I agree totally with the guest. I'm an American. Democrat my entire life I wanted Bernie Sanders too. The middle class needs rescuing now. Both parties have done nothing for us. The middle class is in desperate shape and have resorted to desperate measures in hopes of change.
Don't know how old you are, I guess old enough to change your Party affiliation. It was all a dog and pony show. How can you remain a member when it was all so rigged for Hillary?
The host could use his short term memory to wait for his guest's responses once in while. Maybe the theme of this show , ive never seen it, is that the host has a line of scrutiny like a district attorney. Host completely cant let go of the point that millions of 3rd party progressives had voted nay to incrementalism/ nay to dnc cynicism
Don L I can't bear it. I haven't heard one, of slavs thoughts to the end. Medhi is getting more and more rude and ignorant because he has an axe to grind. I'm done watching him.
Francisco Sousa No, he's using pretty much the same tactics that got Trump elected: Ignore the argument and go for the balls. That's what the media don't seem to understand - Trump's bigotry is simply the polar opposite of their own. That"s why it appeals to those who've grown sick of the status quo.
Lord. This horrendous rhetoric is everywhere. Sir, please try and make your own arguments, for your cognition's sake. If you don't think for yourself, soon your synapses will atrofiate by reading these pseudo-intelectual blogs and going over the internet regurgitanting this out-of-reality discourse. You wouldn't say anything you just did had you watched the video attentively. I sure hope you just use this insane arguments on the internet. In the real world, you'd sound mentally ill saying that with a straight face.
Tom Bayley lots of "cut offs" distractions and redirect. It's a cheap nasty tactic that Medhi has adopted. He should be ashamed of himself. I wonder how many pieces of silver he is taking, to stir up the flames.
i got owned on the internet by Francisco Sousa. let everybody see this display of defeat. where should I learn what real journalism is, since you're so smart and well acquainted with the subject? Or will you attack me again for my "ignorant" opinion?
Mehdi Hassan did his job as a journalist by calling out Zizek's hypocrisy. It wasn't difficult since Zizek had no argument to begin with. Zizek's position is that of an anarchist with no personal ramifications.
@gibran Khan Please, save your yelling for the Trump supporters, some on the left want serious self-reflection regarding what happened. This debate was not set up to expose the right viewpoint, but so that he could yell over Zizek..
jacobthelioneater Its called journalism. Mehdi asked Zizek pointed questions for which he had no answers. This is not Mehdi's fault. If you feel Mehdi should have given Zizek stone massage then you are free to watch RT propaganda. As for me, I'm evaluating arguments purely. I never mentioned Trump.
Gibran Khan You didn't mention Trump but perhaps you should have considering this is a video about Trump and Mehdi starts the "debate" by asking if Slavoj feels guilty because Trump is so bad. Every time Zizek gets to elaborating, Mehdi raises his voice and reiterates his point. It really is tiring to watch. How can I learn what Zizek says if Mehdi interrupts him before he gets anywhere? This is exactly the same kind of Bill O'Riley-esque mock debate where he yells more loudly and interrupts frequently. This is not the free exchange of ideas. Was there even a single time where Zizek was allowed to finish before interruption? It is also ironic to accuse him of hypocrisy consider the left was selling hypocrisy this year. Wall Street-Backed Hillary is not a leftist in any traditional sense. They simply relied on Trump being so bad that liberals would vote out of fear. I voted Hillary too, but I do not pretend there is no rational reason for not doing so. Perhaps hearing a liberal explain why he would've voted for Trump is what the left needs to stop painting the opposition as 100% racist sexist and evil?
jacobthelioneater Zizek had plenty of time to respond however when he tried to evade the questions, Mehdi held his feet to the fire. I am tired of watching journalists ask soft ball questions, allowing politicians and opinion makers to just ramble on while evading questions. I consider that an insult to my intelligence. Again, not sure why you're selling me on Hillary or Trump, I'm not arguing for either.
can someone please shut up the host, so the guest can finish a sentence without being interrupted by the host who can't control his urge to spill Corporate Clinton rhetoric?
Mehdi the interviewer is a very poor presenter, he is not a journalist but a bully. this interview is an example. He asks a question, interrupts then asks another question. I think he spoke more than Zizek.... shocking.
he is, what's the point of having someone like Zizek on the show only to take the opportunity to shoot him down as much as you can, that's not journalism that's playground banter. Bring Sami Zeiden or kamahl santamaria on the show.
