I like his idea and from it i have my own veiw on that of charity from goverments, try healing your population from poverty instead of other countries that will almost never survive.
I keep the idea of erradicating the roots of poverty and inequality which justify the existence of charities, welfare state and so on... In fact the origin of this mess is root in the origins of the fossil fueled, unsustainable civilization and I'm not sure we will be able to sort it out before a bloodshed ending of the current way of western societies and now China are doing its dirty bussiness
In the present, yes, we need to continue to provide to charity. However, as the argument goes, we need to look towards fixing the issue from its very starting point. We can't just continue to provide charity forever, that won't solve anything.
@ShitboxXx360 you obviously dont understand the basis of communism and see it as a terrible thing seeing as the most well known communists were self interested tyrants and the opposing forces were well, a little more subtle about their ideas about their controlling economic system. Communism without the military force and corrupt politics WOULD work beautifully IF society as a whole could even comprehend a world were you work for what need/want rather than the money.
also i hope that racists and oligarch apologists soon appropriate and devalue all forms of the "[adjective]posting" construct because it is so wearying
a fashionable nonsense to blame leninism as the source of ethical catastrophe of 20th century.
if misantrophy fits the situation that we live in, then why leninist radicalism is not appropriate? I do not understand why zizek discredits it? these academicians do offer nothing to overthrow capitalism since like charities supporting the maintenance of poverty, these intelectual debates are also binded to the existance of capitalist corruption. social thought is zizek's occupation!
Every one knows that the struggle for financial freedom is unfair. kids in africa, for instance, cant get the same eduation as us but that doesnt mean that we should stop doing the humanitarian thing and try to help the lesser fortunate! And it is by doing that countries with financial struggles can grow out of misery!
I completely understand his arguments and issues with cultural capitalism - my criticism then becomes that all he has done in this lecture is complain. You've see the problems, cool. So do we. Now what do you plan to do to change it?
@songaway13mkify There are four steps to problem solving. Step one, understand the problem. Step two, devise a plan. There's a reason he doesn't offer a solution; too many people still misunderstand the problem. Once enough people realize the problem, then we can progress towards devising a plan as one.
Zizek better explained by this way, drawings. It's hard to perceive what ideas he's trying to explain while I'm only focusing on his wild way and words that are often used.
I was having a discussion about this earlier. Does Zizek think that people should actively participate in the escalation of the problem, or is he merely stating people should withhold from buying organic (bio/fair trade etc.) to shortly alleviate a certain guilt?
@nomologic he is simply stating that buying organic apples is an ideological pseudo-activity that is not adequate in any way to solve the problem of ecology. I do not think it would be his position that we should actively escalate the problem. We should be aware of the ideology that causes our actions, and start to think about how to go beyond capitalism with a human face because it will not save us.
Why his analyses are theoretically brilliant, Zizeh has done nothing real. This is a contrast to Muhammad Yunus for example, a theorist who also make his point on the field. Theories without practical application, or at least experimentation, are as superficial as religions
In general, without preserving the threat or fear of poverty and its consequences (such as charity as a form of humiliation), there is no real motivation for individual success. This may be better than the motivation by fear practiced in comunism. It appears that curiosity and ambition are not enough for the good functioning of our society. If we eliminate poverty or the illusion called 'money', these strongest thugs and gangs will rule without any of current false appearances of fairness.
An excellent visualization, but Zizek's full of shit. We have plenty of examples of societies where the rich give -nothing- to the poor (See: Angola, India, Brazil up until quite recently), and it didn't trigger any sort of grand movement or improvement in living conditions.
It's no mistake that democratic revolutions tend to only happen once people reach a certain level of material wealth (or a baseline level of welfare); someone who is starving cannot worry about rights.
Holy christ, has the message of this video flown completely over your head? Not only does Zizek admit that charity is better then nothing, but that the point is that we should not demolish charity, but demolish what caused the point to charity.
