Slavoj Zizek The Pressure of Meaning

A #marxist and #Lacanian analysis of the ideological and political responses to the terror attacks on #september 11, 2001, Žižek's study incorporates various psychoanalytic, postmodernist, biopolitical, Christian, and universalist influences into a Marxist dialectical framework.
Zizek speaks on this topic beautifully in his 2002 analysis titled, "Welcome to the Desert of the Real." In this discussion, however, Žižek gave his speech today on a wide range of topics that included his views on 9/11 and the movies produced in their honor there after.
Žižek has argued that Global #capitalism and Fundamentalism are two parts of the same whole: ultimately, their opposition in political and everyday discourses represents a false ideological conflict in both the Marxian and psychoanalytic senses.
Žižek explains how - in his view - the fundamentalist terrorist plays an analogous symbolic role: the excluded "other" whose alien presence legitimizes measures of internal discipline and/or corruption.
Zizek claims that this expresses that American's received what they secretly desired, i.e., the ultimate spectacular experience. Creating the perception of a purely external threat allowed the system of global capitalism to go essentially unchallenged, functioning to indefinitely defer discussion about alternative socioeconomic futures.
With the only "other" alternatives to global capitalism being a renewed form of #socialism because the "others" of #capitalism (those excluded from capitalism's benefits) are vast, even though they are all formally extended the promise of liberal rights.
In Zizek's view, the United States claims to stand for "democratic" rights and principles, while at the same time, suspended these rights for its citizens, even legitimized torture, in order to fight "the war on terror.”
Through a psychoanalytical lens this means, rather than seeing these as real exception to the democratic process, Žižek identifies them as "central tendencies" that occur in #liberal #democracy, a system inherently susceptible to corruption and unable to universalize its own rights.
Furthermore, changing conditions of and in war - further erode any distinctions that could be made between a state of war - or exception and a state of peace - central distinctions in the democratic ideology.
Zizek believes that the #democraticdebates system has a habitual nature to always be generating new states of emergency to justify the negation of its ethical principles. Further, he posits that the future of emancipatory politics cannot be contained within a liberal democratic framework, which is designed to account for notions of human rights, the rule of law, and constitutionality of actions taken by the government.
Zizek focuses his critique on two productions released to mark the 5th anniversary of 9/11: Paul Greengrass's United 93 and Oliver Stone's World Trade Center. For Žižek, both try to be as anti-Hollywood as possible by focusing on the "courage of ordinary people, with no glamorous stars, no special effects, no grandiloquent heroic gestures, just a terse realistic depiction of ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances."
"There is undoubtedly a touch of authenticity in the films - recall how the large majority of critics unanimously praised the film's avoiding of sensationalism, its sober and restrained style. It is this very touch of authenticity that should make us suspicious - we should immediately ask ourselves what ideological purposes it serves," Zizek pondered.
#psychology #socialmedia #sociology #psychoanalyst #zizek #lecture #education

[@lifeisclimbing]

Men like this make me thankful to have a thinking brain.

[@bicrehan]

Jesus. Anyone translating our dear Slavoj's speech into sign language deserves a raise.

[@AiChiomi]

Or at least to be in the frame of the recording.

[@andrewroberts8139]

+Brett Crehan Seems pretty lucid to me.

[@deadmeat1471]

lol

[@yvesnyfelerph.d.8297]

He makes the most of what little he can. His words are eloquent. You cannot fault his style. His delivery is flawless. As far as I can see, there is nothing that would make any reasonable person disagree with Zizek's analysis of history, philosophy, politics or social institutions. There is no need to say anything more, really. It is a simple and brilliant explanation of our current situation and a clear argument for the necessity of revolution. One that is utterly convincing, even to someone like me who has the most fundamental of misgivings about politics.

[@johnlavers3970]

that's just dumb

[@eosapienrancher4045]

Zizek spittin pure GAME at the beginning

[@wearethenightparty]

The woman hired to do the deaf signing had her work cut out for her. On that note, at times Zizek almost does his own signing!

[@yvesnyfelerph.d.8297]

This isn't even the first time he's done it! The woman's response to this gesture? "No, you are not a sign-writer" The video concludes with a few more scenes of her signing, including "I am your enemy" and "I hate you" (the last of which is apparently her last word to Zizek). The title of the video is in reference to the book "The Master of Disguise" by the French anarchist Georges Sorel, which tells the story of a young man who signs in order to infiltrate the Nazis in order to save the life of his girlfriend.

