ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ธ.ค. 2016
- Slavoj Žižek on Refugees, Conservatism, and Cultural Incompatibility
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How did we get to this refugee crisis? Newton’s Third Law. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It’s something we may not consciously clock as we hear news and see devastating photographs of migrants crossing dangerous waters in crowded boats, fleeing for their lives. Why is this happening? If you rewind the history of these countries, tracing political event to event, you’ll find the firestarter - and more often than not, it's a long arm that has reached past its own border to interfere in another country.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK:
Slavoj Žižek is a Slovenian philosopher and cultural critic. He is a professor at the European Graduate School, International Director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, Birkbeck College, University of London, and a senior researcher at the Institute of Sociology, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. His books include Living in the End Times, First as Tragedy, Then as Farce, In Defense of Lost Causes, four volumes of the Essential Žižek, and Event: A Philosophical Journey Through a Concept.
Žižek received his Ph.D. in Philosophy in Ljubljana studying Psychoanalysis. He has been called the "Elvis of philosophy" and an "academic rock star." His work calls for a return to the Cartesian subject and the German Ideology, in particular the works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling. Slavoj Žižek's work draws on the works of Jacques Lacan, moving his theory towards modern political and philosophical issues, finding the potential for liberatory politics within his work. But in all his turns to these thinkers and strands of thought, he hopes to call forth new potentials in thinking and self-reflexivity. He also calls for a return to the spirit of the revolutionary potential of Lenin and Karl Marx.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Slavoj Žižek: We who try to be decent people are bombarded by some kind of moral political pressure from two sides: First there is the worst one, of course, this anti-immigrant populous side like why should we even allow refugees in; it's their fault; third world travel and so on, there are enough poor people here; they come from another civilization; it means conflict and so on and so on. So there is all the time this pressure of we are defending our way of life; refugees are disturbing it. And it's interesting how in some radical right wing circles we really have already new conspiracy theories, which always fascinate me in their madness.
A couple of weeks ago the main Slovenia, I'm a coming from Slovenia, right wing weekly journal something like, Slovene Time Magazine, published a comment by a guy, which was a ferocious attack on George Soros, the humanitarian billionaire, claiming that he's the most disgusting despicable and dangerous person today in the world because he's a Jew who is organizing Muslim invasion into Europe. The guy uses totally open brutal terms like Negroid Islamist hoards are invading Europe. Claiming that the Jewish plan is to destroy Christian Europe and they're using Muslims to do it. Why do I like, I mean don't misunderstand me I'm horrified at it, But why do I "like" this fantasy? Because it goes to the end and it brings together two different levels of conspiracy theory. One is Muslim invasion of Europe and the other is anti-Semitism.
Usually we think that there is some kind of a conflict in the Middle East between Palestinians or Muslims and Jews. This theory claims this is an appeared conflict to dilute us. In reality even the Muslim terrorists, all of them, Isis, it's a Zionist creation to ruin Europe. In the good old fashion or Stalinist way you know how fascists spoke about plutocratic Bolshevik plot, you bring the opposites together; they're doing this. So, not to get lost this is one blackmail. But then now things get much more problematic for some liberal leftist. Then there is the other blackmail, the humanitarian blackmail like poor suffering immigrants coming to Europe desperate; is Europe still Europe? Is it using its heart? How can we see all those people suffering and so on and so on? I basically, of course, agreed with this second position. I none the less think there is something terribly wrong in this automatic retranslation of, I don't want to call it a crisis but whatever you call it what's happening with refugees into a pure humanitarian problem, which is ou...
For the full transcript, check out bigthink.com/videos/slavoj-zi...
Want to get Smarter, Faster?
Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter
I have to give Slavoj a lot of credit. He's really trying to tackle extremely nuanced topics with all its nuances. As opposed to just looking at the issues in a very shallow manner. That's why it seems he's polarizing. Most people just don't want to deal with the nuances. Because it's uncomfortable and difficult. But nonetheless important and integral to fundamentally changing the way we think about the issues going on.
It is a paradox by itself. Most of the population are not smart enough to understand the global issues or motivated enough to deal with the issues. Yet, without knowing anything, the joint ignorance in a democratic society still creates consequences that everyone needs to bear. How can you solve that?
@@frankxu4795 By informing citizens
@@insanekos1 and then it becomes authoritarianism when you start lying to them for personal benefit
@@sai63836 I think the majority of people can't maintain a long enough chain of thought to understand / listen to these nuances. I'm pretty sure everyone here watching this is well educated. It also involves a lot of complex words and concepts and chains of thought.
Open discussion is never going to happen. Most people don't want to be involved in politics. And by counting on media for information, they're being fed whatever this media outlet is paid to feed the masses.
There's a fundamental problem in distilling these complex problems to the general population. Having an open discussion with everyone is a distant pipe dream. Never going to happen. Specially not today with societies growing to such scales. And this distillation can't simply be through media outlets. Cause then propaganda comes into play.
One solution I can think of is giving people an undeniable source of truth, that makes it easy to conduct the research they need. Imagine a search engine that searches logical facts and topics and maintains these chains of thoughts with all the nuances to be explored on demand. But even this seems like a distant pipe dream.
He’s a real philosopher, and that’s how real philosophy works.
"If we don't approach these topics openly in a public we are just feeding the anti-immigrant populists." THIS.
