ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 พ.ค. 2013
- 16/05/2013, 21:00h, cinema Europa, 6th Subversive festival
Slavoj Žižek "Love as a political category"
Moderator: Srećko Horvat
Che Guevara's statement that "the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love" should be read together with his much more problematic statement on revolutionaries as "killing machines": "Hatred is an element of struggle; relentless hatred of the enemy that impels us over and beyond the natural limitations of man and transforms us into effective, violent, selective, and cold killing machines. Our soldiers must be thus; a people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy." These two apparently opposite stances are united in Che's motto: "Hay que endurecerse sin perder jamás la ternura. (One must endure -- become hard, toughen oneself - without losing tenderness.)" Or, to paraphrase Kant and Robespierre again: love without cruelty is powerless; cruelty without love is a blind, short-lived passion. Guevara is here paraphrasing Christ's declarations on the unity of love and sword -- in both cases, the underlying paradox is that what makes love angelic, what elevates it over mere unstable and pathetic sentimentality, is its cruelty itself, its link with violence -- it is this link which raises love "over and beyond the natural limitations of man." Has this topic any relevance for our late capitalist predicament?
Slavoj Žižek
Slovenian philosopher and cultural critic working in the traditions of Hegelianism, Marxism and Lacanian psychoanalysis. He has made contributions to political theory, film theory and theoretical psychoanalysis. Žižek is a senior researcher at the Institute of Sociology, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, and a professor at the European Graduate School. He has been a visiting professor at many important universities. He is currently the International Director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities at Birkbeck, University of London and president of the Society for Theoretical Psychoanalysis, Ljubljana. He has been called 'the most dangerous political philosopher in the West'. He is a traditional guest and Parteigenosse at Subversive Festival. He has published over 50 books that have been translated into 20 languages. He writes on many topics including subjectivity, ideology, capitalism, fundamentalism, racism, tolerance, multiculturalism, human rights, ecology, globalization, the Iraq War, revolution, utopianism, totalitarianism, postmodernism, pop culture, opera, cinema, political theology, and religion. Some of his books are The Sublime Object of Ideology (2002.), The Ticklish Subject (2006.), Violence (2008.), The Parallax View (2009.), First As Tragedy, Then As Force (2010).
www.subversivefestival.com/for...
![ช้างศึกสู้ต่อไป!! พาเปียโน ดูบอลไทยครั้งแรก ตกรอบแบบโคตรเสียดาย!! l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4WloIH645Lg/mqdefault.jpg)
"Fall in love and attach yourself to worldly objects." -Slavoj xoxox
That’s why I’m no Buddhist
It is quite fun watching the camera operator panning around to find who is asking the question..... small joys
I like how the Zizekian style of speaking seems to move to the crowd asking the questions, and so on
I love how annoyed Mr. Zizek became after Srecko Horvat asked everyone to give him a round of applause.
His best speech till now.Great mind.
My goodness; he's such a beautiful person!
End of quote
He's brilliant.
*applauds heartily*
My Friday night movie 🍿
Fuck me this is a beautiful realization.. Understanding. Thanks Savoj, I needed this spoon fed.
Wonderful - and great questions as well (which is not always the case :-))
Great man
A Very good presentation👍
Excellent.
What is more disappointing, knowing to be plain stupid, or to realize your optimum love is intellect inducted actions to fit the societal need of being loving ?
Why is the latter disappointing?
absolutely fantastic
If you example Pattberg’s works, Pattberg will notice.
"For example, when we talk about “Chinese philosophy” it is clear that we are doing an eurocentricist operation, because “philosophy” as we know it emerged in Europe; and if we apply the same notion to Chinese thought, the Chinese thought is automatically in a disadvantage."
30:55 - Charity as false love: Feeling good of participating in the struggle against suffering.
32:17 - Objective victories of Capitalism. 'We live in a Golden Era' : the best of all possible worlds.
38:28 - Critiques of Eurocentrism - Every Universality can be a false Universality. Historicist Relativism - Beware how every universality can be a false universality.
59:11 - The whole problem of Hegel, [...] , is how in these conditions of failure, [...], how to save the legacy, how to remain faithful to it, how to do it again, how not to betray what was worth fighting in it.
59:42 - The use of the Fiasco of Communism by ruling ideology to put in question the entire Legacy of Modernity.
1:01:30 - "Modernization is a radically ambiguous process. Any return to pre-modern values, traditions, only serves to accelerate, to strengthen what is most dangerous of modernization."
1:02:16 - Definition of the Wound of Modernity: "[T]he wound of modernity, the wound itself, by wound I mean this cut of modernity: violent interruption of traditional order by modern universalism beginning with Christianity and so on."
