Internationally renowned philosopher and cultural critic Slavoj Žižek returns to Seton Hall for a public talk entitled “Why Do We Enjoy Feeling Ashamed?” Recorded November 1st 2022.
Golda Meir once approached one of her ministers reminding him that it was about time to learn Hebrew: "Aren't you ashamed that after 10 in Israel you still can't speak Hebrew?" "Of course," answered the minister, "but being ashamed is much easier than learning Hebrew."
What a wonderful man. Words matter, indeed. I agree that psychoanalysis is a tool we should use more often to understand the world and ourselves. I also appreciate how he always introduces love in his arguments, giving it the academic attention it deserves and very rarely receives.
Slobbering Left King - fan of Hegel, who was a bootlicker of the German Royalty. Folks like Slavo, live inside a tiny closed society (mostly all white) and daydreaming of a lovely Marxist Universe. Aha That World Which Will Never Came to be, never will... What a hype this guy is - and hyper in essence - in terms of not making an iota of difference to ground reality with this eternal verbiage.
Words matter, but not as much as intention. Fans of identity politics completely disregard all intention. To them, only a word or a gesture in and of itself is enough to forever indict someone.
Slobbering Left King - fan of Hegel, who was a bootlicker of the German Royalty. Folks like Slavo, live inside a tiny closed society (mostly all white) and daydreaming of a lovely Marxist Universe. Aha That World Which Will Never Came to be, never will... What a hype this guy is - and hyper in essence - in terms of not making an iota of difference to ground reality with this eternal verbiage.
Slobbering Left King - fan of Hegel, who was a bootlicker of the German Royalty. Folks like Slavo, live inside a tiny closed society (mostly all white) and daydreaming of a lovely Marxist Universe. Aha That World Which Will Never Came to be, never will... What a hype this guy is - and hyper in essence - in terms of not making an iota of difference to ground reality with this eternal verbiage.
People constantly praising Chomsky really need to look in a mirror. No, he didn't change, he decided the Cambodian genocide was a thing and stood by his bullshit when the evidence clearly showed that something horrendous had happened. Rinse and repeat with the Yugoslavia wars (though I'd agree in that case "genocide" may be getting misused), or basically anything bad a Marxist-Leninist state has done, it's all American lies to Chomsky! The dudes always just a contrarian and "manufacturered consent" was never a novel idea, read Huxley for example.
Shame like most of our mental mechanism is useful when applied lightly. Of course we live in a time of super-sizing most everything. IMO just as too much can do harm eliminating shame is not the answer. In my 70 years when I have felt shame it opened the door to either rethinking my behavior or to realizing the flinger of shame was using it as a tool of control. Although no claims here to having reached a nirvana as what I try and sometimes experience is a better understanding of me! Know thyself and accept others as they are.
It's an evolutionary adaptation and as Zizek is utterly disinterested in scientific explanations for human behaviour, we get two hours of entertaining irrelevancies.
It's a shame how that one guy took up most of the Q&A time.Yeah. It's like he wanted a debate, and not to ask a question. This would be fine in a one-on-one conversation, but it was kind of disrespectful to the other students there who were actually curious about a question and didn't just want to make a point. The answer to his question is pretty simple as well. By his logic of appeasement "to prevent a nuclear war," any non-nuclear powers that aren't in alliances with a nuclear power are essentially free for the taking. Sure, he takes a little bit of Ukraine. And then next year, there are other uprisings of "local militias" in Russian military uniform in the West of Ukraine, and now the weakened Ukraine has no way to resist the "military aid" that Russia is sending to these "local freedom fighters," just like in Crimea. Ironically, this argument only supports an imperialist view of the world, as only great powers and strong alliances could remain in a world where such appeasement is okay. And it would only bring us closer to a nuclear war, since suddenly any neutral country would have to acquire a nuclear arsenal to protect itself. It just doesn't work.
The guy at 1:46:00 ain't very smart, so Russia has nuclear weapons they say give Crimea or else, and he says yes, then Russia goes, give rest of Ukraine I have nuclear weapons or else, and what does he do? say yes? So any negotiation that includes nuclear weapons as leverage has to necessarily include disarmament and any proposal of disarmament for one country has to include all countries, an very quickly you are inside diplomatic mess that cannot be solved, what is his point then? Mutual nuclear disarmament is what we all want, but how can we achieve this?