You guys just don't know what you're talking about. If you guys don't know what serious journalism is then stop pretending. Have you ever debated someone in real life? Like, outside your bedroom/basement? Only point Zizek (poorly) made was about "Trump shaking up the system", which he's got no evidence to back up which made Mehdi's job very difficult.
Clearly this was an attempt from the liberal right to "debunk" or give a bad name through a bad interview to Zizek who lately has been getting a lot of attention putting them on their place.
game300 He cuts the guest off, purposefully misinterprets what he says and shows an overt bias against Trump which prevents anyone saying anything good about his presidency.
People just now heard of adversarial journalism, it seems. To debate a topic, both positions have to be clear. Zizek for the life of him can't make his so.
Push back from the interviewer needed to be done here. Watch now in 2121 and you will see the idea that Trump will make anything better was short sited at best. Freak show is mild in comparison.
@@Bmmhable How does it feel to be exempt from the greater suffering that occurs when either party is in charge? Both parties bomb Yemen, both parties drone Somalia, both parties parties drone Syria. Pardon me for not getting excited about your student loan forgiveness for Pell Grant recipients despite this though.
The interviewer needs to stop screaming over Zizek everytime he tries explaining himself, the questions are legitimate but nevertheless shouldn't be used to interrupt him at every turn
@@gustofzephyr947 The job of a journalist is ask hard question which is what Mehdi did. You can go watch Zizek's talk if you want soft ball questions thrown at him; plenty of that content on TH-cam.
Pieter Maas I think Zizek was saying that Trump would disrupt the political establishment by galvanising the left to rally against him and become more vocal which could lead to a true liberal like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders being elected in the next cycle because Trump polarises the issues at hand. This allows the status quo of the left being complacent and accepting half a loaf (Hillary) instead of nothing (Trump) to be ended and for the left to become more powerful and outspoken. He thinks Trump's somewhat of a paper tiger because the wall, repealing of Obamacare, ripping up of the Iran deal and the ban on all Muslims are things that he probably won't implement to even nearly the degree he was claiming on the campaign trail if at all. This is supported by facts. Trump is already softening his stances on these issues in interviews.
This is my problem with cult like following of people. When they make no sense as Zizek is, you can't see it. The damage Trump had caused and continues to cause (see Supreme Court picks), who will reverse it?
Zizek is a "leftist" who somehow always comes out in support of imperialists, white nationalists and the far-right and somehow always stands on the opposite side of the oppressed. It's *_dialectical_*, you won't understand.
The host isn't giving his interviewee much chance to speak and is using a horriblly disfunctiional interviewer style. I turned in because I would like to hear what Zizek has to say. The frequency of aggressive interruptions means that it isn't possible to catch much of what Zizek might have been trying to say. And the host isn't even coherent. In my book the host gets a rating of 1 out of 10 for the quality of this interview - the single positive point is for having someone on the show who sounds as though he might have some interesting thoughts to share. A good interview would have allowed the guest to speak.
It is his job to stop the guest from bullshitting and put the heat on him. If you want the guest to speak without host that is criticial, then watch Fox News
I'm actually a Zizkek fan but was he right? I don't think Biden is the result of a establishment shake up he (Zizke) imagined after Trump. Instead its as you were in the democratic party. But I'm with Zizek, it was worth a go because things would have been as dire with Clinton as with Trump, just hidden.
@@LuisPerez-tx5jo I don't think the results of a shake-up would be so readily visible. Perhaps it would be clearer if we revisited this moment in a few years time; After all, hindsight is always 20/20.
Children should not be allowed as hosts for such a news channel. A fool entirely inept of any conversational intellect has been handed the microphone. Pity, Zizek's ideas put forth a genuinely interesting perspective but fell upon deaf ears. Lost my little respect for this channel of news.
I believe Mehdi's style of interviewing is to bring out the emotional aspect of the interviewee to let the truth out. When a person is emotionally charged, he will show his true thoughts without any 2nd considerations. I think this interview was a good one and both have very relevant points.
Look Mehdi...... everyone is trying to listen to the intellectual academic world renowned philosopher in today's modern times......So Mehdi shut up!!!! so that we can listen the guests point of view finish a sentence.