Weston Wilson agreed. What I think most decent, reasonable people on the left don't understand is that for I believe most people who are fundamentally against these immigration policies, they don't hate individual migrants for not being of the sale ethnic background. That's ignorant or dishonest. There are serious economic, political and cultural issues that drive these sentiments and very little of ikt actually has to do with hating people. A lot of the populist movements stem from dissatisfaction from a lot of people toward their government sstablishents who insisted on engaging in foreign interventionism and proxy wars that caused much of the destabilization when a significant portion of European (and Americana nd western citizens in general) didn't want those nations' communities and societies to be destroyed in the first place. Now those governments are forcing their own people to accept the blowback when they didn't even want to do what caused it in the first place. My point is that aside from a small minority, most of this anti-immigration sentiment doesn't actually stem from racist hatred of people who don't look like them, but if the establishment left keeps trying to censor and silence free speech, free expression and open discussion and debate on such issues (or in general), Zizek's prediction will be absolutely right. Such suppression of speech will foment actual bigotry amd resentment toward immigrants themselves.
Some awsome nonsense from this quasi-intellectual. A small minority of war-industry Tony Blairs caused trouble in Libya, Iraq, etc, and "therefore" it makes policy sense to have everyone-elses' europe radically undermined by mass immigration of people who (in large part) totally lack our own cultural values. In reality there is no valid "therefore" there.
Vash: Who is "we"?
Also, what exactly are you advocating when you say "cut the head of the snake"? Be precise.
Weston Wilson Seems like both ends of the political system lack this type of common sense thinking
Weston Wilson ... While he openly discusses these topics in public.
I grew up as a Muslim in an Arab country and I totally agree Slavoj Zizek. The west have to set limits. I'm sorry but nobody in the world should respect traditions that goes against human rights.
Red/white
Red/white
And I totally agree with you as a person in a country which is mostly Muslim. I also would like to add that it makes me sick when some politicians or people in Muslim countries say that human rights is not universal, because it doesn't take into account some "traditions" or "religious beliefs". This bullshit makes me so sick.
Muslim? so what? .. you may be a Shia'a Muslim, and just propagating against the majority of refugees who are Sunnis. Or you may be just someone siding with the faction that is causing these refugees to flee.
Don't play the "I'm a Trumpist Muslim", or "I'm a Nazi jew" card, sorry, but this doesn't work, it is pathetic and repugnant. Refugees in Europe need to be regulated whether you are Muslim or not.
Oh my god, what have they done to you?
Islam, Christianity, Judaism. Do you know who invented these religions? ... it is us, Levantine Semite people. And I tell you.. all these religions must go to trash. Religion as a whole is THE problem, not some small group of it.
Plus, you can be an atheist and still criticize Human Rights, you may be some kind of misantrhope, or some humanitarian worker who worked in refugee camps and war zones and realized that Human Rights are just a bullshit dogma designed to sedate people and honey-talk them so they don't really act.
HomsianCam You say fuck human rights but also fuck Saudi Arabia. wouldn't Saudi Arabia be the perfect place for someone who doesn't like human rights?
"I am not afraid to speak as a leftist moral conservative" --i had to pause to calibrate that position on my ideological map
He's not the only one out there. I also am a (moderate) leftist moral conservative. I've heard rumors that there may be one or two more of us out there.
@@uberultrametamega946 you and zizek are not similiar. He is a Marxist and a communist.
@@bruhmoment5034 you don't understand Zicek's humor.
European politics are just waaaay more interesting, fruitful and juicy when it comes to political positions. It really helps you see the flow of thought.
I dont get it
7:46 - the rare Žižek double sniff
sniff and rub and repeat, always repeat
Come Mierda yup, you always know if zizek is moving away from you because the time between the rub and the sniff appear farther apart
an asshole - next round we make him skip
Its all that cocaine he snorts up his post-Marxist nose...
2:41 too
i feel like most of the "academic left" has forgotten the struggles of the working class people. i am in no way a fan of zizeks politics, but you have to give him respect for talking honestly about real problems.
The academic left has always had a problem with shitting on the working class in some form or another. Ivory towers.
One of the best points made by Zizek is one that I'm constantly trying to explain to people, is this idea of separating the struggles of social equality and oppression from economic equality and oppression. These things go hand in hand, it's like trying to only fix a flat tire when you also have a bent axle. You may get the ruling class to stop oppressing certain groups, but only to the same extent that they oppress everyone else through economic exploitation. Everyone is still oppressed as a group, no matter if men and women are equal, that's the goal of Neoliberal economics, at its very core, to keep the power in the hands of those who have it, and give it to those who are willing to exploit their community.
Im more than willing to exploit my community. Where do I sign up??
@@swine13 See yourself as a victim constantly and accuse your critics of not understanding your victimhood by calling them bigots.
Unlike left-wing ideologies, neoliberalism has no prescribed goal. It is a system that steers toward profit-maximization, hyper-individualism, etc. yes. But it has no goal, certainly not that the "ruling class" keep the others down. That's some bona fide commie talk. I am lower middle class in a neoliberal society and I can move up - nobody's keeping me down ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Try that in any left-wing authoritarian state; there, you have an actual ruling class and then everybody else. Sorry to say so, but capitalism is rocket fuel for boosting social mobility.
Who made the subtitles lmao? How can you misinterpret "high theory" as Guy Fieri?
Puse 😂😂😂
Same thing right
I don't understand the difference.
@@Red-Brick-Dream hahaha
Why do you need subtitles if you can understand him lol
"Every religion is problematic" Indeed...
To me it's the fundamental problem. Here, the consensus is to keep religion out of politics, and I bet most of us wouldn't give that up just to accommodate people, no matter where they come from and what's their struggle.
Octopus On Fire I agree that the fundamentalists are FAR worse. But I stand by my extrapolation.
not religion. intolerance
Indira Poitier Typically religion = intolerance of others not part of that religion...
I don't agree.