@Christopher Grant there isn't only one hive mind if u want to discuss along that line. China, India, Africa also have their individually colored ideologies. Which power do you mean ? The hierarchical structure of power itself which tends more and more back to monarchical appearance in certain countries ? Putin is easy to blame , true ! But he is the bad ass same like USA triggering wars on various continents and let his people live in lowest standards of living. And he definitely is the badest ass of 21st century so far. Historical revisionism, dictatorship, terror are P's only instruments. So to hell with him and his apparatus.
there's a concept in Game Theory called the prisoners dilema. If both sides were to cooperate and mutually disarm that would be the best outcome no? But if you know your opponent is disarming then maintaining your own nuclear weapon stock is preferable because you have lost nothing from not disarming and have gained power because your rival has disarmed and cannot invade you due to fear of being nuked. Both sides operate on this rationale. So the last scenario is both sides keep their arms, neither can be screwed by the other, but also neither side can be invaded this last scenario is more or less a Nash equilibrium which is not necessarily the best action both players in a game can take, but rather what action prevents the worst outcome for either side even if both sides lose out in some sense.
From and outsiders perspective (outside of European majority countries) the Civil War within the global European colonial empire (WW2) was a good thing that led to liberation and independence from colonialism. Today Neo liberalism might be inadvertently, heading us towards another big unavoidable global “civil War” within the new global corporate plutocracy. Where Russian oligarchs, are but just another faction of the same global plutocracy, like the aristocracies of old, carving up the world. I betcha China would love to see this blow up into another Wester civil war again. They’d love to acquire the Eastern portion of Russia for themselves alter the radioactive fallout/dust has settled
I can't believe people seriously ask this question 🤦♂️ people who think that a Russian would need viagra for a Ukrainian woman have neither seen a Ukrainian woman nor Russian in their life. The utter tragedy of western societies is that they believe in the own propaganda. Russians rapped Ukrainians with viagra as did Ghadaffis, Sadams and Assads soldiers because western toilet papers claimed so.
The West should use its best soft power weapon, as in every Russian soldier that deserts is given immediate asylum in a Western country. Russia would empty out overnight.
This is the same talk; the Putin discussion is in this video as well. The only things missing from this video are the clips themselves, which all had to be edited out due to copyright.
Yeah. And it's a shame how it took most of the Q&A time. It's like he wanted a debate, and not to ask a question. This would be fine in a one-on-one conversation, but it was kind of disrespectful to the other students there who were actually curious about a question and didn't just want to make a point. The answer to his question was pretty simple as well. By his logic of appeasement "to prevent a nuclear war," any non-nuclear powers that aren't in alliances with a nuclear power are essentially free for the taking. Sure, he takes a little bit of Ukraine. And then next year, there are other uprisings of "local militias" in Russian military uniform in the West of Ukraine, and now the weakened Ukraine has no way to resist the "military aid" that Russia is sending to these "local freedom fighters," just like in Crimea. Ironically, this argument only supports an imperialist view of the world, as only great powers and strong alliances could remain in a world where such appeasement is okay. And it would only bring us closer to a nuclear war, since suddenly any neutral country would have to acquire a nuclear arsenal to protect itself. It just doesn't work.
Lets just take some time to appreciate how terrible this thumbnail pose is. For some reason one fist is clenched, upside down, and the other arm is awkwardly pollyannaish, and the facial expression looks like he's trying to be sexy, but is not.
Kinda bullshit how he equates universities protecting trans people with censorship. Like, obviously if an institution like that entertained a debate over the existence and validity of a people group, then it would lend credibility to the side that claims that trans people aren't valid or shouldn't exist. It's dogmatic, certainly, but he himself has argued for the utility of dogma as a means of protecting vulnerable people in the past.
@@VoloBonja Then should we discuss Nazism and its benefit? I mean why censor it. When individual's safety and well being are concerned then the issue becomes dire. But there is educative value to debates and should be held to get more clear view.
@@IndiaTides should we? No, we shouldn't. Should we prohibit discussion about Nazism "benefits" ? Imo: NO. That discussion would gather all the fool I'd like to see, just to know how stupidity looks
@@VoloBonja You are underestimating those fools and their capabilities. We had seen how far right can be dangerous. You assume that the freedom of speech allows hate speech as well because that is how it ends up in. The dehumanisation can lead to dangerous consequences. Thank you for reply.
@@IndiaTides i partially agree with you, there is some border between freedom of speech and speech being crime, cant decide where is it for now. But i think those fools closed in their microcosms are even more dangerous. I like to see stupid fucks clearly and react fast.
Zizek moves more to the right.... P.S: Also no basis I could find to Zizek's claim that the soviets under Stalin sprayed the skies to prevent rain on may day. Just another 'good' story like so much else generated during about that time here in the west.