1:56:24 - The legacy of Jewish Ethics: "I's a totally intersubjective ethics".
1:56:40 - About Israel: "I'm part of the boycott there".
1:04:50 - "There is no way back, we have to play to the end the game of Modernist Project"
Thanks for these timestamps
“Love is all and love is everyone” is a verse from the Beatles song, it gave me a new perspective on the meaning of word love - not a romantic love to a particular woman or man, your girlfriend, wife, boyfriend - that’s the most popular definition, but to humanity, a stranger, your surroundings and yourself. To everyone.
It’s this great sense of fellowship and positivity and I think it’s very powerful. Seriously, there’s might in that.
“How does it feel to be one of the beautiful people” - another one. We’re all beautiful and all together.
This is explicitly what Zizek argues against
Why do people ask such long questions? Just ask the question! Don't tell your life story first.
hush
make it please!
Why is not possible subtitles,legends?
At 1:51:31 the camera man starts to play "where's wally"
Just notes for self: the people of Germany, soviet union, North Korea, etc. love(d) their leader, which meant people lost control to them; there are multiple passages in the bible talking about how Jesus wanted to create hate, not love; Marx was intrigued by the successes of capitalism, he just wanted this success to help everyone; the British wanted India to keep its culture so they could exploit them; Malcolm X is called "X" to symbolize that he has been deprived of his identity (last name); Malcolm X became muslim; the justification for Apartheid was to have multiculturalism; you can love someone so much that you can want to kill/destroy everything else; terrorism is justified with love; violence is a sign of impotence, when you are really strong your don't need physical violence;
Jesus didn't want to create hate...he was exposing how 'love' is not passive loyalty to some outside authority ie parents, siblings, police, politicians etc etc. We should 'hate' that kind of love, which is passive obedience and not active.
Yanas with a great question
He is so amazing. This kind of person I will blindly trust even !
Good luck with that
even this sounds like a Slavoj quote, my brain has truly broken haha
Then you miss his point.
@@planet7085Indeed.
If language is meaningful, then the other dutch phrase "op slag verliefd", freely translated as love-smitten, shows a more violent, uncontrollable aspect of love. Unless you want to seperate a sudden love with a cultivated one, we must admit simple language is not conclusive on these kind of "metaphysical" questions.
Can't stop thinking that an inquisitive lizard is perched on the chest of Zizek throughout his talk
Philosophoraptor
What time does he talk about paganism? I heard it but cant find it again
ALGUIENQUE PONGA SUBTITULOS POR FAVOOOORRR!!!
What you are looking for is a systematic to Zizek. Unfourtunately such a work is not(yet) available. We have to wait until he is dead perhaps.
He borrows a lot from Hegel, Marx, Freud and of course Lacan, mixes those theories. To understand Zizek is to understand the major ideas. You dont have to read all those primarily. However I think Lacan is predominant in his thinking, I recommend "How to read Lacan(2006)", in which by intruducing Lacan, he introduces himself.
Interesting pair of trousers the philosopher has on -- and do not fail to notice the matching pair of short socks.
47:53 "The wound can only be healed by the very speer that smoulded it."
NO, I claim. If the spear stays inside the wound (we cannot go back to previous unhurt conditions) so true healing will never happen.
Only if pulled out, again the 'body' attacked can begin the healing process and continue with a scar left as a reminder.
The speer (different cultural ideolgy, in this case India using english language) fully has to be removed and a new mode of societal conduct, most unlikely as it appears, COULD begin to sprout.
Where there is language inherited cultural habit's will never die.
Sorry, we don't have time now to go into this ~
Zizek 4ev✊°
I'm glad it says "This comment has received too many negative votes"
Now you know people disagree with you, why? You are wrong he he makes the seemingly irrational, rational. He helps us to understand how the human mind led so much of man to the same place.
4:39 lady don't hurt me...don't hurt me...no more.
Baby* don't hurt me
1:49:00- I love that moment about miracles. Ali ovaj Smješko pored njega je pobjedio :D
I was just thinking about that line were he said the British didn’t want a colony of people like them. In reference to the the attempt by the British empire to support the caste system in India. Ireland I think represents the British fears. Because, that was a colony where the western values and concepts of the enlightenment were fully adopted. And, it is, of course, from the groups most connected to that, the liberals and leftists that the Citizen army and IRA were formed. Therefore, this much smaller country became profoundly difficult for the empire to maintain control over
Especially because the caste system essentially reflects the British class system as well?
Slavoy: "When you engage (in Love ) it should be within the prospect of eternity ."
In the same vein:...