As a bleeding heart liberal, Zizek is preaching to me. When he goes on about being patronizing, it really hit me hard; my friends (and often myself) have definitely fallen into this trap. What he goes on to say about conservatives is equally as valid.
Wish I could pick this guy's brain over a few drinks. Thank you Zizek.
I am curious as to the psychology of this. What led bleeding heart liberals in the West to be patronising to people of colour / those from the Global South?
Boy I think you really hit the jackpot with this Zizek series. Thank you!
Very interesting ideas. It's not just about blind support for refugee migration. A very important topic of day to day confrontation with difference and policy is being ignored. It's important to discuss those small community issues and how best to resolve them. Just like it is of extreme importance to discuss them when dealing with household cohabitation. The day to day ordinary differences are the ones that pile up and create resentment among communities. We shouldn't ignore them for the sake of 'respecting ways of life', that may be well and good in the abstract, but fails to see the reality of community creation and continuous ordinary life. Which is the bread and butter of villages, cities and countries as a whole.
well said.
The burden of assimilating foreign people is always on the host country, even at the cost to their own wellbeing. The same leftists who will bend over backwards and go as far as to compromise their own egalitarian values to accommodate someone else's culture don't have an ounce of respect for the host countries culture and history.
The problem with addressing intercommunal issues is that they're always ruled into the favor of "oppressed" minorities while "oppresser" Europeans just have to be punished and humiliated for the audacity of complaining or being an unaccomadating host. Indigenous people are expected to be endlessly patient and compassionate, while migrants complain about the country being too different for their taste.
He really has a BigThink in every video he is in on this channel thats what I want to see more of on this channel
For the entire video, all Slavoj is encouraging us to do is to look into many tricky topics in more detail before assuming that they can be solved quickly and try to be critical. He keeps underlining that he does not deny the difficulty of the subjects we must deal with as a society. Before closing yourself to his points, please, think twice. That's all he is asking. To think before we act or judge.
I've heard it rumored that he keeps the wisdom in his nose. I subscribe to this.
Not wisdom, cocaine.
@Steven Thompson I've seen it more than ten years... is it possible to have himself heavily addicted that long???
@@architheia9443 he doesn t do coke. He has tourette syndrome
hahahahaha
I absolutely love this man. But seriously, if a puddle of mud could talk, it would sound like this guy.
The Family Photo that was a very ignorant comment.
@@camerontaylor7471 Ignorant in what way?
Zizek would love this comment, it's the kind of politically incorrect obscenity that brings people closer.
He sounds like a whooopy cushion
@@mjames7674 I don't think even they know
UNSUBBED!! What is this moderate, realistic and sane video that Big Think is providing? Seriously, they are watering down the voices of the radical liberals and the extreme right. I don't come here to be educated, I come here to see people lose their shit in the comment section.
lol
Hahahahahaha
Funny how he avoids saying China (in Africa), instead naming other non-eu countries.
I wonder if the dislikes are mainly from leftists or the right? Anyhow I belive he's onto something
He is
I don't think they're from a political side; I'm betting they're from the kids who come to this channel looking to be told what to think and say instead of to hear someone else's thoughts, and they don't like that he isn't easy to listen to and regurgitate.
you could say leftists support muslims more, as they are more pro immigration. Rightists are on the other side against immigration of muslims
nemesis962074 I grew up as a Muslim, my whole family is Muslim. And I'm European leftist, that means far left haha. But I agree with Zizek 100 percent. No country should sacrifice their humanitarian values just to please out dates traditions from 1500 years ago.
I'm basically on the 2nd side Zizek describes here, and consider myself a far leftist(Anarcho-Communist) but i mostly agree with him, we shouldn't have to overly change our society for old backwards ideologies.
"We really have already new conspiracy theories, which fascinate me in their madness" lmao relatable
Good thinking Slavoj thanks for yet another explanation
I think the solution to this dilemma may be so simple that the "my roof, my rules" saying is all we need to apply .
That being said, since an international citizen seems or unfortunately is an utopian dream due to religious, cultural and moral differences, every country should impose its standards on immigrants within the scope of human rights.
How about this, just apply the law you apply to natives. Problem solved.
slavo should be handcuffed during his interviews
Schnupfndrache7 why?
Nooo, I think he has extra brains in his hands, let him use them.
Why in the world would you want immigrants coming to Europe, living off social security and demanding same cultural conditions as where they ran from? I don't get that reasoning.
One of his most important points is his criticism of western liberal centrists who tend to overemphasize identity politics over economic issues. This is not casual since they are simply the human cosmopolitan face of neoliberal economics. As such this is why the real left wing is also critical of these liberal centrists like Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair, and the rest of the liberalized social democratic parties in europe. If the left wing in the US and Europe wants to have a chance it needs to come out openly againts this corporate liberalism and the disasters and tyranny of the EU. Otherwise the far right and the racists will be seen as the only real alternative to this "rainbow" neoliberalism
Ecléctico Iconoclasta class identity is also identity.
@@tarimali4466 Maybe, but is not only about "identity", is also about economy.
You maybe think this is an idiotic thinking, but it is not. The social-democrats are using women's rights, LGTB rights and cultural/religious diversity as their main electoral promises, as their way to difference themselves from the right wing. And please, don't think I am a conservative, all those ideas are great. But the main idea behind the left should be "economy", most focused in the rights of the working class. Because, if not, they are only "right-wing with liberal views on society". This has happened with the Labour Party in the UK, the PSOE in Spain, the PS in France and Portugal. I would say the Democrat Party in the US, but everyone who knows about American politics knows that they are still entering the social-democrat thinking.
