"Ok, these sublime moments are nice, but what is happening the morning after?" Magnificent quote from Zizek. It is great to see a socialist philosopher actually confronting other left-wing movements; it is only through self-criticism that movements will make sense
hahaah. How can he have such a serious discussion and then just say, "Canada should invade the USA"? That is the funniest shit i've heard in a while. I have a new favorite philosopher and political commentator
@@coreycox2345 Canada didn't even exist as a country until 1867 and it was the British army that burned down the White House what is now Canada didn't even have it's own army it was the British who were in charge.
Even the normal people in 1984 are still deeply invested in the political process. The watch the news with deep interest, discuss politics over lunch, join partisan groups, and care about an ideology, even if it is the dominant one. Such a citizen would be considered an activist in today's society.
I would say he is the Geoffrey Chaucer of the 21st century. A perfect cross road of the ridiculous and the sublime. And I think the fact that he thinks Avatar is ridiculous makes me more of a fan
He doesn't let him answer the question. 3 minutes in he's asked him like 4 totally different questions. You're supposed to go deeper not laterally in an interview.
On the contrary, I think this interviewer does a better job of reigning Zizek in than all the other ones I've seen or listened to. Zizek does have a tendency to ramble, and this is obviously a very short-form interview.
@@Nature_Consciousness progress towards neoliberalism, and that's actually a type of regression if you look at the big picture and what's happening beyond legal and governmental systems, and to the ecological systems that the infinite growth of neoliberalism is destroying before our very eyes
@@lilithmotherofmonsters6055 Quality of life (control, technology, urbanization) is increasing, people are living better than ever. Ecology isnt really a problem, I see great strives for sustainability and renewable energy, this ecological progress will only increase as time passes by. Our worry should be about developing a society where it isnt sustainable for humans, WE NEED PROBLEMS, because the better the world gets, the worse people become. Just imagine the previous generations caming here, they would all call us ungrateful assholes, and they would be right. Wishing for more is our nature, but we have to discuss our existential problems, instead of doomer trivial bulshit, we have enough of that. At the end of the day, PEOPLE LOVE TO COMPLAIN, to the point of not seeing reality, they dont understand that the referential point will aways change and we will never be satisfied for society. TIME TO GROW UP.
I agree with his take on Orwell. 1984 was naive in the sense that he imagined that there was some inherent nobility in humanity that would have to be crushed to establish a totalitarian state. Truth is far more mundane - many people will get on just fine in a totalitarian state, fear won't be necessary to control them.
First time I've heard it said that Avatar is boring. lawlz. And I guess the message is fairly simple, it's an adjusted version of the "Europeans suck for invading the New World and imposing itself on the natives through military force and taking all the resources (that the natives don't particularly want or care for)" and is also a critique of America, with the idea that we perpetuate war and then point at the other guy and say they started it, and then going on to explain how this isn't a thing of the past if we consider the mindset of the people who are perpetuating the behavior, it's the market people who hold all the shares. There isn't much more than that, if you haven't seen Avatar.
Also, dont forget, how the benevolent white guy (being the choosen one) has to be the one to save the natives. Its modern pseudo-liberal exotistic imperialism all over again. Thats the condescending hollywood "left" for ya ;P
Once "outcasts" create their own community, they're not outcasts anymore. Consequently, you can't define yourself as an outcast. Once you have created or found your community, you have no defining feature and identity you have for yourself. Hence, whether or not you're an outcast, you must create a personality for your own sake.
In a corporatocracy the power is where we as consumers put our money and our attention. The system depends heavily on that do not spend superfelously or allow artificially manufactured trends to control your desires.
i have favorable opinions on socialism. after watching this video and reading some comments i have determined that this is a good environment to have a discussion on political and economic systems, and develop my opinions on socialism.
I have. Heidegger wrote, years later, the Letter on Humanism. A response to Sartre's "Existentialism is a Humanism" Quote "That the opposition to "humanism" by no means comes out in defense of the inhumane, but rather opens up other prospects, that now should have become somewhat clearer."
It's not that he positioned himself in opposition to humanism, he just wasn't in favour of it as a mode of thought. He wasn't opposed to humanism. He was above it. (Heidegger was just replying to Sarte out some kind of courtesy. They were never in serious dialogue. Heidegger is after all a far superior philosopher.)
thank you for your intelligent remarks. I am a big fan of Huxley but I still get these two dystopian novels mixed up. An old military adage says, "Invasions come from the North." But most empires, like cities, crumble from within.
