment of racism, and you're doing him a disservice by trying to reduce his discourse to a simplistic "us vs them" rhetoric.
Well by framing him in a memeatic way he might convert some chuds into socialists, if you wanna gain supoort you have to reel em in with something they wanna hear and then make them learn something new.
@@superduperfreakyDj I daresay Žižek isn't a good starting point if you're looking to "convert" people-his points are generally quite nuanced and complicated, and are likely to fly over the heads of many who don't put in the effort to really read (or listen) between the lines of what he's saying.
@@superduperfreakyDj yuck socialism. Such a shame that the West is becoming socialist. That being said i can respect Zizek.
@@user-kj4bp3tj8q Hahaha smooth brain
@@superduperfreakyDj dude your a memester! ummm troll face? ummm pepe the frog?
It sounds like he's talking through a walkie-talkie, over.
*kkhrrrk* and so on and so on and so on, over
@@saturatedneowax 🤣🤣
AMAZING.
I have had to put an Australian dude in his place a couple of years ago because he tried to BS me (an African who has lived across 3 continents) about the exceptional grandeur of "Aboriginals"; to which I replied "there is lot to learn from EVERY culture."
That shut him up and made him walk off.
Putting aside the accent and rhetorical differences, Zizek sounds exactly like Tom Wolfe talking about radical chic.
A lot of people often mistake nepotism for racism.
I'm so glad he is saying this. Goodness, I couldn't have said it better myself.
No u couldn't have.
@@rahulsharma-tb9dw ???
@@sebastian-benedictflore I was trying to be funny seb..😜 u couldn't have said it better I mean
@@rahulsharma-tb9dw I know what you mean. I just don't see the point in saying that. Seems like you're trying to start something.
@@sebastian-benedictflore Chill.. I was just trying to be funny that's it.
Sniff
Touch face
Lisp
“Uh”
Shake head while talking, also gesturing with hands
“And so on”
Yes dude, we know.
mabusestestament someone’s mad.
@tyrannic
You are? 😉
@@mabusestestament Actually it's you my dude so chill a little.
@Hamza Shukri
It is?
Zizek can turn the ridiculous into the sublime. That too is an art.
0:27, 1:53, 4:03, 4:17, 4:25, 4:53, 7:01, 7:25, 8:48, 9:30, 9:54, 10:09, 10:44, 12:23, 12:38, 12:56
So on so on so on
Nice
You do have a lot of free time, don't you?
love your vids! keep it up
The problem is, we’re pretending there’s a difference between stealing purses for having been “robbed”, and clutching them for having been robbed. Both are simply reacting to lived reality.
His speech brings tears to my eyes, for example the way he siffs
His speech brings saliva to my forehead
Americans, this is not talking about your left-right divide but the liberal and conservative views in general. Not everything is about America. America is not the default.
Everything right until that last sentence.
@@davideanes3425 Lmao, do you think America is the default of the world. We are annoyed by your toxic division and interpolitics affecting the world. We who lived in safe countries that are not divided are baffled by some of the stuff that is going on in your country. You are not the default, you are the exception because no country has ever been so developed and so backwards at the same time.
@@DrakesdenChannel We are the default. You are the passive receptors of our unyielding inter-politics that dictate what you do and how you think. Lmao, if you're so annoyed you should do something about it.
Drakesden And you as well
It’s kind of hard to say that America isn’t the default to some degree when essentially the last century has pivoted politically and economically on the United States. Not saying that’s a good thing, don’t get me wrong, but it’s hard to say that American politics aren’t the most important on a global scale. 🤷♂️
If anyone needs to wear a face mask. Its this guy
I always wondered if there is positive racism. Now I know there is and it’s as sick as racism itself. As it is racism nonetheless. Thank you Slavoj.
AS sick?
For someone who hates people Z has a helluva lot of friends.....
We've all been slowly socially engineered to these points and more so coming to ahead these days with the emotional culture and quick feeling of gratitude for doing something 'compassionate'. Compassion and empathy have become weaponised, and feeling over fact is king. The creation of the emoji could be looked at in regard to this for the quick release of 'feeling good' by a reaction and not a debate.
These comments are always hilarious to me because it shows how unaware people are of how often people killed each other over the most minor disagreements 😂
I need to read some of his work. I'm blown away by the way he thinks
The whole problem with the white woman clutching her purse story is that it assumes racism that might not be there. We would have to know if the woman would have done the same thing if a white man the same size had been behind her. What about a smaller Black man? Men of different races dressed differently? And he mentions that the woman might have been robbed by a Black man and that this could have triggered her response -- but then he dismisses that idea and goes back to assuming racism.