"speaking from a position of white privilege" --- WTF!!! I like the fact that you've brought onto the show a very good guest at a very good time, but there's nothing intellectually honest involved in the comment: "You're speaking from a position of white privilege ... " that's nonsense amateur-hour stuff ... come on guys, you can do A LOT better than that
The host is an obnoxious know it all. Very irritating. Bad work. Argue, sure, but keep it coherent and let people finish making their point instead of interrupting.
why dont you say it žižek: let them have their own fascist a little, till now they only exported it to other 3.rd world countries. Now its coming home. Enloy it.
the interviewer is an a--! Doesn't know what he is doing. You are not slavoj zizek, you are not letting him talk! legitimate questions are undermined if one screams at the guest. at one point he is saying "hold on" to zizek!!! he doesn't let zizek to explain his statements and then screams his own views on him!!! Ridiculous!!
If you ask a philosopher for his opinion - let him answer. And if he tells false facts: stop him - but opinions about facts are not " right" or "wrong". You don't have to correct every third word : (
Oh poor Zizek, I am so sorry to see my favorite philosopher confronting a naive “woke” journalist. Thank you for keeping your calm, I’d have small quick slap 👋 to the interviewer
I normally like host but he was so off here and wasn't listening. The Iran deal doesn't have to be destroyed, Obamacare doesn't have to be repealed for what the guest says to happen.
Mehdi has become irritating. There are subtleties and opportunities for insight lost because he insists on playing the combative journalist. It's so unimaginative. Zizek is unorthodox and requires a similar approach. Mehdi may actually be a well researched dullard.
very weird but entertaining interview. mehdi definately seems self-confident and well-spoken, his questions might be very dualistic (things are either black or white, there is no grey even though almost everything is grey imo) but he challenges zizek's views and wants to understand his position. zizek was put into the position of having to defend trump, a guy he can't even vote for and he did fall into his trap, i think. but zizek was right in some points. trump wasn't as dangerous as democrats wanted (and needed) him to be, especially regarding health care. but biden still won against him and he is just as much part of the establishment as clinton and obama.
All the questions mehdi the host asked were relevant and probing but the antagonistic tone in which they were asked makes the host sound rather rude & too cynical. For my part, I agree with the host: trump's victory signalling a "political shakeup" may never even materialise.
I don't blame the host for being emotional in the wake of a Donald Trump victory. But the fact of the matter is yelling about white privilege and bigotry IS NOT GOING TO WORK ANYMORE!
Ha Ha. Never though any one could over talk Zizek. His patience was heroic and he did manage in the end to get his point across. Perhaps Mehedi did it purposely because he did articulate a lot of problematics that many would have in their minds regarding Zizek's position.
i have a message to the interviewer: bro just let him say more than 4-5 words, let him build 2-3 sentences. You will still have the chance to disagree. Wait until he finishes his thoughts and then disagree, if you want to disagree so or so
if i understand zizek correctly, he's trying to say that having trump in office may push socially, economically, and/or culturally marginalized u.s.-dwelling people (e.g., muslims, black people, lgbtq people, women, the undocumented, indigenous people) to actively struggle for liberation to a greater degree than they would have had hillary won. if hillary had won, many marginalized people might have regarded such active struggle as being optional rather than necessary, such that little or no progressive change would occur. trump's victory may function as a wake-up call, a fire under the rear ends of the marginalized, prompting the marginalized to recognize the absolute necessity of here-and-now active struggle for liberation (hence, zizek's assertion @7:20, "for me, the main thing is political mobilization of the left, to break out of the status quo"). of course, the key word here is "may" ( hence, hasan's retort @7:27, "how do you know they're going to break out of it? how do you know they won't just go home depressed and defeated?").
Noitce two things...when he starts talking about Sanders they edited this part 6:27. Its very clear. Also notice the long pause by Hassan when Zizek tells him the establishment candidate was Hillary 7:40. Hilarios!
seems like mehdi is neoliberal apologizing here somewhat of a fundamental misunderstanding of the state of american politics at least a very surface view of the situation.
This host was annoying. I wanted to hear what Zizek had to say. An interviewer isn't supposed to be an interrogator. He wasn't even a good interrogator as Zizek didn't have a chance to explain himself. A more pressing question would be what does he think will happen if we maintain the status quo?
I can't fully agree with Zizek, but I really feel sorry for him. The host was totally unprofessional, rude and impolite. It is so hard to let your guest speak without interrupting and attacking him?