"TOUTE jouissance est projet." (Emphasis added" .)
(Simone de Beauvoir ) I.e. NO pleasure is conceivable without a PROSPECT of at least - duration..
.
( I am not at all a fan of Beauvoir, but this particular sentence of her I
find illuminating. )
Nietzsche: "Denn alle Lust will Ewigkeit..."
"But joys all want eternity..." Buddhism: "joys all WANT eternity, but they don´t GET it...!"
It's not "should" be within the prospect of eternity.
It's "is" within the prospect of eternity ( otherwise it's not love )
Japanese aesthetic of "Wabi-sabi"= acceptance of the transient and fleeting nature of things, and loving them anyway in a melancholic way-- to go along with your Buddhist sentiment.
And when Slavoj references Nietzsche he always focuses on "Love of one is a barbarism, for it is exercised at the expense of all others. The love of God, too"- Nietzsche. But I'm sure I have read "all joys want eternity", too. It sounds like something that was in either _The Gay Science_ or _Thus Spoke Zarathustra_
Speaking of Nietzsche, I think Slavoj is absolutely correct to make comparisons between the "Holy Spirit" in Christianity and a radical Communist egalitarianism which says we are all equals and hates any social hierarchy. Nietzsche himself made comparisons between the notion of equality we see in Socialism and even Democracy and the notion of equality we see in Christianity. Unlike Slavoj, Nietzsche detested this attitude of absolute equality; he both disbelieved in it (everything to Nietzsche has an "order of rank") and saw it as a form of resentment by the weak for the strong. To Nietzsche, the desire for equality is the desire of the weak to raise themselves up while also lowering the strong, that this Christian, Democratic, Socialist attitude of "we are all equal" is not only wrong, but is the insidious violent revenge of the weak.
Obviously Slavoj likes the notion of equality more than Nietzsche, but I found it interesting that they both admit that Christianity and Communism has this notion in common.
Don't you think it's kind of dangerous mixing the terms love and pleasure?
Que alguien le ponga subtítulos en español!!! por favor
classic
hahahah love it
Love is for the ideal in man and that potential society which can be created by freethought. Che was a freethinker. He was also a warrior in which he understood that violence is necessary and hatred is part of that necessity. They have nothing to do qith each other. Don't muddle it.
If only he had a bitchin' goatee like mine he could stroke. Or a cat that's internet gold.
Best part lol
Mr Zizek should read Richard Rohr's Falling Upwards. Maybe he could get a better Christian answer to the problem of Lk 14,25 (If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother and so on... blablabla...)
Klara Kiss-Pal Zizek is Christian, a Christian Atheist.
Tradúzcanlo al español.
1:14:18 should be a gif
i believe in miraclessss
1:43:41 on goodbye lenin vs lives of others
I wonder what political standing Slavoj has?
At a guess I will say a liberal but a quite lefty liberal.
I don't truly know though.
Dude, time to study up: he's -Communist- Socialist, though not a facile one. Sorta like he is a 'Christian' but at the same time an Atheist
from this very lecture: ""Holy Spirit - which is the first name of the Communist Party as you know""
@@pfflam he will send you to gulag for calling him a socialist
1:45:00
i trust him
Jesus sounds like your typical cult leader getting his followers to turn against their families.
But maybe there is the ultimate contradiction between love of family and love of the cause, that every disciple has to go through. Whether for good or for evil.
Why are we told and taught to love family ? Isn't precisely this space highly charged with devastating conflicts which you cannot escape unless you totally unclutch ?
This bluff for the love of family, I claim, needs to be honestly addressed in order to generate a more truly adult and realistic look upon of what we are dealing here with.
And YES ! Very well observed Jesus was nothing but an absolt fanatic jewish cult leader !
in the part of christ saying "if you don't hate... etc" I instantly remembered "eastern promeses" the movie with vigo mortensen. When he joins the russian mafia he has to express his hate throw his biological family.
The thing is to show loyalty to no one though. You don't hate your family only to express your love for the mafia!
Slavoj might find Swedenborg gives a much different interpretation of the Gospels.
31:06
Divide and rule.
subt
I think zizek just boiled down the meaning of flannery O'Connor's novel and the title thereof
So don't watch him, just listen.
1:39:27 who is this guy? zizek.2???
Share this shit world needs to heat it
Zizek's facts about india farmar suicide is wrong. It's West India, Maharashtra, Bidarbha where farmers are committing suicide most.
hate because they lost their ways ...
You don't get it. It's not about religion. It's about the absurdity of ideology.