Agreed, it's a matter of perceived danger. Check out google image search, for 'white gang member' and 'black gang member' and the former gives you dudes who are tattooed up to their eyeballs and look like they've been on meth since Auschwitz 1944. The latter has a lot relatively normal looking black kids in hoodies and hip hop gear. Then google for a 'black guy in a suit'.
I grew up in the 90's in a multicultural suburban rough neighbour. I had best friends who were black and black girlfriends. Still, if you walked at night and saw a group of young black males with hoodies coming towards you, you just wouldn't cross the street if you were an idiot. These survival instincts are natural to people and they shouldn't sum you up as being racist. I even asked a black friend at the time if it was ok to do it and he replied: "Don't be an idiot and stay on their path. Just cross the street. I will still be your friend".
@@miguelrosado6348 Yep. Institutional racism is a real thing, but being scared of a scary looking dude isn't really a good example of it.
I have had it happen that I was at a cash register in a big city. I thought to myself: "I should not leave my bag unprotected at my back". So, I turned my bag towards the front. As I do this, I see a black person behind me. Being exposed to the narrative of racism, I could not help but wonder if that person now thought me a racist.
Racism is in the eye of the beholder. Even if it is not only in the eye of the beholder.
Nature.
Love how he openly tells the audience he's saying something to provoke
He is so great. Brilliant.
Patronising celebration of "the other" . Touché
This is a trait of "virtue signalling" people with a Messiah-complex, not a factual reality.
Stop interviewing people with 3rd-hand experience of racism (i.e people who have read it only in books, seen it in films and heard it in songs) and this problem will be solved.
Most ethnic minorities don't give a sh!t whether people worship them or not. They just want to be able to live their lives without being caricatured by Mainstream media or fetishised by attention-seeking missionaries.
...is there transcripts available somewhere? Please understand
Zizek is just so neat.
8:40 That's the entire premise of a movie called "Embrace of the Serpent"
I really would like to watch it with subtitles
Thanks for the video, rly nice content!
If u could make it, it'll be very good to have portuguese subtitles on your videos!
White liberal racism is still racism. It's just more polite and casual
White liberal racism, by its pretty trappings, is the more problematic than any flat-out obvious racism.
Neither polite nor casual, just passive aggressive.
How did this guy become a philosopher? Jokes aside I respect him.
pfp goes hard.
I heard several of the things he speaks about myself, the most recent was the whole "richer lives" thing.
Lets be clear: The left is about an economic reform platform, the right is about traditionalism, and perhaps their reimagining of it, and both have moderate and radical wings ---->>> the post moderns are about tearing down anything, the anarchist are also, about tearing down everything, the minarchists and libertarians are about severe limits to government. However, since most people in most modern developed societies and countries are basically some sort of moderate, absolutely anything else is usually regarded as radical. Also it is good to note, the Soviets thought of themselves also as "conservatives" and the west as "liberal horrible capitalism." But yet again we're getting a little lost in terms. The moreover point being these terms can and do shift. Perhaps even significantly, depending usually msot often who's in power or if not who's got a bigger megaphone.
I want to see a debate between him and Jesse Lee Petersen, just for the luls an sho on an sho on.
For some reason I can't even imagine that happening
That would be Uh-mazin.
Jesse is whatever the opposite of a good Hegelian is. I wonder if their brain waves are even compatible.
Jesse Lee's knowledge of Christian theology is actually decent. Would be an interesting debate for sure.
neththom999 Not a chance lol 😂
I hadn't thought about 'authentic minorities' as a form of racism and I'm pretty sure I have been guilty of this.
What campus is the story about the swimming pool from? I can't find a story about it so far
"You live a much more authentic, wholistic life . . . " HYSTERICAL!
Zizek has soooo many friends aaaaaaall over the world.
And they come in handy!
It's just going to be confusing, isn't it? Because calling native Americans Indians, will make the interlocutor think of Indians from India.
I want to add a translation but i can't !!
Zizek aims to find the right question, before trying to find the right answer.
The problem with racism in America revolves around misplaced thoughts that have the potentiality to create violent outcomes, and repeated loss of life. It is unjust because this underlying problem is built in preexisting institutions that we live on. The lady in his example is just as entitled to her fear as one is entitled to their opinion. Yes you are free to have that opinion, but it does not make it true or justified.
her opinion is a symptom of racism. because slavery. it's not that complicated tbh
i love how he butchered the word "myths" toward the end
About those indians with fad informers in NY, here in Brazil we host many of those typical peruvian folk band. Just like the La Muerte Peluda in South Park.