I don't know about other people, but when I watch an interview I expect to hear the interviewed person speak answering intelligent questions. Not giving space for a person to answer, especially one who is speaking in a foreign language, is just bad journalism.
The host ignores some quite obvious points due to his unswerving bias. He doesn't engage in discussion, he attempts to make a spectacle out of disproving Zizek as quickly as possible. This isn't anything, I may as well have the host's ideological bias crammed down my throat directly.
shameful by medhi hassan. he was channelling a fox news interviewer - bringing on a guest to interview whom he already had some enmity towards, and then just ridiculing whatever he said whilst limiting his ability to express himself. i might not agree with slavoj zizek, but i wouldn't know it from this farce of an interview.
Why does such a bad host get the chance to talk to Zizek? What a shame. Really disrespectful host.
I agree totally with the guest.
I'm an American. Democrat my entire life
I wanted Bernie Sanders too.
The middle class needs rescuing now.
Both parties have done nothing for us.
The middle class is in desperate shape and have
resorted to desperate measures in hopes of change.
Don't know how old you are, I guess old enough to change your Party affiliation. It was all a dog and pony show. How can you remain a member when it was all so rigged for Hillary?
The host could use his short term memory to wait for his guest's responses once in while. Maybe the theme of this show , ive never seen it, is that the host has a line of scrutiny like a district attorney. Host completely cant let go of the point that millions of 3rd party progressives had voted nay to incrementalism/ nay to dnc cynicism
Don L I can't bear it. I haven't heard one, of slavs thoughts to the end. Medhi is getting more and more rude and ignorant because he has an axe to grind. I'm done watching him.
He's trying to understand zizek's bogus position. Go back to fox news.
Francisco Sousa No, he's using pretty much the same tactics that got Trump elected: Ignore the argument and go for the balls. That's what the media don't seem to understand - Trump's bigotry is simply the polar opposite of their own. That"s why it appeals to those who've grown sick of the status quo.
Lord. This horrendous rhetoric is everywhere. Sir, please try and make your own arguments, for your cognition's sake. If you don't think for yourself, soon your synapses will atrofiate by reading these pseudo-intelectual blogs and going over the internet regurgitanting this out-of-reality discourse. You wouldn't say anything you just did had you watched the video attentively. I sure hope you just use this insane arguments on the internet. In the real world, you'd sound mentally ill saying that with a straight face.
Tom Bayley lots of "cut offs" distractions and redirect. It's a cheap nasty tactic that Medhi has adopted. He should be ashamed of himself. I wonder how many pieces of silver he is taking, to stir up the flames.
What a terrible interview. Žižek could probably answer all his questions if he wasn't being ping pong'd around by this "host"
Zizek could probably spew more platitudes and non-answers. Go learn what real journalism is.
i got owned on the internet by Francisco Sousa. let everybody see this display of defeat. where should I learn what real journalism is, since you're so smart and well acquainted with the subject? Or will you attack me again for my "ignorant" opinion?
This host is an embarrassment.
Al Jazeera really?,
Mehdi Hassan did his job as a journalist by calling out Zizek's hypocrisy. It wasn't difficult since Zizek had no argument to begin with. Zizek's position is that of an anarchist with no personal ramifications.
@gibran Khan Please, save your yelling for the Trump supporters, some on the left want serious self-reflection regarding what happened.
This debate was not set up to expose the right viewpoint, but so that he could yell over Zizek..
jacobthelioneater Its called journalism. Mehdi asked Zizek pointed questions for which he had no answers. This is not Mehdi's fault. If you feel Mehdi should have given Zizek stone massage then you are free to watch RT propaganda. As for me, I'm evaluating arguments purely. I never mentioned Trump.
Gibran Khan You didn't mention Trump but perhaps you should have considering this is a video about Trump and Mehdi starts the "debate" by asking if Slavoj feels guilty because Trump is so bad. Every time Zizek gets to elaborating, Mehdi raises his voice and reiterates his point.
It really is tiring to watch. How can I learn what Zizek says if Mehdi interrupts him before he gets anywhere? This is exactly the same kind of Bill O'Riley-esque mock debate where he yells more loudly and interrupts frequently. This is not the free exchange of ideas. Was there even a single time where Zizek was allowed to finish before interruption?
It is also ironic to accuse him of hypocrisy consider the left was selling hypocrisy this year. Wall Street-Backed Hillary is not a leftist in any traditional sense. They simply relied on Trump being so bad that liberals would vote out of fear.