[@sandraseeper]

From Trinidad and I admire Slavok with joy and obsession. His observations are imperfectly perfect🙂

[@philippococktube]

Zizek's missing Rumsfeld diagram element, the Unknown Knowns IMHO are covered when William Burroughs quipped that 'Art is what we already know, but we don't know that we know it.'

[@farrider3339]

¹ There are known Known's (There are thing's we know that we know). ²There are known Unknown's (There are thing's that we know, we don't know). ³ There are unknown Unknown's (There are thing's we don't know, that we don't know). IV There are thing's that are unknown Known's (There are thing's that we know, but we don't even know that we know them). THiS iS iDEOLOGY ❗️ IVa Things we believe without believing. The crucial problem of believing : When our act's do not match our conviction's and/or believe's. Master Zizek 🛐

[@RichInk]

Excellent. I haven't seen this lecture in a few years. His affinity with Christianity is powerful when he takes the believers for a ride to contemporary thought. It is wonderful that believers recognize his thought as important.

[@yvesnyfelerph.d.8297]

If you want to know the truth about Jesus and Christianity, then Zizek has you covered. He offers more and deeper knowledge of the faith than many of his critics, and does so in a way that is clear and simple to grasp. I am glad I went.

[@hermitage6439]

Zizek says in words what I never thought existed in my mind.

[@hzingano]

recorded with a rock

[@Zach-wr6fw]

Better audio than many lectures I’ve heard on KZbin

[@droid16beta97]

No, he just looks like that

[@juancpgo]

I identify a lot with this talk... I hate those “between the lines” rules, as he called the “meta rules”. I like precise communication. This stuff reminds me a lot of Larry David also and his hilarious show “Curb your Enthusiasm” which is all about these social complications.

[@criztu]

Juan Gonzalez read Nietzsche's Master Slave Morality. Most of Zizek's discourse applies to the Slave, not to the Master.

[@UnchainedDreamer-we2fy]

+criztu who discourses on the 'master morality' in todays age then?

[@criztu]

Unchained Dreamer 8911 I donno man... but when Zizek is telling me at 46:55 "Even if we claim to not believe (in God), we have the need for another one to believe", I recognize the Slave morality right there. The Slave morality is that of the "herd", as in Zizek's "the need for another one to blabla what we can't admit to ourselves". The Master morality would be the one of the "shepherd", in which the shepherd does not need the herd to believe for him, he simply uses the herd to make a better life for himself, nobody else above him.

[@julesfreis6813]

And the restaurant bill paying is from Seinfeld.

[@alinbarba1418]

I think Zizek said that the meta rules are what gives a culture its life and character, you move to Germany and you aren't a German when you know the rules, you become a German when you know how to break the rules like a German.

[@Teadekun]

incredibly informative and clear! Delighted

[@kamiel79]

1:48:00 "for the fake of argument" -> for the sake of argument. priceless

[@lifeisclimbing]

and so...?

[@sunsilab2655]

veeeery precise

[@crruan1142]

He constantly and almost by reflex goes into the Polish trope of everything Soviet bad, as if to inoculate the listener, reader of any suspicious "original sin" in his untainted by Russia brand of "Marxism". Works well for his audience and makes his non-pc discourse palatable. I'm aware he's not Polish, btw.

[@reviveramesh]

Such an interesting video - un(focus) throughout the whole time - it makes the point even more poignant..... The pressure of meaning....

[@ElectricityTaster]

Wipe nose, pull shirt, wipe forehead. Repeat, but never rinse.

[@AiChiomi]

and so on and so on.

[@mrtaurus51]

+agun17 ... His gestures remind me of Pina Bausch's choreographies .... :)

[@AMpufnstuf]

+agun17 AND IM SURE YOU KNOW *COKE SNIFF* THE FAMOUS STORY OF THE MAN WHO HAD NO BALLS

[@amypellegrini1732]

"again"

[@jacobjorgenson9285]

And go waaaaay beyond your comprehension. But keep trying

[@DRORELIMELECH120V]

VERY GOOD

[@Kmarsden123]

Zizek at 5:20

[@ffelegal]

Thanks so much lol

[@marcostorrestaboada5502]

thankkkk youuuuu

[@landherr9892]

Great crowd!

[@JB-qh3dn]

Great, Great intro!!!!

[@teenspirit1]

05:20 I'm putting this for myself.

[@BEASLAND000]

1:34:41 the reason why you never enjoy parent enforced activities (football, hockey, ballet, skating) when you’re a teenager, especially when you were interested in it in the first place

[@mauvenumnum5320]

17:50 wow this is so true , considering what is really happening in the world today....

[@DarkAngelEU]

Did anybody ever mention how similar he looks to Luke Skywalker?