In my city there is one of those bands that I love utterly deep. Both vocal supporters dress like mohawk, the lead singer dress like an apache biker and they do peruvian covers from songs like My Heart Will Go On and Hotel California.
And so on and so on......... and so on
8:39 "You shorty"
Damn there sure are a lot of conservatives in this comment section completely missing the point of this video
EpsteinsPlasticSurgeon that’s a bold statement considering I didn’t even specify which comments I take issue with
Looks like Palpatine using his lightning powers
Could you put English subtitles please
I love what he has to say, but it is very difficult to listen to due to all the hisses and pops etc... Please add english closed captions for silent viewing and for the hearing impaired...
If you call an indigenous American "Indian", how would you distinguish between them and real Indians?
(You know,from India.)
It's usually understood by context. When context isn't clear, people make sure to use native americans rather than Indians.
Why not say "Amerindians", just like people say "West Indies"?
@@nachannachle2706 You can. I just say native americans. All I'm doing is explaining how language is used in the US in regards to this topic.
Many use American Indian in a more formal sense. An American Indian movement was created decades ago. There are American Indian license plates for cars.
There were several issues with Native American. The largest was the fact that it was pushed by a handful of people on university campuses who deemed Indian politically incorrect & offensive on behalf of all. This was offensive to people that had spent generations identifying as Indian, and it did not go over well with many. The most common response was, “my ancestors lived & died as Indians, and I will too”.
I grew up beside the Cherokee Indian Reservation. That’s what it still says on the sign. The police department is the Cherokee Indian Police Department. There is a Museum of the Cherokee Indian. Most have an American Indian license plate.
They don’t need people on campuses, that have obviously not spent any time near a reservation, dictating their identity to them.
If you know the tribe/band name that always remains a good go to if having more generalized conversations about a group. In the day to day people just call each other by their names. 😉
There is a similar issue with the term Latinx today. It’s something primarily being used by a tiny group of white people on Uni campuses or 3rd - 4th generation kids removed from the language & culture. The overwhelming majority of Latinos polled despise the term. It makes their skin crawl.
Universities have long needed to ditch their attempts to redefine a group of people based on topics they discuss in a classroom.
They seem unable to realize that a name they come up with on the fly to discuss large swaths of people in class does not = the only politically correct option that everyone should immediately start using (trust me / it will change again, and again, again as they continue to make the same stupid mistakes) when addressing people.
He makes a good point that I agree with, but I feel the example he gave of individual racism makes it seem as though there’s a justification at the individual level for individual racism. I feel it would’ve been better to tie the fear that makes individuals behave in racist ways, to the indoctrination of racism by the system. The white woman walking down the street is scared of the black guy because the system has created and perpetuated stereotypes of black people as criminals, regardless of whether black people are really criminals or not. As much as it’s not the white lady’s fault that she feels what she feels, it’s also not the fault of the black man nor of black people either. Nor is her fear justified by the fact that some black people commit crimes. All credit is due to the system, for the fear, the racism (which includes the creation and dissemination of stereotypes as facts) and the crime.
Yes, I agree, there are some inconsistencies with Slavoj rhetoric, but I think it comes from an outsiders point of view, he is a white man and his opinions of observing are going to be bias. I tend not to agree on certain things, racism is racism and what you are saying is exactly the problem, what Slavoj says perpetuates individual racism that reinforces systemic racism.
I think that's exactly his point. As he says, people tend to individualize a problem that is systemic. The system created racism, it's ingrained in American culture, therefore the average individual perpetrates the racism whether they want to or not.
Damn we got a triple “and so on” 4:02
This makes me long for the written word.
It's pretty weird how right-wingers assume Zizek is somehow "secretly right-wing" when he attacks liberal, individualistic takes on racism. Maybe his speech lacks depth, as he glosses over how media and culture over-potrays black crime, causing people to over-react. (while some liberal media nowadays falls to the pittrap on the other end, as Zizek again retells his take on the "angle-like others")
Ultimately the discussion should not be about single racist tropes or actions of individuals. The very moment somebody asks " was this person racist?", the nature of racism is missed. No worker exists outside society, and the culture affects all of us - unless we are talking about sombody actively and knowingly building false conscience, the answer is that we all are racist, and the only way to change that is trough changing the power dynamics and culture of society.