I voted Hillary too, but I do not pretend there is no rational reason for not doing so. Perhaps hearing a liberal explain why he would've voted for Trump is what the left needs to stop painting the opposition as 100% racist sexist and evil?
jacobthelioneater Zizek had plenty of time to respond however when he tried to evade the questions, Mehdi held his feet to the fire.
I am tired of watching journalists ask soft ball questions, allowing politicians and opinion makers to just ramble on while evading questions. I consider that an insult to my intelligence.
Again, not sure why you're selling me on Hillary or Trump, I'm not arguing for either.
can someone please shut up the host, so the guest can finish a sentence without being interrupted by the host who can't control his urge to spill Corporate Clinton rhetoric?
Allahu Akbar
Its his job to stop the guest from bullshiting.
@@joeyb3318 his job to bullshit instead of the guest you mean?
@@joeyb3318 Fight bullshit with bullshit?
Mehdi the interviewer is a very poor presenter, he is not a journalist but a bully. this interview is an example. He asks a question, interrupts then asks another question. I think he spoke more than Zizek.... shocking.
Small ears it's like he is a copy cat of O'Reilly
he is, what's the point of having someone like Zizek on the show only to take the opportunity to shoot him down as much as you can, that's not journalism that's playground banter. Bring Sami Zeiden or kamahl santamaria on the show.
You guys just don't know what you're talking about. If you guys don't know what serious journalism is then stop pretending. Have you ever debated someone in real life? Like, outside your bedroom/basement? Only point Zizek (poorly) made was about "Trump shaking up the system", which he's got no evidence to back up which made Mehdi's job very difficult.
k
Clearly this was an attempt from the liberal right to "debunk" or give a bad name through a bad interview to Zizek who lately has been getting a lot of attention putting them on their place.
this host needs to listen a bit. dude
True. He's being so asinine.
Kai McKenzie the host is amazing because he always challenges, and gets the best out of his guests
game300 He cuts the guest off, purposefully misinterprets what he says and shows an overt bias against Trump which prevents anyone saying anything good about his presidency.
People just now heard of adversarial journalism, it seems. To debate a topic, both positions have to be clear. Zizek for the life of him can't make his so.
Francisco Sousa Zizek is pretty clear. The host consistently misinterprets him
This was not a frank discussion. I lost respect for Mehdi.
I'm sure he's devastated.
I'm surprised you had any in the first place. He's a very simple man, and clearly not well read except the latest headlines.
Is this an interview/exchange or an attack?
Jesus Christ, let the guy speak.
You haven't seen the show before, have you?
This host is very unprofessional
But you don't even know what professionalism is because you've never had a steady job.
omg if you have time to reply every comment ... I'm sure you do have an important job lol
Please, attend yourself to make-up tutorials, Paula.
Francisco Sousa
hahahhahaha
It's good to see you care about the health of your face since your brain unfortunately isn't working properly.
what a terrible host
The guy spoke a lot of sense but the interviewer rudely interrupted him at every opportunity .
He’s incapable of asking a question and listening to a response that falls outside the paradigm he subscribes to.
My favourite Zizek interview. Not because of its content, but it's just hilarous how aggressive this host is.
Look how clueless you are. Your comment didn’t age well huh?
The host was perfect for a guy like Zizek, I like Slavoj too but he needs people to put him in his place to make him more productive and think harder
This was useless. Confusing and berating a guest prevents ideas from being revealed. That was hard to watch.
For once Zizek tries giving a concise explanation of his views and the host won't stop interrupting him.
How does it feel to be exempt from the people suffering under this administration? Enjoying the freak show?
Push back from the interviewer needed to be done here. Watch now in 2121 and you will see the idea that Trump will make anything better was short sited at best. Freak show is mild in comparison.
Your comment didn’t age well.
@@Bmmhable How does it feel to be exempt from the greater suffering that occurs when either party is in charge? Both parties bomb Yemen, both parties drone Somalia, both parties parties drone Syria.
Pardon me for not getting excited about your student loan forgiveness for Pell Grant recipients despite this though.
The interviewer needs to stop screaming over Zizek everytime he tries explaining himself, the questions are legitimate but nevertheless shouldn't be used to interrupt him at every turn
The questions are clearly needed to understand Zizek's point before going further in the discussion. How does one not get that?