[@farrider3339]

Yeah, however Luke was a burnt out dork not knowing what to do after his glorious battles and victories. In contrast to "oh it's all meaningless snowflake Luke" Zizek is a continues heavy explosion on precisely the same meaninglessness. Z : 1 L : 0 😂

[@juicerino]

dramatic final moment

[@andrewroberts8139]

Britney Spears' Rule of Government lol

[@futuristiclettuce]

Great taken down of Sam Harris' superficial atheism at 1:03:20

[@9000ck]

I'm coming to the conclusion that Zizek is like a big unorganised compost heap of ideas...he's forever going off on tangents...but occasionally he brings up the gold (which perhaps in the compost analogy is like a fungal network) which makes sense of it all. Ideology as unknown knowns. Disgust as the very human feeling which comes from when the frontier between the inside and outside is breached.

[@abooswalehmosafeer173]

Surgery vivesection examination tearing apart at times ...

[@21stcenturyoptimist]

Why is the janitor talking on the podium?

[@pinakibhattacharyya7853]

Slavoj doesn't get enough sleep!

[@sous-titreenfrancais8471]

I would like to know the name of the professor who presented S Z

[@YouADamnWitch]

If I knew he did this speech I would have walked to Grand Rapids.

[@theacademyofgermanidealism6210]

1:28 is Schelling's view...a good view

[@kazkk2321]

I hate the between the lines rules too we should outgrow them.

[@ourlovehowerica]

Thats interesting.

[@edwardbackman744]

Good talk but holy shit why do the Bohr/toilet bits have to work their way into every damn public appearance

[@deep_fried_analysis]

1:41:39 ... hey, that's John Green!

[@Life_Of_Mine_]

Got it

[@wkl3553]

What college was this done at and when?

[@QoraxAudio]

Fully pixelized video with Zizek having a not fully grey beard. How old is this recording?

[@Qvmmy]

almost 20yo ı believe

[@handyalley2350]

2006

[@thereallegend4lyfe]

1:04:00 Talking about Sam Harris' "End of Faith".

[@sullivansongz]

26:00 - "disturbed the balance of Neil Young"???

[@hetmanjz]

Haha, "yin(g) yang."

[@sullivansongz]

+Jan Zamojski 😌Thanks for clearing that up

[@hetmanjz]

éanna o'sullivan No problem!

[@pattran4057]

slavoj’s video quality looking like fidel castro

[@StephenThomsonMoore]

when was this recorded?

[@handyalley2350]

2006

[@dumpsta-divrr365]

1:33:24 no wonder he chose Blue Velvet as one of the movies in perverts guide to cinema

[@Dea7hCubeK]

At 22:35 ish to 22:00 he is critiquing Alan Watts lololol. I appreciate it though!

[@turgayulusoy9783]

me to! it is hard to go back in time.

[@JamonJamoni]

T

[@Life_Of_Mine_]

Name of the lady that gave the introduction?

[@stephen0793]

So the ideological significance of 911- any thoughts people? Wish Zizek had elaborated (of course, the mujahideen were at one point on American payroll, but whatever)

[@denitargski8955]

someone make a gif 1:57:00

[@fredwelf8650]

Zizek seems to be saying, like Hegel, that god is being, that is, that god is not a transcendent thing but exists in the interactions between humans. This however leads to the problem of freedom as necessity, unless freedom is merely the arbitrary 'do whatever you like,' which no one would accept and Hegel calls a limited freedom or no freedom at all. But, spirit as freedom or as god does not accord with the notion of Christ's death as a giving to humans their freedom, that is, making them responsible for what they do. The perspective from Christ as he dies on the cross or during the scourge is not comprehensible as compassion for man. Anyway, humans cannot be said to have internalized any of this god-talk as they terrorize and murder each other constantly. Zizek's discussion of god and freedom is hypocritical because he readily acknowledges that a 'confession' that is too deep, too internal, is irrelevant to action, yet he engages in it.

[@warisaijaz]

has anyone here watched “the reluctant fundamentalist “?

[@WindsongPodcast]

No what's that about?

[@saeedn1693]

I prefer to not.and so on and so on.

[@OurFriendErik]

From back in the days when he would actually show up places prepared to make a point.

[@inquisitorwhitemane9722]

+Erik Beck I wasn't aware that he changed in that regard (considering I listen to his lectures in random order), but I have to say this is definitely the most coherent presentation I've seen so far. Quite insightful really.

[@allisonschempf2230]

Sturgeon's Law LMAO

[@n_7458]

Jijek?