Wow, someone who's not afraid to speak his mind. Another thing Orwell couldn't portray is that the big brother would be voluntary and even desired by some people. Facebook anyone?
because your response missed the larger point, which is that the comment you were replying to reflects an obvious misunderstanding about Zizek's point of view.
"the acting-essence of dasein is preserved, even in the end when it should have been abandoned." Could you say more about this? I don't quite understand your position. Why should it have been abandoned? Thanks.
You seem to be reading a lot into what I did write. I never said or implied that Heidegger was against an essence of humanity in every sense, nor did I ever retreat to liberal humanism. All that was about essence was "denigrates the essence of humanity.", which is true. According to Heidegger, dasein is the key to the disclosing being, therefore humanistic principles can not be privileged as they would limit dasein's way of being.
his finishing remarks had me in tears laughing for a good minute. thanks for putting this on TH-cam. as for the uploader's comments re: Heidegger's turn against humanism...there was no such turn. i don't know how you could confuse such a poetic writer with an anti-humanist. read Being and Time and think that over some more...
there's a big difference between having a gun and ammo and being a military power, militia can be a powerful force if utilized tactfully but are usually quite untrained and inexperienced which there's a large difference between being good on a range and good on the field of combat, it'd be similar to saying because you can fire perfectly in a game that you know how to fire a gun in real life, you only simulate small aspects and real firing and real combat involves a lot more
I haven't seen the movie he's referring to but it sounds like he's talking about brave new world, which is sort of a conservative idea of totalitarianism people having sex and being happy (I agree within that book it was totalitarian but it doesn't truly represent what it looks like, repression isn't done during protests by drugs or someshit to keep people passive- they beat the shit out of them.) Sexual repression still is related to authoritarianism. I could go on but yeah
Maybe Read his "Letter on Humanism" (a full twenty years after the publication of Sein und Zeit) to see him distancing himself from humanism and existentialism.
I seen your comment on SyrianGirlpartisan's video, and I completely agreed with it. I checked outyour channel and you seem a very intelligent, well informed person, I got a question about this comment. How exactly does the privatisation of production lead to fascism? Wont nationalisation of production just as likely lead to fascism as we seen in the Soviet Union. I n fact, it might be easier with that way as production, government bureaucracy, social control etc... are all in the same place. TC
In social media 'environment' is not determined by physicality or URL but by who is currently occupying/viewing the space, you would have been better off offering a specific or generalised question in response to one of the previous comments to achieve a discussion/result.
I tend to agree with you. However, what I fear is that Western society is not predominantly Orwellian nor reminiscent of Huxley's Brave New World. I see society as a mixture of both; in increasing potency. Huxley's idea was not that hedonism is wrong and that we should adhere to an orthodoxy of... chastity for instance. No, it was that the system in which we live continually preys on our pleasures to the extent that it uses them to subvert our agency and leave us as subjects rather than actors.
See posts below first: Also, what are your thoughts on Corporate Sponsership of Election Candidates? PS - Can we discuss this over Private Messages, so we wont have this annoying character limit and typing characters to verify we are human? Thanks for your responses. Take Care.
Thank you for your reply. But couldn't the religious/conservative nature of free-market countries be an artifact of the Cold War? Also, Social control is different to Market control. No social controlmeans that individuals are free to follow any religion they want,or become athiests. That is better than forced atheism IMO (I am an Atheist myself). I agree that market control is necessary, but I think it is because of what I like to call "The Capitalism Paradox".
BNW -1984 and The Island .... present a three different worlds and societies ... our world is a combination of all ... and we get close to one of them in each era ...
What I mean by "The Capitalism Paradox". With near-complete deregulation of the market (like USA), prvate companies are free to develop, become very large, and become monopolies. When these companies inevitably fail sooner or later, the state would be forced to bail them out (if they go bankrupt, the entire national economy collapses). This state intervention (from tax-payer money) is ironically Socialism. The government will then own parts or all the company=nationalisation, which is socialism.
"One is so full of "logic" that everything which is offensive to the customary indolence of opinion is immediately rung up as its opposite." "To think in opposition to "logic" does not mean to stand up for what is illogical" "Opposition to humanism is thought because it does not locate the humanity of man high enough." - L o H He is opposed to humanism in so far as he is not in favour of it. His own thought is better, superior, higher... in that his own philosohy trumps humanism. You know?