Christianity says the highest possible act is forsaking eternity for the worldy. Zen says a good thing is not as good as nothing. Neither of these are mutually exclusive.
are u unaware of subjectivity. im celt we took jesus as a god in 60ad b4 "the church" existed. religion like a state is control but religion doznt have a monopoly god/s spirituality marriage ect....
im agnostic/atheist I don't hate religious people I just don't believe things they believe. I like tea u may like coffee religion an state means as much to me as starbucks lol
I'm similar, hope you are well after all these years! Take care!
Kressner The first level of stupidity is someone who dosent understands Symbols the second the one who neads explanatory help all the time, and the third ,(the toppest),he who accepts symbols unaquestioning.(Zizek)
how to legitimize unconditional submition for autorithary ruler , that was for centuries the rule of church, that was why fictional jesus figure was invented, for mases to practice their submition and sense of nonwortlhiness.
And now we hear the same story ifrom žižek. very sad.
1:45:00 LOL WTF?
He is completely wrong about violence, with this relative aspect of violence and 'good' violence. Jesus was COMPLETELY non-violent, all the way to not even opposing those who killed him. He was NON-violent to his death(not even antiviolent, but NON-violent). It is better to die in this world than resort to violence. THAT is love. Absolute refusal to resort to violence, EVER. All of this "means to an end" nonsense, justifying violence for the glorious end etc. is completely in error. Love it to death is the only way. Love is so disarming because it does not include ANY violence; that is why it is so puzzling, a feeling that would not resist ANYTHING.
As Slavoj loves old jokes, he probably would giggle on this one:
Žižek: What is love?
Haddaway: Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.
This is a 10-year old lecture but it's as actual as ****. 💖
1. What makes you think, politic as the primacy of knowledge, as the path of change, the Chinese futurism will immediately disadvantageous in front of philosophy, an eurocentric tradition which you conferred only has preparedness of an self-absorbed european reader and will not has scripted from a sinocentric playwright?
2. No, if a dominance can only expresses Indian's identity, then this implosion of anger is because such unforgivable coloniser wasn't Indian at the first place: Oh I know every -ism is bad, but a history hasn't written by ethnicity is even worse.
3. I don't know the son of God, Jesus had never beknownst of Saint Mary's wound until he sealed Mary Magdalene's womb.
His objections to those Christian passages are infantile.
The same christ told people that if your right eye causes you to sin you should pluck it out, or if your hand causes you to sin you should cut it off. Better for you to lose one of your members than to be cast into hellfire (that’s not word for word perfect but it will suffice for this argument you can look it up).
He did not mean literally you should cut your hand off. Or pull your eyes out OBVIOUSLY.
Apply the same principle of hyperbole and you will come closer to what the teaching is.
This man’s ability to be indifferent or sarcastic and scathing does not make him a great thinker.
“It’s not literal bro!”
These ecologies of unemployment
"Your opinions on war are a dealbreaker"
Awful people
Awful
Dude, I can not focus on what he's saying because he is constantly tugging at his shirt
You will die one day but God will remain.
We should tell this guy that China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea... are not Christian countries.
He’s selling books left right and centre though ..capitalism at its best
Wait a minute... "God IS Love" that He, out of Mercy, sent his only begotten Son to save the humankind that He terrorizes daily. 😀 Buddhism teaches Compassion, not Love or Mercy.
Marxist philosopher in 2013. OMG
+Jazz Cat
I know, right! He's an embarrassment to my country.
The only reason he is popular is because a lot of intellectuals like BS stuff. But, popularity has never been an indication of truth.
+xleax
Hahaaha, "popularity has never been an indication of truth." How prescient... Neoliberalism has been embraced as truth worldwide, yet it is full of myths and legends and is more akin to a religion... So yea, you are right, but the reason he holds sways among intellectuals is because his points hold up to intellectual and, sometimes, factual checks...
zanzeh teh hero Like what?
That Marxism killed over a 100 million people in the last century and he's still a Marxist?
xleax
The myth that neoliberalism has anything to do with freedom or democracy... Leninist style communism has indeed been directly and indirectly responsible for plenty of deaths and misery, but if you think Friedman style neoliberalism is innocent, you are solely mistaken. Ask the people of Latin America. Chile had a socialist democracy under Allende that was working for them. The US sponsored and supported a coup d'etat that installed a neoliberal dictator (Pinochet). Needless to say, over the next years, Chile was not a democracy, was very much a neoliberal capitalist state (with some exceptions, most of the state owned businesses got privatized), the standard of living fell dramatically, poverty increased and a lot of multinational companies got filthy rich. Argentina, Brazil and whole set of other nations can testify to the success of neoliberalism.
Neo-liberal dictator? That's like flying dog. If anything, he was neo-fascist.