Zizek Goes Monarchist

[@sIouchingpoet]

Wow, this is going to be a long, quiet car ride home.

[@VorosMedve]

Did you do a geist in the car?

[@VorosMedve]

Socialism would take too many evenings - an aphorism attributed to Oscar Wilde

[@diogenes2550]

Calling someone a flat-headed, charlatan mystic is insulting, but not sarcastic.

[@PR0R0GN]

When it comes to participatory politics, it gets real old hearing "it's all meetings, all the time thing" exaggeration. If a policy meeting pertains to you, go and partake. If it doesn't, cool; don't partake. But disengaging from direct political action as a long-term process because something sounds tedious, or because you want someone to do it for you, is how power-hoarders take control. Conversely, imagine that a political decision gets made that you dislike and you start complaining because it's not what you wanted---well, you disengaged from direct participation because of "meetings." Also, "alienation is good sometimes" is the kind of thought process that gets us garbage hierarchical politics in the first place. WTF.

[@lbjvg]

This lottery monarch would have to be anonymous no? Otherwise opponents could threaten or bribe.

[@DugongClock]

“Truly to escape Hegel involves an exact appreciation of the price we have to pay to detach ourselves from him. It assumes that we are aware of the extent to which Hegel, insidiously perhaps, is close to us; it implies a knowledge, in that which permits us to think against Hegel, of that which remains Hegelian. We have to determine the extent to which our anti-Hegelianism is possibly one of his tricks directed against us, at the end of which he stands, motionless, waiting for us.” - Foucault Hegel attempted to capture all philosophy before him. Philosophers since him have attempted to answer him in their own way. I would encourage you to study him. If you’ve found him impenetrable, Hegel’s Ladder (1997) by H.S. Harris is the the only complete English commentary on Hegel’s Phenomenology in existence. It is a masterpiece and excellent study tool. If Hegel is Aristotle, Harris is Ibn Rushd. However, even reading secondary literature may eliminate some of your common misconceptions (such as Hegel being a Prussian apologist).

[@markoslavicek]

What's with the beeps?

[@Garrett1240]

Pill pod is for the kids

[@khana.713]

First 10 mins should be family friendly, then it doesn't matter. Weird and specific KZbin requirements.

[@watcher8582]

I mean the obvious retort to choosing a non-expert and non-professional, random or not, is that someone with more knowledge in the domain would make better decisions. If the task is to find a substitute for gasoline to fill up a car tank, clearly you don't want to present equally weighted proposals to a decision makes who has never seen a car. In your discussion, you then end up "why even have a person"? Why not just roll a dice? Well then all of the politics just gets shifted to those who come up with proposals. Random selection of decision makes has been studied a lot. Voting theory, different voting system, this is a mathematical field (e.g. a known gem being "Arrows impossibility theorem", a purely mathematical result.) And inevitably, instead of random picking answers, you'd rather have a anglo which also takes into account facts - and then you're just in an AI technocracy. So let me phrase this hindrance as a question to you: If your system was implemented, why wouldn't people end up trying to design a machine that instead of the d20 takes into account some fact. Bounds the decisions by what's reasonable. That water in the tank makes no sense at all. If you random choose, politics will be about who makes the proposals and how they are weighted.

[@Summer-kb2dm]

From the start - people not liking Kant: well......I don't think you can have the phenomenologists without Kant and furthermore let's not forget Lacan's Real: the subject never connects to it's object. I've always thought of the phenomenologists as spring boarding off of Kant (reactionary that is)...which is a very Hegelian dialectical thing to do. I am not criticizing Kant, Hegel, or any of the phenomenologists nor do I criticize the post Kantians who try to bring us to our experience as "real enough' to which I think continues to be our only possible path out of nihilistic self-destruction. While I admit we are plagued by the asymptotic strivings - we must as Kant asserts try anyway.

[@Summer-kb2dm]

Now on to the rest of the video.

[@dissatisfiedphilosophy]

Zizek keeps winning. Hegelian monarchy is a very cogent conceptualization of governance. There is a great PhD defense of the Hegelian monarchy from the late 90s that I recommend everyone check out.

[@shreyass7442]

What is the paper called?

[@LostSoulAscension]

​​@@shreyass7442it's called the Great PhD defense of the Hegelian Monarchy from the 90s 😂

[@Roland00]

1:00:40 with the dice comment, to go Shakespeare and Latin that die rolling is divination and is evoked several times by Bill in his Julius Caesar, when oracles consulted birds or dice and in the same act the famous line the fault is not in our stars but we do not have the stomach to take charge and act, for unlike the gods we are underlings with a belly that can be stabbed (which sets up the future murder.) And the selection of lots for a jury that too is divination, and we call it chance but the ancients would see it as fate and fortune, the goddess Fortuna or Tyche who was married to the seize the day god, last son of Zeus Tempo / Occasio and you also see his name all the time as Caerus which Walter B, Gramsci lots of early 1900s people talked about with messianic time. (which I think Zizek has written on, so he is reusing his old stuff, just hiding the link.) thanks for the pod and god my comment is long.

[@urbbankilll]

You guys and Zizek both battle a straw man version of the argument against alienation. We could very well overcome alienation in labor and not force everybody to go to meetings every day, the two things aren't even related, the problem is completely in your conceptualization of communism (and his). The point is social reality needs to be made transparent at the level of labor, even when it "operates behind our backs" we have to set that process in motion consciously. There was NO argument in Marx against alienation that demanded everybody go to meetings, but this straw man (at least for Zizek) is very convenient to keep doing liberalism. It's nonsense.

[@benzur3503]

Zizek is opposing not Marx, but the proposals of modern day anarchists who call for collaborative decision making on every topic. Is Zizek wrong in considering decisions made without someones who’s affected by it’s judgement regarding it taken to an account as alienated? If you say its not alienation, than how many discussions, data and minutiae can be accessible to people not focusing on the issue in their daily life until the hammer breaks?

[@bogdanandone9022]

The thing is that the European voting got so god damned bad. In Romania for example was surprisingly bad low key, even if folks voted but y

[@VorosMedve]

First 10-mins of this podcast: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nYaVi5qXhsR7Y7ssi=icU2gApw2K0y2tvv

[@osoisko1933]

D20 Democrats unite!

[@culture-jamming-rhizome]

Nested council structures can help to deal with scaling up political delegation. Anark has 2 videos that go into this "when consensus fail" and "after the revolution". I would also look at the decision making structures of groups like the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, The Zapatistas, Cecosesola, and Fejuve.

[@ihavenojawandimustscream4681]

Lottery based monarchy? Paul Cockshott, who is a maoist and thus very far from Zizek philosophically, also proposed that. Is this the new leftist trend?