Some people think that the left has not recovered from the dissapearence of the Soviet Union. In my opinion, that is not the case. The problem is that the "industrial working classes" have dissapear in the West. Industrial works are each time decreasing due to globalization and technological advancements in robotics, so right now the tradicional idea of "proletariat" is death. The new working classes are in the services sector. They work as bartenders, waiters, working in the office of some multinacional bussiness, etc.
And, because they think that work is different from the industrial work, they pride themselves with being "middle class". I remember one time a friend of mine said, when I and my friends were talking about socialism, "How can you think about communism when we are all middle class?". He was unemployed, living with his parents because he had no money to live of his own. When we got out at night, we had sometimes to pay his drinks because of the economical problems he had. And yet, because he had a degree in English language, even if it didn't serve him to get a job, he was "middle class" because "poor people don't have university studies".
Again, we have to redifine what the "proletarian" is. What is a "worker". Because, if not, we are leaving society to the paradox of a unified "middle class". Everyone is "middle class". Hell, I even think the homeless will think they are "middle class" if the TV says it enough times.
The result: we are seeing it today.
Due do the economical crisis, right now we have the "richest richs" and the "poorest poors" in the last 50 years. Social inequality has seen some of the worst cases in our history, with banks buying enterprises by billions of dollars while its workers are all making the minimal pay.
By this time, the "lost generation", the generation that has studied in the university to not get a job, or to have to inmigrate to another country to even work as a bartender, should be voting the most radical left idelogy that exists in its electoral system. And yet, communists parties are down. The democratic socialist have improved their results, but using populist slogans and ended up being "radical social-democracy", that means, they just say the social-democrats are not radical enough and end up being the same "with some extra-oil".
And what are the working classes voting? They are voting Trump, voting the populists movements in France, Italy and Germany. Voting Brexit. I would not talk about Brazil because that is a completelly different thing. Why? Because the right-wing populists have convinced them. "It's all the fault of the globalists" And they are right. The problem is when those right-wing populists then give tax shelters to the same bussiness that are making profit out of globalism. Trump would say "Muslims are invading Europe" when thousands of refugees go to our countries, but he would not open his mouth when some of the most profitable enterprises in the US are being bought by Saudi Arabia.
@@alberum8442 You know your stuff... Saudis have money in Uber and many other places... We have truly returned to Feudalism as explained by Sam Vaknin...
@@tarimali4466 class is not an identity. A proletarian is someone who sells their labor power to survive, period, even if you don't see yourself this way. Capitalism and imperialism still do.
Totally agree. Serious debate on the issue needs to be done immediately.
I would pay 50 dollars to see him do magic.
51
Can you put it on youtube?
Mike Oxsbigg 60
I wanna see him doing coke.
Thats just a guy doing coke, magic is a whole showcase of slight of hand and showmanship.
Anyone can do coke.
I remember seeing this (or something similar) years ago and finding it interesting but unconvincing. Watching it again now, I think he was ahead of his time on these issues.
Today is the first time I saw this, sad but true. There are often issues that we ignored spiral out of control.
Gift this man a handkerchief.
Cesar Gonz It's called OCD... And it's not a joke...
Cesar Gonz coke coke coke
Cesar Gonz No, that would impede his natural flow. He has perfected something special here.
hes old slav is natural.
The part at the end is actually completely brilliant
Daniel Pluchinotta is this comment to make us actually watch till the end?
I felt like he's on to something but I got confused by all the sniffling. Can you write what you think the essence of his last statement is?
I turned the subtitles on and turned the volume down to a less distracting level... hope that helps!
Based on his point about Bernie Sanders, I read him as saying that the more we focus solely on PC and LGBT etc and not tap into the basic socio-economic struggles then we are doomed. Not sure if others would agree.
@@kruxboard This is what most young leftists agree on. Many of us have completely abandoned the Democratic party in the United States because they continue to miss the forest for the trees, so to speak. They focus on identity politics rather than the socioeconomic conditions that give rise to such politics.
I love this guy , someone shake his hand
;)
Total ideology and so on *SNIFF*
I guess that's why he's on TV and you're still here talking shit on youtube 😅
I wish all Marxists were this thoughtful.
You can say that for any group of ists.
Very interesting points! A different view than I have had but I see how what he says could be true
It's always a pleasure to listen to this guy
One of the better, more coherent or at least organized soliloquies of his. Makes very good sense.
We have AI capable of interpreting Slavoj Zizek's speech into captions. The future is now.
Am I for or against immigration?
Well, I'm not for or against rain. Too much, you get floods. Too little you get droughts.
Is there, then, a "right amount" of immigration? Maybe there isn't. Maybe there is but it's always changing and it's different for different regions. Hopefully it's wide enough to not spiral into chaos trying to be within it. Hopefully when it goes to one extreme, there is some way we are activated and can confirm as a society to listen to the other side.
My main problem with mass migration is that it's not good FOR most immigrants. We create ghettos with nation and ethnic-segregated communities because we foolishly believe that simply living in a first world country solves their problems. We haven't solved the problems in their former country and now we keep creating problems for them even in their new country. If they're working professionals, then we just reduced their former country's ability to improve, or as some people call it "brain drain". We fail to integrate people into these societies creating growing social unrest. WE DON'T GIVE THEM A PLACE TO CALL HOME. That's why they still identify with their former country even if they're given citizenship. They don't identify, to put it sardonically, as part of the evil capitalist colonialist West like the privileged white liberal likes to call themselves.