@@chicox3me not at all, it's a way to straw man his argument instead of listening to what his train of thought actually is.
It is fine for Mehdi to be blunt with his oponent, but interrupting him like this is not a polite way to treating his guest
You haven't seen the show before have you?
Or polite, productive, intelligent, there are no positive qualities to repeatingly talking over your own guests.
Really hope Mehdi reads this: ask your question then shut your mouth until they've answered. It's called manners
he has manners ...arab manners
Its called cutting of bullshit
@lilwondair4836 he is not arab you racist. That is your manner.....
Wish the host would allow Zizek to carry his points through to the end of a sentence.
The host is a total disgrace.
He did his job as a journalist. Amazing, I know.
@@gibrankhan2174 The job of the journalist is to interview people, not interrogate them.
@@gustofzephyr947 The job of a journalist is ask hard question which is what Mehdi did. You can go watch Zizek's talk if you want soft ball questions thrown at him; plenty of that content on TH-cam.
@@gibrankhan2174 maybe he should let zizek finish what he is saying
@@Max-ek3kf Man this wasn't a lecture that Zizek was invited to where he can speak for 2 hours.
the lack of nuance from this host is amusing
The lack of substance from someone who considers himself a philosopher is disconcerting.
I agree with Zizek. We need a shakeup in our way of thinking.
Mehdi, let the guest speak and after that ask your questions.
Moosa Iqbal - he rarely does that.
GEEZUS Dude, let Zizek talk!
For a moment i tought i was watching CNN.
Zizek was right on the money.
He doesn't understand the point -_-
No, It's Colombia
fire this host already he's incompetent
The host seems to prefer to attack his guests rather than have a debate. Just attack, attack, attack.
This interviewer was the worst. He was so aggressive, accusatory and bombastic. What was his purpose as journalist?
WTF Mehdi, stop your 'paid' propaganda.
This interviewer is the worst.
Too emotional. Use logic and rationality to counter arguement, pal!
Pieter Maas I think Zizek was saying that Trump would disrupt the political establishment by galvanising the left to rally against him and become more vocal which could lead to a true liberal like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders being elected in the next cycle because Trump polarises the issues at hand. This allows the status quo of the left being complacent and accepting half a loaf (Hillary) instead of nothing (Trump) to be ended and for the left to become more powerful and outspoken. He thinks Trump's somewhat of a paper tiger because the wall, repealing of Obamacare, ripping up of the Iran deal and the ban on all Muslims are things that he probably won't implement to even nearly the degree he was claiming on the campaign trail if at all. This is supported by facts. Trump is already softening his stances on these issues in interviews.
This is my problem with cult like following of people. When they make no sense as Zizek is, you can't see it. The damage Trump had caused and continues to cause (see Supreme Court picks), who will reverse it?
@@caimaccoinnich9594 guess who's wrong now?
Zizek is a "leftist" who somehow always comes out in support of imperialists, white nationalists and the far-right and somehow always stands on the opposite side of the oppressed. It's *_dialectical_*, you won't understand.
ʻabd allāh He's like a video gamer that sets the difficulty too high because he thinks he's going to win.
The host isn't giving his interviewee much chance to speak and is using a horriblly disfunctiional interviewer style. I turned in because I would like to hear what Zizek has to say. The frequency of aggressive interruptions means that it isn't possible to catch much of what Zizek might have been trying to say. And the host isn't even coherent. In my book the host gets a rating of 1 out of 10 for the quality of this interview - the single positive point is for having someone on the show who sounds as though he might have some interesting thoughts to share. A good interview would have allowed the guest to speak.
It is his job to stop the guest from bullshitting and put the heat on him. If you want the guest to speak without host that is criticial, then watch Fox News
Love a bit of Zizek. But makes a change to see someone challenge, and stop him rabbiting on and meandering.
Someone fire this host. Or at least gag him.
After 3 years, we can see zizek was right
I'm actually a Zizkek fan but was he right? I don't think Biden is the result of a establishment shake up he (Zizke) imagined after Trump. Instead its as you were in the democratic party. But I'm with Zizek, it was worth a go because things would have been as dire with Clinton as with Trump, just hidden.
@@LuisPerez-tx5jo I don't think the results of a shake-up would be so readily visible. Perhaps it would be clearer if we revisited this moment in a few years time; After all, hindsight is always 20/20.
You are delusional.