All socioeconomic systems relying on the altruistic, honest, right thinking limits on human behavior the majority would deem prudent, are doomed to fail; capitalism, communism, it doesn't matter (set aside the obvious complication that neither capitalism nor communism have ever been implemented in a fashion consistent with the ideology as originally imagined).
it doesn't matter what system you use, it is the people that run it that are the problem, as long as there are selfish ambitious people more interested in being worshipped or above others these problems will never be solved if all people both at the top and bottom were people of integrity then the problems we have would be reduced by 80 percent or more. you would still have sickness, death and imperfections but it would be a ton better.
The power of nationalism, patriotism, racism, religion and culturalism is innate; it's just below the surface of society. Our plutocracy and corporations will unleash this monster (fascism) if they're pushed to the wall. Real democracy and political philosophy is alien to most people. It scares them. We have to get philosophy and real history into the schools and create an entrenched process of bottom-up democracy without creating a crisis. Crisis usually gives the advantage to plutocracy.
@TheForwardGaze There is always a ruling elite. Democracy's ruling elite usually consists of whoever can best deceive and manipulate the public. Humanity progressed mostly under forms of constitutional monarchy (renaissance, enlightenment made possible by kings rejecting the pope) and as monarchy left the world, so too did humanity's progress.
ALL republics/democracies have a civil war or genocide or both within their first century. USA, Weimar, First French Republic, Soviet Republics, etc.
Capitalism requires growth and the ceiling is approaching. A shorter ceiling wrecked Song China and Rome. Our recent ancestors pushed through it thanks to the Industrial Revolution and the advent of modern science, but we shouldn't assume that it was our only ceiling. It's naive to think that technology will step in to save us. The Song and Romans were very advanced compared to what came directly before and after. It didn't save them.
This is absolute garbage. Charity is the basis of faith. We help one another to construct a better world for all of us. There are different types of charity and Soros is not a charitable man. Charity is sharing knowledge and lift up one another.
@jbaquinones I kind of disagree. If you consider charity from a more psycoanalytical point of view it is more like stress release. Thats just my opinion.
@kefalonitis666 Human beings are not horses that only think with their stomachs. We are creatures of empathy and compromise. I lived in many parts of the world and being nice to one another always builds better societies.
@jbaquinones "We help one another to construct a better world for all of us"
Yes, and it was Wilde's rational observation that charity does the opposite of "helping" the poor.
This insight is everything BUT garbage. It is intelligent. "sharing knowledge" sounds like "education or communication" to me and "lifting up each other" means "motivation" to me. Maybe your image of charity is incorrect? Sometimes "concepts" that in truth are "illusions" are very hard to get rid of.
@jbaquinones If I've understood that right, it's absurd! Every anthropologist or sociologist will prove to you that any form of social binding is and has been crucial for the evolution of humans and many other known species.
if you see (and one must in fact) love and respect as a form of social binding...
I know that the whole video was about how charity was now a basis for our economy, but I'm really troubled finding a concrete answer of.... why? haha can somebody tell me please? (:
As far as I understand it, it is because charity mystifies the true problem. It functions as ideology.
Ideology functions as a mystification of the core problem + makes people behave so that the system keeps functioning and creating poverty, "overproduction" and antagonisms + it hides the "helper's" elements of hypocricy etc.
Ideology plays a central role in his criticism of capitalism and it is the basis component for our economy.
I'm not convinced that by making things worse for the most oppressed and exploited will lead to social change. It is true that the corporations are now using philanthropic tokenism to gain competitive advantage but that is better than them using design or further screwing their suppliers on price. Marx supported the Factories Act.
Hay amk. Slavoj biraz daha uğraşırsa. Ne yapacağımızı bulmak için işi gücü bırakıp oturup birbirimize bakmaya başlayacağız. Ve sanırım bu iyi bir şey olacak.