On the other extreme end, since people in academia are mostly on the political left, particularly in fields directly related to politics, we take it as a moral a priori that there should be immigration. Even Zizek is aware of this saying "of course this is bad" to the extreme right but people perceive him to be "nuanced" (which he is, but notice the tonal difference) when criticizing the extreme left. This is why we are vastly inexperienced in calmly defending and arguing for our position and often resort to ad hominem attacks. We are not accustomed to speaking with an articulate and well-reasoned person from the other side, particularly in this matter. We say we like things like their food, culture, jobs they fulfill, etc. as if immigrants are just good moral window dressing for our civilization. It's perverse. We should let them be part of our civilization instead of creating polarised groups with growing prejudice in both directions. We seem to value them not as individuals but as the benefactors to adding to our civilization that ironically we hate so much, or at least more than any other existing today. We should WANT people to be American, German, French, Swedish, etc. and not just buy off our conscience by living alongside them, sometimes going to a Jamaican festival or Indian restaurant like we just bought people off so we don't have to travel to experience their culture, instead of being WITH them having a pint together, getting our kids to play with each other in the playground, going to concerts with, going to medschool together, etc.
I apologise for the us/them verbage. I'm a first generation immigrant, but I needed to argue from the perspective of the recipient nation to argue and not be perceived as taking a side. From my experience, the extreme on one side don't mind the criticisms for the other side but are enraged to read criticisms for their side, as if we had selective blindness for our ideological concerns.
I am taking my lunch while watching you speak. I enjoyed your good speech and off course, the way you do with your nose. Thanks a lot.
22:33 It is not to keep DISTANCE from those different struggles, but to realize they are different AXIS of intersectionality which leads to say one can work out each one somehow independently. Because it does happen more or less independently throughout other civilizations.
Very lucid analysis of the refugee crisis facing Europe. I wonder who of the other public intellectuals could pull off anything similar. I think that nobody comes near to Zizek in terms of potential audience size anyways. Besides, Big Think looks like a great platform for Zizek, allowing him to articulate his thoughts in an understandable manner.
Many eastern European countries are now paying the price for skilled and non skilled workers leaving their home countries but very few people want to talk about it as it would be an admission of failure.
This video will be extremely relevant in the next years or so
can confirm in neu-right neoliberal America it has only been getting more relevant every day. people are violently uncomfortable to even discuss the problem, as the wound of the outstanding ideology of personal responsibility (and the imagined ability to solve global problems with nice words and gestures) festers and grows closer to total collective collapse. community outside the church or work exists with great effort and constant increasing compromise on the very things that make us human.
My Man is tweekin' hard. I love it!! Good message
5:13 "We are deeply responsible for them" -- so important and not said enough. So many of these people are fleeing from conflicts that we (the West, Europe, the US) caused.
+lemondrizzlecake
When did Sweden bomb Syria? By the way, 1$rael is the one responsible for ALL of the conflicts in the Middle East, ESPECIALLY the situation in Syria. Why haven't they taken any refugees?
When he says we he mean zionist jews right?
@@lucasgrey9794 economical neocolonialism wich sweden i also at fault
@@Andrea-fd2bw How is Sweden also at fault? Because they're white? You Libsharts are truly on another level of vile and despicable.
i would like to translate the subtitles in italian, my native language, and add them to the video? can someone tell me if it is possible or what is the best way to do it? tnx..
Best drinking game- Take a shot every time Slavoj rubs his nose.
lol one would fucking die :p
LOL!!!!
Tried with milk (I like my liver too much) and literally couldn’t swallow fast enough at times
Only Hitchens would survive that...
@@akibh3022 Hitchens could have survived anything
Just respect the law of land. and dont use faith as excuse. then evey immigrant are accepted every where.
Abhijeet Sharma Just act White guys and everything will be fine
"in rome act like romans"- or at least like a Roman version of yourself.
but most of the times the law of the land is based on faith
Tridink
Since the Industrial Revolution, the law of the land in Europe is mostly secular, though.
How about an 8 year old who is illiterate in his own language sitting in a classroom in France. That's going to work out. You guys esssentialized the problem into a legal one - the Muslim problem stretches across the entire social/cultural everything they are problems in economic terms, political, demographic, public safety, sanitation, and even just everyday politeness - they don't know what a handshake is sometimes - - the easier task would be to figure out where they are not problematic - but that will actually be hard to because you will be searching for a long time before you find something - - you will have to sift through pages and pages of public record - - court documents - - census records - - tax code etc you get the point
I habe been trying to explain this to western people, but it's very hard to convince them, that the comfort that they enjoy means the exploration of a third world country.
it eats at me daily. not even just the unfathomably large machine of violence and destruction that steals, abuses, and mistreats those who work to create the standard of living we insist upon; but the increasing niceties of the emboldened new-right and their acceptance of our reliance of it, and the cold indifference and inability to attempt to image a world without it. as if just ignoring it with a smile and a shrug will not allow it to persist and grow to the point of global suffering that history has shown us ALWAYS ends in catastrophe, if not war over the very ideals they claim to hold. but this time, the machine of power is orders of magnitude larger and capable of unthinkable violence at accelerating speed. those who cheer it on the loudest get elected to office to hand wave it all away even harder than the last puppet clown.
14:15 - Slavoj actually getting back on track.
Nobody has a tissue for him?
Piddlepond I don't think that's snot he's got in his nose
Piddlepond it's a tick unfortunately
Would like to hear what politicians think about this.
Hopefully they're already discussing this. He has been talking about this for years btw.
*Makes a video with a leftist perspective*
"WOW BIASED MUCH"
*Makes a video with a conservative perspective*
"Glad to see the truth for once"
Come on guys, I lean right but we have to at least be principled and consistent
EXACTLY
Um, I am, tyvm... don't forget that comments are made by different people. We arent all just a network of flesh nodes, so you're probably just seeing the discrepancy cause it stands out to you and then you positively reinforce your belief by focusing on examples of it and ignoring cases of consistency in the meantime.