The decadent West is spreading lies about Soviets seeding clouds on the victory day for the parade, instead of accepting that Nature itself dared not to spoil such sacred day. While Soviet scientists boasted about how they can control the weather on command and even modified a An30M plane for that purpose. Серёгин Ю. Дождь и снег по заказу // Юный техник. - 1975. - № 3. - С. 17-21.
They still do spray the skies for military parade in Moscow. you couldn't find something... sometimes it means you were looking in a wrong place (or commenting before actually doing research)
No disrespect intended, but why in so many of these live talks do the introductions last so long? Nobody comes to the talk for the introduction. just get to the speaker. Life is too short for all the fluff.
Reminds me of Herbert Marcuses concept of repressive tolerance. By controlling the disturbance yourself, you turn it into something harmless, maybe even into something helpful.
I love Julian Assange he is a Hero in my Opinion. The difference between us and this guys is their our own childhood and how anybody grow up. So thats means anybody of us make other experience, and thats is what our opinion shapes. What does the "Indians" with that problem, in their forgotten past? They sit around the fire and one starts with his problem and he tell his own opnion and problem. AND THEN, the other guy ...the opposide....the other guy must NOW tell what he have understood, from that what his opposide has said! ..."And when he was right" ...THAN he can explain his own problem with his opposide! AND THAT implies all sides KNOW NOW what the other THINK and WHAT the problem IS what the other side have. And only with that in mind, all can came now to a good solution for all. And the "WALL" is the Language and your Childhood, like how you grow up, what have you see and learn, what is your scoial individual? Have you the empathie to understand REALLY your opposide...and when YOU WRONG, can you nevertheless agree? It is the Language and the "Fine Tune" inside the Words to come closer, to understand that YOUR WORLD is only one LITTLE part. BUT some absolutly UNKOWN Shadow Guys ...know that allready, and use that fact against "ALL"!!! Why? To make Money and get Stinking Rich?! They say "WE ALL ARE CATTLE" ? When that is wrong? Than this "Unknown Shadow Guy's" are Extra Terrestrial. So their is absolutly NO Empathie, no compassion and there is a reason to think, that this Unknown absolutly DON'T KNOW what this Words mean, and what the Feeling of this Words does do inside your Body, with a Person that feel all this Things! And 98% of us Humans feel that compassion! When that is right...such a Being CAN'T BE a Human. In my Opinion with that discribe we are closest near by, to that what we call Reallity! But the disscussion about it, is not considered! Thats the Fatality! I mean UFO'S are freaking REAL...US-Military confirmed it. But maybe that are NOT Aliens, so while they are "Demons!" Not from outer Space, so they came from Earth. That were a reason too, why no Social Media, Militry, TV-Talk Show...Scientist "WOLRD WIDE" wanna talk about that...!? Officially! That the US-Militray confirm it, means not that they are talk about it, so why they don't talk about that Visitings! All this "Acient Aliens" and other TV Media Series are lairs, that is what i belief, they tell nothing ...what they say is "WAIT, TOMORROW WE KNOW MORE! And then there came NOTHING NEW. This is a indicator for "We have something to hide" ! And all the WAR, the GOLD and the ENDLESS MONEY they make... FOR WHAT? The Wikileaks Videos tell us more about that! The "Unknown Shadow Guys" behind...have GREAT Interest and GRUESOME LUST to KILL...angain and again, more and more, year by year ...without end. Is that Human like? That have something of a Sick Criminal Insane that is totally Ill and sick epedemic! And thats phenomena is a "WORLD WIDE" phenomena ...by all Leaders ...because some lonely islands, they have maybe a better harmonie inside their chitizens and government. Nobody can deny that. In my opinion that is NOT a Human like Problem, that is something else. What is feeding in extascy on Human Fleash and Blood and their Hunger is a Lust without an End. The Wikileaks Videos "Shows" this Fact ... question yourself, is this "Human like" ? So what WE HAVE SEEN, by Wikileaks is only the Top of the Mountain...the real DAILY THING will let you Puke in Horror and you can only sleep atfer you seen all of that Stuff, only with a hand full of HARD PILLS ...that knock you out...otherwise you can't sleep anymore. So, "Who are they, the Unknown Shadow Guy's" ...Humans? Really?
Fear's close relative Shame is simply one more of Mind's mechanisms to keep a person inline with it's surroundings ( society ) - it generates a sense of safety as a reward for giving in to that oppressive force - our close relatives the higher primates know it too
1:48:20 There is a strong presence of an Orthodox church in New York, Putin considers to be a member. Or at least shows a membership of. Therefore, New York is safe.