Anti-capitalist vids tend to go like this: "People have 2 much freedom to make their own economic decisions; they're not smart enough to know what it is they want or they tend to consume excessively. Let us modify the typical consumer economic activity via distortions thru government involvement. Yes, government interaction has largely failed in the past. In fact, at times they have produced disasterous nd DEADLY results. But let's fix government problems with MORE government"
Anti-capitalist vids tend to go like this: "People have 2 much freedom to make their own economic decisions; they're not smart enough to know what it is they want or they tend to consume excessively. Let us modify the typical consumer economic activity via distortions thru government involvement. Yes, government interaction has largely failed in the past. In fact, at times they have produced disasterous nd DEADLY results. But let's fix government problems with more government"
Let's do away with the neo-liberal paradigm, which sees everything as something which the economy can overtake and market. Perfect example is green capitalism, which pushes green living as green consumption without attacking overconsumption at all. Or charity as something that can be packaged with a coffee to make people feel like they're doing some good for the world.
@benfly To me he sounds like he wants to stop the factors that cause needy people in the 1st place. He wants to stop papering over the cracks in society that people fall through and rebuild the whole thing so that it's much more solid.
Researching TOMS, came upon this. An interesting look at charities and capitalism--I don't know much about our world at all, and it's nice to have a much more expanded look at the root of the world's problems.
The wellfare state did hold us back, it bribed us, made us think that we where living in a democracy, that maybe our society wasent the best but it was okej anyway.
That time has come to a final end, the welfare state is going to its grave because the capitalist class dont need it because i think they dont fear the people anymore. The working class movement has decayed much thanks to the welfare state, and now finally we are moving again, thanks capitalism!=)
The hypocrisy of these cheap and half-arsed attempts at charity is clear, which is why in terms of charity itself, it's best that they are being properly governed and observed instead of just letting them loose, because, LET'S BE FRANK HERE, you do NOT know if the money you donate would actually come to the people you want to help, especially with the rogue organizations who manipulate your sympathy to gain money (possibly for their own narcissistic profits...)
In my opinion we don't need a shift, we just have to turn back. (At least in Germany) we had a well functioning social system from the 60s - 80s with a working medical system, unemployment security and adequate wages for the working. Then they decided to pump all the money from the bottom to the top, and now we can watch everywhere: A constantly raising numbers of millionaires and billionaires and a growing amount of people struggling for a decent life.
Zizek has some great ideas but I think he got too apologetic toward the end. His opinions are well-supported and thought out. It's unfortunate that he couldn't cite an idea or two to correct the problem, but that's much harder than talking about it.
for how long time we are going to figure out that we must make each other life worth leaving, lets hope the Sol don't expand faster enough to forbid this this
Starbucks get full tax relief for their 'charitable' donation, it is not altruism.
The same with McDonald's with their children's $1 from every Big mac day it is all tax deductible and no one buys just a big mac. NOT ALTRUISM just maximizing profits good capitalist business practice.
It is wiser to give to charity yourself and get the tax relief yourself rather than giving greater profits to cynical big business.
@Raulthomas30 Totally agree, this is a problem which is obvious if one were to spend the correct amount of time thinking about. If anyone were to stop and think before they invested into charity, surely they would realize they are just prolonging a person's state in poverty. It IS pointless.
Zizek does say that the solution would be to create a society in which poverty is impossible, but he never addresses how, or in which ideals could it be built. Instead, he elaborates further on the issue.
@Raulthomas30 Zizek is a philosopher first and foremost and the essential nature of philosophy is to ask more questions than it answers. It is a problem posing study not a problem solving one. It empowers us with a new perspective and its up to us to act on this new found knowledge.
@Raulthomas30 You could come up with your own. Why rely on some guy to tell you what to do when you've got the capacity to think for yourself? We have to stop relying on 'experts' politicians or business/the market to solve these problems and do it ourselves.
@DavidCoy99 Everyone is not cut from the same cloth. I am not a strategist, I am an implementer. I am not a person consumed with pride to ignore the gudiance of others (especially people whom I respect) in favour of my own. Tell me what I need to do to save the world and I'll do it.
@Raulthomas30 Zizek has stated that the role of today's philosophy is to better understand the questions we put forward. Today's "left" needs criticism to better orient itself around a goal (ie, tackling poverty).