@@minhyukjang I will be bumping this. You will be wrong. Why can I already tell? Why could Medhi? Why can’t you? Even worse, why are you a b*tch?
No it's worse. Politics are super polarized and Biden's presidency and the far-left have embolden Trump and his supporters.
Children should not be allowed as hosts for such a news channel. A fool entirely inept of any conversational intellect has been handed the microphone. Pity, Zizek's ideas put forth a genuinely interesting perspective but fell upon deaf ears. Lost my little respect for this channel of news.
I believe Mehdi's style of interviewing is to bring out the emotional aspect of the interviewee to let the truth out. When a person is emotionally charged, he will show his true thoughts without any 2nd considerations.
I think this interview was a good one and both have very relevant points.
An intellectual isn't moved by emotion.
Look Mehdi...... everyone is trying to listen to the intellectual academic world renowned philosopher in today's modern times......So Mehdi shut up!!!! so that we can listen the guests point of view finish a sentence.
Big Zizek fan, but it's really good to finally see a video challenging one of his positions instead of acting like he has all of the answers!
I couldn't hear a one full sentence from Zizek because this guy! an awful interview.
"speaking from a position of white privilege" --- WTF!!! I like the fact that you've brought onto the show a very good guest at a very good time, but there's nothing intellectually honest involved in the comment: "You're speaking from a position of white privilege ... " that's nonsense amateur-hour stuff ... come on guys, you can do A LOT better than that
Despite the large table, I bet the host was still covered in spit.
I think the host was educated with American media
Oxford actually
great interview. mahdi just proved the that idea trump will 'shake up the system' is baseless utopian vision.
the host is extremely irritating, let people answer when he asks a question... You're Fired!
Terrible interview.
One of the best journalists to exist.👍
He was spot on with every comment here
"white privilege" when he's slovenian lmao
The host is an obnoxious know it all. Very irritating. Bad work. Argue, sure, but keep it coherent and let people finish making their point instead of interrupting.
why dont you say it žižek: let them have their own fascist a little, till now they only exported it to other 3.rd world countries.
Now its coming home. Enloy it.
Zizek is inconsistent incoherent and illogical.
Is this the guy (the interviewer) from the argument clinic in Monty Pyton?
Is this an interview or a monologue of the host?
the interviewer is an a--! Doesn't know what he is doing. You are not slavoj zizek, you are not letting him talk! legitimate questions are undermined if one screams at the guest. at one point he is saying "hold on" to zizek!!! he doesn't let zizek to explain his statements and then screams his own views on him!!! Ridiculous!!
I'm a big fan of Mehdi, but maybe he should've just posted a monologue to make his points. Rather than having on a notable philosopher to talk over.
If you ask a philosopher for his opinion - let him answer. And if he tells false facts: stop him - but opinions about facts are not " right" or "wrong". You don't have to correct every third word : (
Horrible host, let the man speak instead of interrupting and saying the same things over and over.
This interviewer is worse than Bill O'Reilly.
Oh poor Zizek, I am so sorry to see my favorite philosopher confronting a naive “woke” journalist. Thank you for keeping your calm, I’d have small quick slap 👋 to the interviewer
hahahahaha the interviewer actually said "white privilege"
he never let zizek make his point, why bring an intellectual on if you're gonna constantly talk over him
I normally like host but he was so off here and wasn't listening. The Iran deal doesn't have to be destroyed, Obamacare doesn't have to be repealed for what the guest says to happen.
Mehdi has become irritating. There are subtleties and opportunities for insight lost because he insists on playing the combative journalist. It's so unimaginative. Zizek is unorthodox and requires a similar approach. Mehdi may actually be a well researched dullard.
Interviewer asks fair questions but doesn't give sufficient space for his guest to answer and elaborate. Very frustrating.
very weird but entertaining interview. mehdi definately seems self-confident and well-spoken, his questions might be very dualistic (things are either black or white, there is no grey even though almost everything is grey imo) but he challenges zizek's views and wants to understand his position. zizek was put into the position of having to defend trump, a guy he can't even vote for and he did fall into his trap, i think. but zizek was right in some points. trump wasn't as dangerous as democrats wanted (and needed) him to be, especially regarding health care. but biden still won against him and he is just as much part of the establishment as clinton and obama.
All the questions mehdi the host asked were relevant and probing but the antagonistic tone in which they were asked makes the host sound rather rude & too cynical. For my part, I agree with the host: trump's victory signalling a "political shakeup" may never even materialise.