I think you might have missed some things about Heidegger. He became a Nazi during Hitler's regime and he tried to move his career towards becoming a major Nazi ideologue. Furthermore he wasn't very fair to his tutor Husserl, mostly because he was a jew.
continued from post below: My personal principle is simple - Liberty to the masses. If denying some freedoms and liberties to massive multinational corporations and their few key beneficiaries means more freedoms to their workers and people as a whole, then it is a necessary price. Also, no one man'sidea of progress can overturn the will of the masses. This is all theoretics - not sure how exactly it could be implemented in a referendum-based, ultra-democratic political system.
"It's not impossible." invading a country where its citizens have the fundamental right to carry an ungodly amount of arms and ammo? well, good luck w/ that... lol. but he's def right about Orwell. I once saw a web comic that compared Orwell to Huxley and it basically showed that Orwell's vision was like China and the US was like Huxley's. But I personally don't consider Orwell's 1984 a "cautionary tale" but rather a cynically complacent view on how power structures naturally emerge.
I initially liked the letter on humanism, but I have doubts now. Read Karl Löwith for example for a good criticism of Heidegger. Or even the new ecological order by Luc Ferry. There is no reason to jettison the enlightenment tradition of reason and morality going hand in hand.
Well, 'socialism' is too broad a subject to say anything worthwhile in 500 characters, particularly given I subscribe to what I in vanity call 'free-form consciousness' and thus think in abstracts as opposed to ideology (I'm sure Slavoj would call that in itself an information ideology). I will however say I perceive any given system as a mix of varying degrees of socialism, fascism and anarchy, and that the health and education sectors should be socialised while allowing corporate competition.
![โฮ่ง! (SUGOI) - LYKN [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nFp4zjAARFs/mqdefault.jpg)
"I haven't listened to one song from Lady Gaga"
One man still standing in this world.
Same here, but replace Lady Gaga with The Beatles
@@marshmelows, Well…except he probably heard a Beatles song.
@@Claytone-Records not voluntarily of course
@@marshmelows, But of course.
@@marshmelows well comparing the beatles to lady gaga thats a big reach
More like:
Slavoj Žižek briefly on the Avengers and then a lot of other stuff
and so on and so on
That's literally everything I've ever seen with Žižek
And an eternal and so on and so on
I listen exclusively to classic movies.
-Slavoj Zizek, 2012
DefinitelyNotOfficial
The fkin OG. Goat.
Then Canada "go invade, make a colony!" 😂😂 Love the guy
"Ok, these sublime moments are nice, but what is happening the morning after?"
Magnificent quote from Zizek. It is great to see a socialist philosopher actually confronting other left-wing movements; it is only through self-criticism that movements will make sense
Zizek is just amazing. He is undoubtedly a dangerous philosopher.
What he says from 5:50 is pretty prophetic considering this was in 2012
“It’ll be like Groucho Marx in power”
Lord Julius
hahaah. How can he have such a serious discussion and then just say, "Canada should invade the USA"? That is the funniest shit i've heard in a while. I have a new favorite philosopher and political commentator
Matthew Biggs He always introduces an absurd and unexpected joke in his speeches. He enjoys being a satiro. I love it ^^
Funny, Matthew Biggs? You forget that on June 8, 1812, we burned down the White House. Several celebrate this day.
Well he has a picture of Stalin in the entrance to his apartment, just to bait morons
@@coreycox2345 Canada didn't even exist as a country until 1867 and it was the British army that burned down the White House what is now Canada didn't even have it's own army it was the British who were in charge.
@@dsfddsgh We were on the right side of history though. I am not saying that I risked my skin in this worthy cause.
well this hits harder in 2022
Even the normal people in 1984 are still deeply invested in the political process. The watch the news with deep interest, discuss politics over lunch, join partisan groups, and care about an ideology, even if it is the dominant one. Such a citizen would be considered an activist in today's society.
7:11 is the longest time I've heard him talk without mentioning ideology XD
I was like wow that is some deep serious shit right there - then Slavoj suggests Canada should invade The US. Lol
the stuff before that suggestion was still deep anyway :P
It's not like he's wrong. I'd rather be there than here.
@@dashisworstpony right? why is it a joke
'orwell is too optimistic' Zizek is a dark dark clown indeed.
"I love Canada, you should invade the United States and turn it into the Hunger Games"-- LOL
"Thank you very much""DANK"
This man is a goldmine
that last comment about the hunger games SLAYED me. funniest shit I have ever heard.