The example about the girls in collage campus is a perfect illustration of this: the only way to stay "pure" is to never interact with minorities, that is the only way one can achieve the liberal goal of changing materially nothing, but just never thinking anything racist. Outside of that sanctuary of liberal elite, material change has to happen in order to end racism
I agree with you. Just because you are considered "left wing" doesn't mean when you criticize the "left" doesn't mean you're on the "right." I would be considered "right" but I don't agree with everything on the "right" such as the anti lockdown protests. And I feel as even though political correctness is considered "left" I feel like a lot of people on the "left" disagree with it.
@First Last I actually didn't understand wha you said. Am I the original commentor? If so why did you adress me that way? Also if you are talking about me are you saying my statement is obvious and I am simple? If I am could you tell me how one could be less simple?
@First Last Okay sorry just wanted to clarify that. I'm not used to that type of vocabulary on here and I thought you were addressing me that way since intelligent people tend to do that. Again sorry, I got caught off guard and just got curious not offended.
@First Last You aswell.
It is not written in the stars that you must live together in the same country. The country itself can be partitioned into more homogeneous units.
Zizek essentially implying that prejudice is a rational analysis of the socioeconomic differences between people therefore we shouldn't fixate on these prejudices however I disagree as they do transcend into institutions and need to be addressed with awareness. I agree on not focusing on the moral culpability as every group holds prejudices however when one demographic is in overly represented in institutions such as the judiciary those prejudices have effect. Resolving the root oppression is important I agree, it reduces prejudices and naturally allows more representation however these perceptions such as the example he gave of the women with the purse are still harmful.
exactly
I get what he is saying about bourgeois idealization of tribal cultures. There's a difference between being patronizing and taking issue with how western culture imposed a hypocritical and oppressive form of Christianity on indigenous cultures. Also, there are plenty of tribal leaders in North America that oppose western ideals, and for good reason. Of course, anyone who lives without modern comforts and protections would envy those with them, but the question is how to incorporate these things without imposing ideals.
I can barely understand anything he's saying
"Revolution is the work of logical lunatics."--Wallace Stevens
This would be perfect if it wasn't for all the interference in the audio.
That's a feature of slavo not a bug of the audio
Imagine him saying: pspspspspspspspspspspspspsp💦
1:59 sounds like angry cats hissing at each other in a mexican stand off.
Im happy they didnt provide video, the sweating and slobbering is too much!
Did he record himself with a world war 2 microphone while underwater?
This alien indicator thing is sooo spot on
Triple 'so one' , haven't heard that in a while
1:30
Is he slurping noodles while talking ?
I don't know I can agree with everything he says. I mean, I was pretty pissed when disney changed live-action Mulan's story to fit the hollywood / PRC approved model. I rather the story be authentic - northern nomadic chinese girl against steppe raiders.
i lost it at him saying hola
Put a mask on this dude! It's 2020!!!
Sounds like he is speaking the language of snakes
Did that celebration of the authentic other start with the French writer Michel de Montaigne who celebrated the "purity" of native Americans giving rise to the Noble Savage notion... Montagne claimed that Indians at least eat their opponents dead while in the West we eat them alive
4:05 the rare triple "and so on"
Say it; don’t spray it!
God he's so hard to listen to, he sounds like zoidberg
Man, i want to listen with full attention but i keep thinking about that suction thing at the dentist.
Exotism is as racist as hatred. He has a good point ! And addressing the roots is more important indeed
As a true liberal, in the classic sense, I will never see eye to eye with Zizek on economy. But his takes on racial relations are some of the best.
What do you mean by "classical liberal"
@@jirojhasuo2ndgrandcompany745 right winger
Just say you’re right wing and be done with it lol
culpabilizing...Zizek cannibalizing the English language while gleefully slurping it in and spitting it out
how many languages do you speak without an accent?
@@helpanimals- 4
Zizek’s whole thing is to try to communicate how complex things are. The truth is always somewhere in the middle.
It has nothing to with middle, its just about worse and good ways to criticise society. His materialistic critic is also radical, but in an emancipative way.
@@wiesenthal4688 Thanks for responding but can you elaborate a bit. I am saying that he comments on how subtlety is lost because of polarised things have become. It is hard to make a subtle point to large crowds.
i wouldn’t say the middle, and i don’t think zizek really would say that either. you can go back to Hegel: “the truth is the whole.”
you can see the fact that he’s hegelian very transparently through his approach to analyzing issues; imo he never really muddles about in the “middle,” it’s more of a “zooming out” to see the whole picture. like yes, you’re still looking at both sides so to speak, but rather than pitting them against one another and choosing one, you recognize each is incomplete on its own
@@Kivexor Good replies. I see what you mean. Thank you.
Slavoj needs to play CS to get out the jitters by switching between gun and a knife and pressing TAB non-stop.