He has a very good point. We need to negotiate to find a proper solution to the problems that stem from difference. We need to do it respectfully, and intelligently, and not to frame as "Us vs Them" but as "Us and Them vs the Problem". There are plenty of problems in either culture, and we need to understand them all so we can make the right choices in life.
I would be happy to do your subtitles for you, I can understand what he's saying especially around names.
EG you write Guy Fieri = he said "high theory"...
19:33 - Best point!
+1
Very interesting aspects he points out. I am a black woman, daughter of an immigrant father and born and raised in Germany. And I am missing a lot the nuances in political conversations here. From every side of the political spectrum situations are getting simplified and framed to sell a political agenda but not to create sustainable solutions.
It’s amplified by the large scale ushering of us into smaller echo chambers
Go away
On class antagonism in countries urged to accept immigrants:
Big business makes money and caused crises, but the lower classes in advanced countries (if complicit at all, then only by consuming products of big business) are forced to give up their space, community, government programme resources, and so on and so on,
to incompatible foreigners moving away from crises.
So root causes of the problem don't bear the cost of migrant crisis, they just share a country with those who do.
The "Read Full Transcript Here" link does not send me to a site with the full transcript.
He's got the 360 look at everything down to a tee. He is not for the feeble minded at all.
This video's thesis as I heard it: The Western world has to do just enough to address social problems caused by massive Arab immigration to prevent the masses and their governments from becoming motivated to change the policy. The policy is morally imperative because Western foreign policy arguably hasn't been to the benefit of the third world, therefore it is responsible for conditions in those countries and indebted to their people and therefore must let the entire country move into the West so that they can mooch off of it's wealth. Basically the West sits on magic dirt, so if every poor person in the world just moves to Europe they'll all soon adapt to the European quality of life because such wealth is caused by the magic of the land. Zizeck wants this policy carried out by Western governments inoffensively with some token moderation and possibly concessions to the human rights of the nation's own citizens so as not to provoke anti-immigration backlash that would be inevitable if the leftists trying to import the third world denied all the problems they were causing. Zizeck says not to deny the problems, but to argue that the problems aren't as bad as critics say in order to prevent conservatives coming to power.
There's no recognition that these countries have always been poor and wartorn and remain so due to the people that dwell within them. It's immoral that a German should be told that he is responsible for the war in Syria and ISIS and thus must let the entire character of his country be changed by a policy of completely indiscriminate immigration. Zizeck's opinions on this issue are ludicrous and immoral. I'm a little disgusted.
its not about you, its the country you happen to live in. stop making it personal just because you benefit from an exploitative system.
@@chloegrobler4275 "It is not about you, it is about the country you live in."
So it is about him. It is his country after all.
@@Jose-yt3qz seriously, u gonna necro post?
The Arab world, India and China have historically been the centres of human learning, progress, science, culture and wealth for millennia. For China, it has only ever NOT been the wealthiest country on the planet in the last 2 centuries. Historically, Europe has always been a backwater EXCEPT in the last 3 centuries. So no, they have not “always been war torn shitholes” you are a moron with no understanding of history except through your myopic and one dimensional Eurocentric lens.
I like Slavoj finding the real culprit in the refugee crisis, extreme inequality within African and Arab countries. While the west is buying the food/oil or intervening militarily in these countries who is selling them the food, displacing populations to make profit or causing wars? Rational governments that cared about the people wouldn't be inducing a mass exodus of their own citizens Tackling corruption in these countries is really the answer.
How does one tackle corruption when the entire global system of capitalism and exploitation through direct colonialism and neo-colonialism make it profitable for the elite in these countries to be corrupt. That is the centrality of the issue.
as a europian i ofthen have this debate
i use to think we need a reform an it be fine
i have since changed my mind and believe non europian cultures and idententy groups should be redused by any mean nessesary.
When speaking of muslims, I would like to point out a Bosnian muslims for example, something that is never mentioned in these manners, couse, for centuries we are muslims, but we belong to western world and ideas by beeing part of europe and western way of life, and still are, and that is achieved not by beeing subjected to separation and segregation, but by beeing actively involved in all forms of life and new ideas and thinkings that go beyond word of Kur'an (that is mostly only followed in rest of the muslim world), and still managed to perserve our identity, costums and religion. That was happening from let's say, austro-hungarian times in 19th century, trough yugoslavia till now, and we still identify ourself as europeans. I would really like to Slavoj to pinpoint that "transition" which he probably whitinessed during yugoslav era with his friends who were muslims, I believe that would be a interesting topic to cover.
I see why so many people hate this man. He recognizes that our problems are complex and that the only solution to them is to discuss them openly. Ideologues don't like that.
That doesn't remotely match anything I've heard him say.
I am not sure if people see how sincere he is. And the struggle it takes to not landslide towards some view and keep a very balanced viewed considering reality of social scenarios in a very objective way.
I think as a Sudanese man who hopes to immigrate to Europe, you should let him in, IF YOU WANT TO, AND UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, I think it's like coming into someone else's house, it's preposterous to assume that you can do that under your conditions but, if the homeowner wants to expluite you, it's up to you to decide whether or not you want to come.
Reasonable talk.
Exept Sarajevo "siege" statement.
Interested listener is advised to look it up by him/herself. Sarajevo subject is not as simple as that.
He is brilliant
Paula M how so?
4:49
How can you mention all those countries and somehow miss Israel on that list, it is kind of a big deal you know.
Also refugees are not coming from libya or syria, the refuges we get in to europe comes mostly from sub saharan africa, this is an important distinction.