[@RodrigoOrtizSalema]

Yep

[@sleeplezznightz]

22:27 SZ completely misunderstood the Book of Job if he is skipping the introduction. The devil, in the introduction, is the primary antagonist and philosopher examining human behavior. And like a philosopher, the devil believes human behavior is understood by him and that man will fold to pressure. To say there is no deeper meaning to Job's suffering betrays ignorance of the story.

[@sonarbangla8711]

The Jews were repeatedly expelled by many countries/cultures and after WW2 Europeans settled on the one Zizek refers 'that the Jews wanted to mingle with the locals', as usual the European intellectuals gives the wrong interpretation. The Jews didn't want to mingle with the locals, instead they found the locals inferior and bossed over the Christians and the locals never understood who bossed over who. Marx gave the correct explanation in 'the Jewish problem', where he explained the Jewish logic of enhancing the value of money, ERRONOUSLY, the main reason why all locals hated the Jews.!!!

[@farrider3339]

Envy for economic riches ? Is that all ? Well, seems very basic and sounds plausible but . . . However I agree to your description of seeing the "locals" as inferior or at least as being on THEIR ground andbyecaus of being a sheer menace to be thrown out or exploited to the bones. The one who didn't get the lesson from (his own) history, is condemned to repeat it (and will have to pay the price for this in the now and times to come).

[@sonarbangla8711]

@@farrider3339 Indeed, Jews are fleeing in thousands, they are not under stupid Yankees, but has to answer to the smart Chinese.

[@treintaydiez]

blurry ....

[@pbradford021]

thank you captain obvious.

[@blerocs]

Ok, he makes one think about it but his point is not valid: why should not Job's trial have a deeper meaning (for example material wealth vs obedience and closeness to one's true self/God?)

[@matthewfrazier9254]

blerocs that’s just not in the text my bro bro

[@cinereus3601]

United 93 got shot down

[@BBob-qs1zz]

She is gorgeous.

[@mikenowacki9729]

consolidate lol

[@hansgeselt1065]

Im like 12 Hours into Zizek now and on the edge of giving up. His toilette argument is insanly stupid. I asked that same question when i was 6 to my dad. He instantly concluded that it might have a Plateau, so that no Splash would happen. Zizek read to full Books about toilettes and didnt come up with that tought.

[@sujalthapa7887]

But the fact that not all toilets have it is itself sth worth examining wouldn't you say?

[@handyalley2350]

I liked zizek by the second hour in. And i thought he was a boring european old guy, from flipoing over his wiki page pic a xouple of times. No reading or hearing- just viewing from afar, imagining fictions. Try the egs lectures. Zizek's at his best.

[@jamesmhango2619]

Symbolic castration

[@Kobe29261]

Slavoj's insistence on his atheism is one of denial. Increasingly as a Christian I find he is more so than most - its as if a man were to insist on describing an elephant but refrain from identifying it as such. Like C. S. Lewis my prayer is that he is "Surprised by Joy"

[@littlefaint]

You're misreading him: it's not that he is an atheist who DENIES his Christianity. Rather, he is a true Christian precisely BECAUSE he is atheist. For Zizek, the ultimate message of Christianity is atheism: God literally died on the cross. He is gone, forever, because that is the only way for us (humans) to be free.

[@Kobe29261]

demonessv THAT is NOT the ultimate message of Christianity; that is hijacking Christianity for political ideology. Read Karl Barth/Chesterton et al; of course Christ literally died on the cross but only in the sense of a seed dying. The emancipatory potential of Christianity lies in that a man can today live a life free from slavery through an encounter with the Holy Spirit - not merely political or ideological slavery but spiritual slavery but this is no conversation for a KZbin comment section. I wish you well.

[@umadumadumad]

Anogoya Dagaati u mad?

[@Kobe29261]

umadumadumad Naa bro; its all good. I love Slavoj (although I'd probably get excommunicated reading him lol) - he forces us to think about the world in new ways. I'm thrilled that there are more and more people giving him a hearing. We need -like he keeps saying - 'theorists' such as himself. As a Christian though his caricature of Christianity is somewhat disturbing - being one of the most sincere people in the public space I think he could do better. But it is impossible to speak honestly about Christ without facing the mystery at the heart of the incarnation or as he does entirely re-imagining the phenomenon.

[@haggeoromero]

Anogoya Dagaati " As a Christian though his caricature of Christianity is somewhat disturbing" why should that bother you? you should not be disturbed at all by anything he or anyone else says about your religion. consider what a Buddhist monk or an Amish person would do when their beliefs are mocked....nothing, they do nothing. think about that.

[@rocantenrocanten4150]

как и сейчас.... блаблабла