@tombeddoe No! 'tackling poverty' IS liberalism because it assumes the non-existence if ideology. That's his entire point: to destroy the reason that poverty exists in the first place.
@Maxstate Wow, excuse the crazyposting. Please let me rephrase: Zizek talks about liberalism as being the underlying philosophy of capitalism. He describes 'liberal communists' just in the way that you are talking right now: in terms of the environment, poverty, etc. - problems free of ideology that we must come together as a movement or people to solve. But Zizek's point is, was and will always will be that the problem is capitalism; ideology not only exists - you're a part of it.
@Raulthomas30 Do you want 1 person to tell you what you should do? Why don't you contribute and offer a solution with the rest of the population. I hear democracy is a great concept.
@Raulthomas30 As Zizek says himself - it is not the purpose of public intellectual to provide solutions but to ensure we're asking the right questions.
@Raulthomas30 Because people need to be able to think for themselves instead of depending on others to make solutions for you. Thats the problem, no one is thinking for themselves anymore, everyone is expecting it to happen for them. This isn't a one man solution.
@FanaticDrummer Can you please elaborate at what point in history it was that all humans did 'think for themselves' (using your definition of that term). Because I'm going to posit that the mass existence of critically aware people has never existed.
@KRistos20x6 This must have wen't over your head, and you just reiterated what i what said. I said thats the problem, people "don't" think for themselves,ever. Everyone expects one person to lead or follow, wrong, in todays world where only the elite and corrupt run this country, its up to the small people to change this. We need the wise to overcome the clever, because the weak will never think for themselves.
@smile221 easier said than done. this monetary system suits only to people with lots of money since they can pile even more of it. this people moreover, have no sympathy for no one else but themselves and do not want to share money with the rest of us so they will do anything do sustain this system.
Money=power
who in this modern society or any society in the past for that matter doesnt like or want power?? why lose power if you can perserve it or think that you can?
Capitalism is no longer relevant. It is the cause of many ills in society. It is ruining the planet. Capitalists expect infinite growth from a planet with finite resources.
"the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society, and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an over-riding law. It is unfit to rule because it is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery, because it cannot help letting him sink into such a state, that it has to feed him, instead of being fed by him. Society can no longer live under this bourgeoisie, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society."
great to see zizkes thought materialised. i'd like a copy of those illustrations. hes hard to follow when ur just listening to him, and people get confused and think his thoughts are all over the place and illogical etc. but get a copy of that train of thought and u'll see a coherent message
Capitalism, Socialism, or any "ism" that has been created by man has got to go. Capitalism was good in the 20's or 30's, but that indeed led us to where we are today, which is a mix of a lot of things. I like to say we in the the U.S. are a Corporatocracy, since Capitalism is all about self serving interest, which gave incentive to get to where we are today. We know y Socialism does not work. It is time to get rid of money, private property, and start using our resources more efficiently. RBE.
@joelpilotf15 I sure did. Socialism has money involved... I think you need to do your homework on what an RBE is. An RBE feeds the world/ creates abundance using science and technology and has no money involved aka the scientific method for social concern. It uses science & technology to solve our problems, not politicians or religion. So, I think I do not need to be the one to do my hw. Since I assume you have very limited thinking on how the world can be a better place without any "ism".
@benandreas369 That "ism" thing. Can't you name anything with an "ism"? Whatever you support could be an "ism" it just takes someone to name however he or she wants to. Would you reject you own proposals if someone "ism-ed" them? C'mon. If RBE's fed the world and created abundance, which is a huge word, 6 million kids wouldn't die of hunger each year. That's what the video is about, they don't solve any problem at all.
@benandreas369 The problem lies in zoning socialism. I have more in common with a student/worker from ur country or even with u than with the rich here in PR. You can't achieve socialism by zones just like u'll never fix hunger or poverty by zones. It has to be a conscious, well-spread effort to educate and then work on a real and permanent solution. Up to date this has never happened. It is obvious that the past socialist project failed but u need to stop participating in charity capitalism
@Dissimul I think you might have dumb down Zizek's argument a little too much. I've read numerous books of his and I don't think the point is to "embrace true altruism" as an a priori, on the contrary he would call that pure ideology.