8:02 I sure like listening to classic movies myself
"Avatar is boring", I love this dude
Honestly lol. Never really got Avatar
@@orter4030 I'm happy it made a ton of money again it's funny. I only really like it for the visuals but at least its not marvel
I, for one, welcome our new Canadian overlords.
I more invite our Mexican overlords! Look at the radically unequal treatment of our two borders.
Thanks Zizek for destroying that horseshit movie that Avatar is. I love you.
He : Thanks for coming man! See ya
Slavoj: No problem bruh! Invade your superpower neighbours. K. Bye
Disney creates PURE IDEOLOGY with their Marvel movies.
I would say he is the Geoffrey Chaucer of the 21st century. A perfect cross road of the ridiculous and the sublime. And I think the fact that he thinks Avatar is ridiculous makes me more of a fan
the morning after, how this will effect my ordinary life.. what a great critique against many things, especially metaphysics.
wow, that final remarks got me in a good laugh!
I like his mind. Not sure why but he makes you THINK.
you dont have many philosophers who can joke while having serious discussion...
That last minute or so is hilarious!
"I see less and less individualism in developed capitalist countries"
“Be quiet and continue on your work, ID 62839”
Ironic
@@mjolninja9358 At least we have our own number...
Love how much he talked about the avengers lmao..
He doesn't let him answer the question. 3 minutes in he's asked him like 4 totally different questions. You're supposed to go deeper not laterally in an interview.
On the contrary, I think this interviewer does a better job of reigning Zizek in than all the other ones I've seen or listened to. Zizek does have a tendency to ramble, and this is obviously a very short-form interview.
Slavoj Žižek is dhe imp of steel
From 2018's view, the "enlightened hedonism" and "new authoritarian" has become the norm. Sorry we haven't done anything in these 6 years.
imacg4 So annoying:/
And with a couple more years of the cheeto in chief it's now very very clear the trends Zizek mentions here are at work, and Sally still are.
@@lilithmotherofmonsters6055 All I see is progress, I am sure that most people would agree with you and say these things if they were true.
@@Nature_Consciousness progress towards neoliberalism, and that's actually a type of regression if you look at the big picture and what's happening beyond legal and governmental systems, and to the ecological systems that the infinite growth of neoliberalism is destroying before our very eyes
@@lilithmotherofmonsters6055 Quality of life (control, technology, urbanization) is increasing, people are living better than ever.
Ecology isnt really a problem, I see great strives for sustainability and renewable energy, this ecological progress will only increase as time passes by.
Our worry should be about developing a society where it isnt sustainable for humans, WE NEED PROBLEMS, because the better the world gets, the worse people become.
Just imagine the previous generations caming here, they would all call us ungrateful assholes, and they would be right.
Wishing for more is our nature, but we have to discuss our existential problems, instead of doomer trivial bulshit, we have enough of that.
At the end of the day, PEOPLE LOVE TO COMPLAIN, to the point of not seeing reality, they dont understand that the referential point will aways change and we will never be satisfied for society.
TIME TO GROW UP.
On a Zizek thumbnail Journey.
Brave New World was a pretty good prediction
I agree with his take on Orwell. 1984 was naive in the sense that he imagined that there was some inherent nobility in humanity that would have to be crushed to establish a totalitarian state. Truth is far more mundane - many people will get on just fine in a totalitarian state, fear won't be necessary to control them.
That hunger games bit was so funny
First time I've heard it said that Avatar is boring. lawlz. And I guess the message is fairly simple, it's an adjusted version of the "Europeans suck for invading the New World and imposing itself on the natives through military force and taking all the resources (that the natives don't particularly want or care for)" and is also a critique of America, with the idea that we perpetuate war and then point at the other guy and say they started it, and then going on to explain how this isn't a thing of the past if we consider the mindset of the people who are perpetuating the behavior, it's the market people who hold all the shares.
There isn't much more than that, if you haven't seen Avatar.
Also, dont forget, how the benevolent white guy (being the choosen one) has to be the one to save the natives. Its modern pseudo-liberal exotistic imperialism all over again. Thats the condescending hollywood "left" for ya ;P
bravo !
Spiritualised Hedonism, everyone is special, be yourself, believe in and follow your dreams, you you you
Once "outcasts" create their own community, they're not outcasts anymore.
Consequently, you can't define yourself as an outcast. Once you have created or found your community, you have no defining feature and identity you have for yourself.
Hence, whether or not you're an outcast, you must create a personality for your own sake.