There's an error in your analysis that flaws all the conclusions about on whose side a true Communist will be, when it concerns to the Ukrainian war. A true Communist cannot engage with any form of imperialism, and does not. Therefore not asking for guns for any side. But... the fact is that a victory of Russia on the geopolitical field (which yes consists in ending the USA hegemony) comes as a window of opportunity for all of those oppressed around the world. So.. Communists don't share the same goal with Putin, they want to cease the opportunity. And the further the war goes the biggest are the chances that Russia achieves a bigger geopolitical victory. For Communists just shaking USA hegemony is what is enough and desired. ( ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0ya8dogGW4c.html )
So the expansion of a violent, paranoid, horribly repressive hard right-wing state should uplift the oppressed? AHAHAHHAAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
With all my respect for great work of Dr. Slavoj Žižek I do not understand why he supports Ukraine? Sorry i respect more Russian president that Ukrainian "sniffolo"
This is the moment (1:47:00) how a philosopher can be in a very challenging position, which is still very different from just giving a prepared lecture to the public. I find it quite amusing when a philosopher struggles to find not only the right words, even good arguments to convince his audience. It doesn't matter, the question should have to be the most logical or correct.
the weird thing is that he already addressed that question in his talk by saying that letting putin take european land piece by piece would be just like appeasing hitler. i’m not saying i agree with that but why didn’t he just bring that back up?
@@notquitearealperson I think its a bit more complicated than this. This is a prime example of the difference of is and ought. Where someone falls on this is precisely their subjective willingness to tolerate one or another risk. With the same level of understanding and the same understanding of the facts, equally reasonable people can fall on different sides of the issue. I actually think that Zizek makes a mistake in conflating Yanis' idiotic take about the Taliban victory being a win against a nebulous concept with the problem of the potential of nuclear war, or simply greater war. They can be seen as analogous, and make sense for extending his personal subjective view, but it's much less nebulous and more a question of immediate risk. Yanis' take could easily be called idiotic by most because the "utilitarian math" of it is so apparently off, but a lot more differences arise when we confront a more direct potential for conflict.
To be fair the question is a loaded question because it presumes Russia will use nukes IF not apeased and presumes that Russia will stop, morally i think we should make a stand against Russia , we didnt when they invaded Crimea and used green men in Donetsk and luansk , we did nothing when he used chemical weapons on Syria, we didn't do nothing in thechenia, we didn't do nothing in Georgia, we didn do nothing when he annexed kalingrad.
Actually I realize now I kind of like a certain kind of so called imperialism. A true empire assimilates different people into the empire. The conqueror introduces superior institutions which benefit the conquered. In that regard the only True Empire was Rome. The European Union does the same but without conquests, but with free deliberate participation.
The British Empire too, contributed such institutions, no? Yet like other Empires, relied on the product from the fringes to sustain the Metropole. Rome's Fall didn't upset the pile of dinner plates outside, which stand to this day as a gigantic man-made hill. Some trivia. Anyway, my point could carry onto the conquest of bread, a duplicitous point about the Indian continent's food sources from ancient wars .V. colonial incorporation sub the East India Company.
To belabour the point. Empires seem to equalise differences by exploiting their power until the advantages become nativised. So progress marches onward, was there any other way for the 'New World' indigenous to come into ongoing modernity? However this raises dubious improvements. The South American's of the time saw their god-emperor kidnapped by the Spanish, and so the institution of egality was brought to them and theism must surely have been reduced. Seeing the pics of the coloseum and ancient aqueducts doesn't stir my imagination as much as the huge pile of olive oil pots (Monte Testaccio). The stuff of that empire persists. For ages the food was generated and distributed and that is amazing. How often did this starved and deprived the fringes of the Roman empire? Food security and diverstiy in the Indian continent was influenced by efforts of kingdoms to become empires. As the almost pre-historic armies marched, they brought new crops. Surely then, as in recent history, the empire deprived the fringes. Those empires passed, as has the British Empire, but the new cereals crops way back then, or the South American crops introduced 'recently' persist. Fortunately this is not the only way to increase food diversity so I'm going away now to enjoy my Mi Goreng noodles without being impacted by imperialism in West Papua.
@@TLPardey no I think the British empire was more of a mixed back. In one hand they were abolishing slavery but the way they exploited their colonies with a total disregard of the people living in those colonies wasn’t beneficial for the conquered. I think in British India the living standard for example decreased during British rule.
The poor mans Jordan Petersen. Zizek has plenty to be ashamed about. Supported NATO and the break up of Yugoslavia. The Belgrade victims of NATO bombing say 'Hi'.
JP is failed intellectual compared to Zizek. Him repeating russian propaganda about war in Ukraine just proves the point. Also Zizek obviously annihilated JP during the debate