Thirdly; the refuge crisis has absolutely and unquestionably been facilitated trough people smuglers, whose income is highly up for debate.
gehstur !
the people traffickers make their money by extorting the people when they arrive.
Well you don't just go around critisizing the holy state or you are an antisemit
Which book of his was he referring to tho? Im very curious to read it.
Wait our leaders make decisions we didn't even agree with. The majority of Europeans were against involvement in the Middle East and now we are all deeply responsible. But when Merkel decided to let in a million refugees she also did it against the will of the majority but back then Slavoj said that the majority isn't always right and that sometimes leaders have to push through a policy even if it isn't popular in the hopes the results will eventually convince the majority it was a good thing. In otherwords if politicians really want to do something even if it is completely against the will of the people they should just do it and if it goes wrong we are all deeply responsible.
Take a shot every time Slavoj tugs his shirt or says "I write it in my book"
3-5 shots?
I need to read his book
Straight to the point 8:55
I am a right-wing anti-immigrant populist and I don't see any reason to change my stance on this topic after hearing this.
I keep zoning out every couple of minutes. His accent is🍭🌹🦄 though
Four years later, his prediction was right. So sad.
they are playing out a script...regardless of the results. Organized 'Clash of Civilizations'
Except a lot of destabilization in the middle east is caused by western involvement, the US is directly responsible for the messes in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya for example
I disagree with few points. One of them: I think that we cannot accept that muslim families have right to force their daughters to be covered in public. Argument about "endangering muslim way of life" is false. For example. Mafia also have strict rules of conduct, and one cannot justify that members of mafia cannot be persecuted for braking laws, because it would be endangering mafia way of life. "Way of life" cannot be accepted if it includes grave breaking off countries laws. If any other family, wanted for any other reason, le'ts say, to force their child to wear winter clothes in summer, and if child would complain to authorities, not only the child would be taken away from parents, but the parents would be sent to jail. Hence, if daughters in muslim families do not want to be covered, and family insists on daughter being covered, not only the child should be taken away from family, but family should also be legally persecuted. It is ethically wrong to justify crime in the name of "culture", "religion" or any other reason. If individual would start social movement with exactly the same prescriptions as the ones Islam have, that social movement would be legally classified as a hate group. And attempt to enforce those prescriptions in reality, would lead to social movement being banned, ad its leaders legally persecuted. It is morally wrong to allow islam to get away with such practices, just because there is 1000.000.000 muslims on the world, and islam exists for almost 1500 years. Numbers do not give ethical excuse for islam, or for muslims.
This would be valid argument-the problem is that you can to seem to wrap around your head that people have different cultures and different beliefs. Being naked is associated with freedom in the West, because historically women were forced to cover up. In the Middle East, nakedness was associated with slaves and extreme lower class, and the higher up the rung you go, the more covered and more clothing a woman had. You cannot seem to accept the fact that, like wearing a crucifix necklace, women in Muslim families start wearing hijabs without "a talk". People don't start wearing a crucifix by having a talk. It's something they start doing when they grow a bit older because it reflects their values. They start wearing crucifixes because it reflects some part of their beliefs. Are they being oppressed? No! People don't start wearing hijabs by having a talk. It's something they start when they grow a bit older because it reflects their values. Are they being oppressed? No!
You make an erroneous analysis based on a baseless assumption, no doubt fed to you by anti Muslim Western media.
Very few Muslim families force their daughters to wear hijabs-the Pew Research Center found that the majority of hijabis, over 90 percent, wear it of their own volition, that it is something they started doing.
You also make an erroneous case of logic. According to your logic, families who force their daughters to wear a sweatshirt over a crop top should be jailed and their children taken away. According to your logic, the families who force their sons to wear jeans instead of thigh high shorts before going to school should be jailed and their children taken away. Nothing short of the same indoctrination and colonisation ideals that forcibly took away Native American children from their parents in the 20th century to brainwash them in schools, put them in white families, to erase the stench of "Native American barbarism."
Yet Muslim governments like Saudi Arabia and Iran threaten prison sentences for women that don’t cover themselves?
Pretty thoughtful. I think we should, as he suggests, talk about these problems, and, before the huge immigrant wave. Our culture, insulated as it is geographically (from the pressing of this issue) by the Atlantic is, I think, ideally suited to have that debate. I sense that protecting the necessary openness of the discussion/debate is the only way to protect the possibility of the true reconciliation of the adversaries. Freedom of speech, interestingly in this context the first right, must be exercised, not merely protected. And, it can only be protected as long as it is truly civil discourse.
Why i watch Slavoj's videos, you may ask? Cause i love reading through comments. Laughs guaranteed!
If a community of certain ideals migrates into a community which has different ideals, why shouldn't the peoples who migrated into a new community have their way of life be changed to fit in with those of the people where they have decided to resettle?
"and so on and so on" is his refrain
Remember that time ISIS fighters apologized for attacking Israeli soldiers?
S. S. Cookies If we keep blaming “The Jews” then the real problems of capitalist society will never be solved.
@@personeater2664 thank you, this is the truth that people don't want to accept. scapegoating anyone is useless real issues doubtless require more complex solutions than simply casting the blame on a convenient section of the population
No. I did not hear of that.
If people could just express these questions without becoming openly racist or hateful... the truth is the world is very polarized right now. But I agree with everything Zizek says here... there has to be a space for questioning what's going on without being censored and demonized and without demonizing others.
No responsibility without agency. We aren't all deeply responsible when the majority of Europeans were against military involvement in the Middle East.