Type "Day 6 - Slavoj Zizek - Full Interview" on google and click on the first link.
he is totally right here
In a corporatocracy the power is where we as consumers put our money and our attention. The system depends heavily on that do not spend superfelously or allow artificially manufactured trends to control your desires.
read Capitalist Realism by Mark Fisher
when i was visiting CooBah
i love at the last second, zizek is like THANK YOU, like he's yelling XD
being and time is an early Heidegger. He distanced himself more and more from this project.
i have favorable opinions on socialism. after watching this video and reading some comments i have determined that this is a good environment to have a discussion on political and economic systems, and develop my opinions on socialism.
I have. Heidegger wrote, years later, the Letter on Humanism. A response to Sartre's "Existentialism is a Humanism" Quote "That the opposition to "humanism" by no means comes out in defense of the inhumane, but rather opens
up other prospects, that now should have become somewhat clearer."
Where can we find the full interview?
It's not that he positioned himself in opposition to humanism, he just wasn't in favour of it as a mode of thought. He wasn't opposed to humanism. He was above it. (Heidegger was just replying to Sarte out some kind of courtesy. They were never in serious dialogue. Heidegger is after all a far superior philosopher.)
thank you for your intelligent remarks. I am a big fan of Huxley but I still get these two dystopian novels mixed up.
An old military adage says, "Invasions come from the North." But most empires, like cities, crumble from within.
Wow, someone who's not afraid to speak his mind. Another thing Orwell couldn't portray is that the big brother would be voluntary and even desired by some people. Facebook anyone?
ahahaha what was with that Hunger Games rant at the end
that's just typical Zizek's humour. He's a really good humoured guy.
because your response missed the larger point, which is that the comment you were replying to reflects an obvious misunderstanding about Zizek's point of view.
"the acting-essence of dasein is preserved, even in the end when it should have been abandoned." Could you say more about this? I don't quite understand your position. Why should it have been abandoned? Thanks.
I do understand what you're advocating, however the word "opposition" was quoted directly from Heidegger's Letter on Humanism.
Awesome.
You seem to be reading a lot into what I did write. I never said or implied that Heidegger was against an essence of humanity in every sense, nor did I ever retreat to liberal humanism. All that was about essence was "denigrates the essence of humanity.", which is true. According to Heidegger, dasein is the key to the disclosing being, therefore humanistic principles can not be privileged as they would limit dasein's way of being.
was that theme song to louie at the end? man i cant wait till zizek gets his hands on a copy of Louie DVD.
his finishing remarks had me in tears laughing for a good minute. thanks for putting this on TH-cam. as for the uploader's comments re: Heidegger's turn against humanism...there was no such turn. i don't know how you could confuse such a poetic writer with an anti-humanist. read Being and Time and think that over some more...
Is this the real interview with the vampire that those books are based on?
0:18 hold on a second...
Maybe should change the title or talks about avengers and more but fun to listen to
there's a big difference between having a gun and ammo and being a military power, militia can be a powerful force if utilized tactfully but are usually quite untrained and inexperienced which there's a large difference between being good on a range and good on the field of combat, it'd be similar to saying because you can fire perfectly in a game that you know how to fire a gun in real life, you only simulate small aspects and real firing and real combat involves a lot more
ok
I haven't seen the movie he's referring to but it sounds like he's talking about brave new world, which is sort of a conservative idea of totalitarianism people having sex and being happy (I agree within that book it was totalitarian but it doesn't truly represent what it looks like, repression isn't done during protests by drugs or someshit to keep people passive- they beat the shit out of them.) Sexual repression still is related to authoritarianism. I could go on but yeah
Maybe Read his "Letter on Humanism" (a full twenty years after the publication of Sein und Zeit) to see him distancing himself from humanism and existentialism.
I seen your comment on SyrianGirlpartisan's video, and I completely agreed with it. I checked outyour channel and you seem a very intelligent, well informed person, I got a question about this comment.
How exactly does the privatisation of production lead to fascism?
Wont nationalisation of production just as likely lead to fascism as we seen in the Soviet Union. I
n fact, it might be easier with that way as production, government bureaucracy, social control etc... are all in the same place.
TC
In social media 'environment' is not determined by physicality or URL but by who is currently occupying/viewing the space, you would have been better off offering a specific or generalised question in response to one of the previous comments to achieve a discussion/result.
How so ?
That ending though... :D
freakin zizek
Heidegger wrote "the opposition", not "my opposition". He was referencing the notion, not proclaiming it. And I think he was making fun of Sartre.
oh god the end epic!