I dont think this view has aged well...
"host"
"Interviewer"
Fire Mehdi Hasan if you want to save your network's credibility.
Why ask them a question if you don't want them to be answered?
Why invite a guest, if you want to have a monologue?
I don't blame the host for being emotional in the wake of a Donald Trump victory. But the fact of the matter is yelling about white privilege and bigotry IS NOT GOING TO WORK ANYMORE!
Ha Ha. Never though any one could over talk Zizek. His patience was heroic and he did manage in the end to get his point across. Perhaps Mehedi did it purposely because he did articulate a lot of problematics that many would have in their minds regarding Zizek's position.
I can't watch this. This isn't Head to Head, Mehdi. You're completely shutting down Slavoj and his rather unique points coming from the radical left.
Mehdi thinks this is another Oxford Union debate. Let the man complete a sentence!
i have a message to the interviewer: bro just let him say more than 4-5 words, let him build 2-3 sentences. You will still have the chance to disagree. Wait until he finishes his thoughts and then disagree, if you want to disagree so or so
The host his horrible. Keep your ego in check. He acts like a college student.
Mehdi i have a lot of time for but this was a shocking interview style. The interruptions were absurd.
انتظر لحظة Slavoj speaks on many other videos in detail so be sure to hear him out in full ininterrupted there guys.
I never saw zizek in a suit always rocking t-shirts.
Watch the the perverts guide to ideology
I really wanted to know what Slavoj Zizek was trying to say :/
if i understand zizek correctly, he's trying to say that having trump in office may push socially, economically, and/or culturally marginalized u.s.-dwelling people (e.g., muslims, black people, lgbtq people, women, the undocumented, indigenous people) to actively struggle for liberation to a greater degree than they would have had hillary won. if hillary had won, many marginalized people might have regarded such active struggle as being optional rather than necessary, such that little or no progressive change would occur. trump's victory may function as a wake-up call, a fire under the rear ends of the marginalized, prompting the marginalized to recognize the absolute necessity of here-and-now active struggle for liberation (hence, zizek's assertion @7:20, "for me, the main thing is political mobilization of the left, to break out of the status quo"). of course, the key word here is "may" ( hence, hasan's retort @7:27, "how do you know they're going to break out of it? how do you know they won't just go home depressed and defeated?").
Mehdi's arrogance is staggering.
The host is obnoxious.
Fire this man. Why invite a guest if we can’t allow him to finish a thought?
Noitce two things...when he starts talking about Sanders they edited this part 6:27. Its very clear. Also notice the long pause by Hassan when Zizek tells him the establishment candidate was Hillary 7:40. Hilarios!
seems like mehdi is neoliberal apologizing here
somewhat of a fundamental misunderstanding of the state of american politics at least a very surface view of the situation.
Oh how wrong he was!
It's not necessary for the host to be that aggressive when his guest is trying to be peaceful rationale
This host was annoying. I wanted to hear what Zizek had to say. An interviewer isn't supposed to be an interrogator. He wasn't even a good interrogator as Zizek didn't have a chance to explain himself. A more pressing question would be what does he think will happen if we maintain the status quo?
I can't fully agree with Zizek, but I really feel sorry for him. The host was totally unprofessional, rude and impolite. It is so hard to let your guest speak without interrupting and attacking him?
I don't know about other people, but when I watch an interview I expect to hear the interviewed person speak answering intelligent questions. Not giving space for a person to answer, especially one who is speaking in a foreign language, is just bad journalism.
The host ignores some quite obvious points due to his unswerving bias. He doesn't engage in discussion, he attempts to make a spectacle out of disproving Zizek as quickly as possible. This isn't anything, I may as well have the host's ideological bias crammed down my throat directly.
shameful by medhi hassan. he was channelling a fox news interviewer - bringing on a guest to interview whom he already had some enmity towards, and then just ridiculing whatever he said whilst limiting his ability to express himself. i might not agree with slavoj zizek, but i wouldn't know it from this farce of an interview.
What a terrible interviewer wasting everybody's time.
This is like Fox News. Don't talk over your guest. Exchange.
This journalist had just one focus...
Forget it
Let Slavoj speak.
Best interviewer ever.
Very good questions Mehdi but give the guy time to respond
Mehdi is asking important questions, i like the bluntness because most of Slavoj Zizeks arguments can be anticipated halfway through.