Maybe, not deeply responsible, but maybe just a little, that is, even if you were against the wars and you still paid your taxes ! I'm sure you know, some of it went to the war efforts.
If your country is like Switzerland or Poland who didn't invade, wage war or didn't have any colonies in other nation states I think you do have a choice if you want to or don't want to take in these refugees based on cultural differences.
Switzerland, the haven of dictators and drug cartels.
Ideology doesn't even have to be part of the discussion. The sheer number of illegal immigrants entering Europe imposes such a high cost on the European people that it is impractical to provide them with an adequate standard of living or for European governments to continue providing for their citizens.
He has such a big heart.
A lot to think about here.....
Well yes, we're living in an age of transgression. Things that were unacceptable are tolerated these days. I believe it was Plato who said the majority of people aren't "philosophical", and so are operating off "base" appetites. With the internet these "appetites" are more easily sated, and so begins the downward spiral IE: You get access to more food, so you eat until you're full. You need more food the next time to get full. Same goes with sexual fantasies (traditional gets boring, might go into kinks (bondage, furry, DDLG, diapers, etc), and other "materialistic" self-pleasuring things. It's not like this wasn't predicted. The only question remains is that how to we fix these decays of values so that it doesn't further transgress societies?
Vgpl0 the Greeks were the most notorious sexual deviants of the ancient world
it's not sexual kinks that you should fear
it is toxic ideologies that fester as a counter culture against our technological and social progress or st and as a derailed version of it (sjw/alt right) but also as wrong answers to our socioeconomic challenges such as liberetarianism
fl00fydragon They were, but even Plato himself knew that sexual deviance was a terrible value to pursue. Don't take Plato as a traditional Greek with Greek beliefs - he was executed for speaking out against them, after all.
It's the values that those sexual kinks bring: objectifying people for self-pleasure (looking at them as objects to be used, valuing them for what they are as opposed to the actual values they themselves hold) that's going to degenerate the overall ideologies to begin with. And not everything technological is necessarily progressive either, nor is relentless appetitivism.
Plato wasn't executed. He died as a rich and respected man in Athens. The man you refer to is Socrates I guess.
And there is one thing that bothers me deeply in what you said: People that are involved in sexual practices that you call "kinks" are not necessarily "objectifying people for self-pleasure". You can have a very warm and loving relationship with your partner while enjoying the pleasures of BDSM practices. If it is this what both partners like and want and you respect each others urges and desires, it is the contrary of "objectifying people for self-pleasure".
Vgpl0
?
you know that sexual and mental attraction are not exclusive of eachother
i know of couples that are huuuuge sexual deviants ( im talking about pet play dog walking in latex) and either of them would not hesitate to die to save the other and when casual they are the most stereotypical nerd couple i have known
fl00fydragon Yes, but I also know that the basis of sexual attraction being the foundation of value is debased in itself. Not to mention dying for one another doesn't constitute morality. If anything that could also be viewed as codependence, so I don't really see how that helps your point.
I know sexual attraction is objectifying, and if that's the foundation of your relationship then it's a weak one at best, and a poor paradigm of operation.
In a lecture in the course of sociology of religion, we, the students, were asked to discuss questions for an upcoming excursion to a moske. the lecturer asked me to present what I discussed with the person sitting next to me. I said that we didnt really get to the subject because I was pointing out the difficulty of formulating a question when you have to filter your phrazing in a way so as to not disrespect them (questioning their faith). I was quickly disrupted by the lecturer who said "we dont question their faith". you see, I feel that a part of the issue is that we dont acknowledge that there is a conflict there. children went abroad to fight in syria partly because the feeling of alienation and when they turn to their governmentally supported moske in their home country, they are met with this politically correct attitude of integration and multicultural harmony. dont people see that the radicalized and "lost identities" of people come partly because their concerns are not taken seriously?
If you are not allowed to "question their faith" then what would be the point of bringing a class of assumed non-Muslims to a mosque EXCEPT TO
QUESTION THEIR FAITH? To limit questions to, e.g. middle eastern cooking techniques, the architecture of the mosque, or how to set up an
inter-denominational soccer match? Then you would be going as tourists, not as students seeking knowledge and information. The" lecturer,"
in the slang of a much older generation, seems to be a "PHONY".A good opportunity for honest dialog was lost in the name of PC (YUCK).
I had a class on the anthropology of religion, and we were instructed to be diplomatic and to act in good faith. We weren't there to expose the inconsistencies of their religion, we were there to understand how they thought it worked, and to then subject it to materialist analysis (the "emic" or insider perspective, vs the "etic" or outsider perspective.)
If you're going in with hostile intent, you're failing as an academic. I have a hard time understanding what exactly your intent was, if you wanted to "question their faith," which sounds to me like ask them badgering gotcha questions to prove their religion is somehow a problem
The first thing you need to do as a social scientist is remember you are a scientist, and you have to distance yourself from your subject if you ever hope to make any meaningful breakthroughs
That's awesome when he says something very serious and terrible and finishes with ''and so on and so on"
Exciting
Ending mass immigration and reversing it back to something like the status quo ante 1960 would be a lovely start.
For that you would have to bring back European birth rates of 1960 or otherwise you would get huge demographic and societal problems.
@@Carl-Gauss Why? Technological improvements in automation and computerisation have brought vast increases in productivity and wealth produced by far fewer people. That frees numerous working people to work in eg care of the elderly. Mass immigration has caused more competition for housing and a rise in the cost of housing, plus big business consumerism, and Left wing subversion of white natives sense of dignity. All promote lower birth rates. Thank you for replying.
Don't agree with everything, but some good ideas here
This guy's pragmatic and relatable approach to world issues is something I'm really enjoying.