I tend to agree with you. However, what I fear is that Western society is not predominantly Orwellian nor reminiscent of Huxley's Brave New World. I see society as a mixture of both; in increasing potency. Huxley's idea was not that hedonism is wrong and that we should adhere to an orthodoxy of... chastity for instance. No, it was that the system in which we live continually preys on our pleasures to the extent that it uses them to subvert our agency and leave us as subjects rather than actors.
See posts below first:
Also, what are your thoughts on Corporate Sponsership of Election Candidates?
PS - Can we discuss this over Private Messages, so we wont have this annoying character limit and typing characters to verify we are human?
Thanks for your responses.
Take Care.
and so on so on so on
Thank you for your reply.
But couldn't the religious/conservative nature of free-market countries be an artifact of the Cold War?
Also, Social control is different to Market control.
No social controlmeans that individuals are free to follow any religion they want,or become athiests. That is better than forced atheism IMO (I am an Atheist myself).
I agree that market control is necessary, but I think it is because of what I like to call "The Capitalism Paradox".
what about Brave New World?
BNW -1984 and The Island .... present a three different worlds and societies ... our world is a combination of all ... and we get close to one of them in each era ...
the future I think is a combination between BNW and the Island
Whenever Zizek talks about this new form of fascism, he sounds like he's getting at Sheldon Wolin's "inverted totalitarianism."
That very last comment was goddamn hilarious. So random.
I love the title of this clip. Totally misleading!!
He sees this from a cultural perspective but policy wise we're moving towards an orwellian state
The question is, will that be true 20 years from now?
and so on and so forth
ZIZEK! I like your deadly jester much more
What I mean by "The Capitalism Paradox".
With near-complete deregulation of the market (like USA), prvate companies are free to develop, become very large, and become monopolies.
When these companies inevitably fail sooner or later, the state would be forced to bail them out (if they go bankrupt, the entire national economy collapses).
This state intervention (from tax-payer money) is ironically Socialism. The government will then own parts or all the company=nationalisation, which is socialism.
it is similar, but without the genetic class system thing, and more of a failure in general. go see it! best movie ever!
5:57 like
"One is so full of "logic" that everything which is offensive to the customary indolence of opinion is immediately rung up as its opposite."
"To think in opposition to "logic" does not mean to stand up for what is illogical"
"Opposition to humanism is thought because it does not locate the humanity of man high enough."
- L o H
He is opposed to humanism in so far as he is not in favour of it. His own thought is better, superior, higher... in that his own philosohy trumps humanism. You know?
I think you might have missed some things about Heidegger. He became a Nazi during Hitler's regime and he tried to move his career towards becoming a major Nazi ideologue. Furthermore he wasn't very fair to his tutor Husserl, mostly because he was a jew.
continued from post below:
My personal principle is simple - Liberty to the masses.
If denying some freedoms and liberties to massive multinational corporations and their few key beneficiaries means more freedoms to their workers and people as a whole, then it is a necessary price.
Also, no one man'sidea of progress can overturn the will of the masses.
This is all theoretics - not sure how exactly it could be implemented in a referendum-based, ultra-democratic political system.
6.30-6.50 on orwel's failing, zizek reveals something of the inadaquecy of his sex life
avengers is another pentagon production, this dude is a scrambler , making a fractal out of a circle
"It's not impossible." invading a country where its citizens have the fundamental right to carry an ungodly amount of arms and ammo? well, good luck w/ that... lol. but he's def right about Orwell. I once saw a web comic that compared Orwell to Huxley and it basically showed that Orwell's vision was like China and the US was like Huxley's. But I personally don't consider Orwell's 1984 a "cautionary tale" but rather a cynically complacent view on how power structures naturally emerge.
Hahahahahah I love him
I initially liked the letter on humanism, but I have doubts now. Read Karl Löwith for example for a good criticism of Heidegger. Or even the new ecological order by Luc Ferry. There is no reason to jettison the enlightenment tradition of reason and morality going hand in hand.
Well, 'socialism' is too broad a subject to say anything worthwhile in 500 characters, particularly given I subscribe to what I in vanity call 'free-form consciousness' and thus think in abstracts as opposed to ideology (I'm sure Slavoj would call that in itself an information ideology). I will however say I perceive any given system as a mix of varying degrees of socialism, fascism and anarchy, and that the health and education sectors should be socialised while allowing corporate competition.
[vowels detensify]