@Dissimul ayn rand sucks though, she had it all wrong and IS and WAS the cause of the financial and economic collapse and depression we live in now....
Assuming that 'alleviating the symptoms' is a bad thing is a potentially disastrous downfall of this argument. I agree in the old feed a man a fish/teach a man to fish argument, but in many cases just dealing with the circumstances is enough. Who's to say that one of those cleft-palate children, after his $20 operation, won't make a million dollars US and come back to make sure that thousands of other children will have his opportunity? Long-term fixes are best, but we must help now too.
@PratzStrike The "a person might go on to do something great!" argument isn't very reasonable; even though we can't say he/she won't go on to become a philanthropic millionaire, we CAN say that the vast, overwhelming majority won't go on to become millionaires.
The problem he describes is small amounts of charity keeping people satisfied/complacent enough to not push for real change (I disagree that individual, rather than systemic, acts are harmful, though)
@Dissimul On personal terms the two are quite different. By most all accounts Ayn Rand was a control freak BITCH from hell. I've heard repeatedly that Mr. Zizek is a nice fellow. (Although he protest and claim he'd prefer to be considered the other thing. haha.)
I made zizek's last argument to my dad - about a charity that was doing facial reconstructions for poor people - he said - no it makes a huge difference - he was right - please consider donating to "Operation Cleft" - run by rotary australia.
I think there's a HUGE problem with how the world is working right now, that is impossible for the almost 4,000 people who have liked this video to solve. Doing things like sponsoring a kid in Africa to feed & educated him/her may just be alleviating the symptoms of this HUGE problem, but I believe that we still have a moral obligation to do good things that alleviate the symptoms. This world is never going to perfect. But with our time & money we can make bits of it better.
@LizziesAnswers The problem is that there is literally no way that individual acts of charity can make a dent in the massive amount of poverty/suffering perpetuated by the society in which we live. It's not just "not perfect." I don't think individual charitable acts are necessarily bad, but they are if they make a person feel that they've done "their part." Africa has a serious problem where nations are in a never-ending debt cycle with Western nations, profiting the West at their expense.
@BenkaiDebussy I agree with you. If I send a $50 check to Africa, it's not gonna really do anything. But if 600,000 people did. It TOTALLY would! I think the real problem is that when people realize they can't make that big of a difference, they choose to instead not make any difference at all. If I sponsor a kid in Africa through let's say, World Vision, no, I'm not ending poverty. But I'm saving one LIFE. And I believe that that's amazing.
@LizziesAnswers jea, but again people in africa dont need $, they need food, shelter etc, they dont have food because they don't have $, so is the problem , that they lack funds to fill their stomachs, or , that the system is inherently inequal and absurd, that they need to have $, while facing starvation and malnutrition, Your feel amazing by keeping the poor aliv instead of challenging the system which makes them poor, Shame
@kaleo183rd I can't challenge the system. I'm only 17. But if I can provide food & shelter for a family, then I AM making a difference. And if everyone had the same mentality as me, we would be changing the world. But people like you are preventing that change.
@LizziesAnswers you're 17 then you should know well enough that firstly, not everyone is gonna have the same mentality as you. And secondly, yes you are making a difference to that one kid by keeping that kid alive, but you're not gonna help the kid get the education they need to step out of it, and you're not making life any much better for the kid or their future generations anyway... if you keep giving the man fishes, who will ever realise how important it is to teach the man how to fish?
@huanhuan861 I actually agree with the whole "give a man a fish and feed him for a day. teach a man a fish, feed him for his life." And actually I'm sponsoring a kid through World Vision and I'm giving her not only food and water, but also medicine and education. World Vision gradually makes villages self sufficient, meaning about 30 or 40 years after they enter into the village. SAME with Compassion & Heifer International. The problem is that not enough people are sponsoring kids =(
@LizziesAnswers There's less people able to sponsor kids than people able to challenge the system. WE are the system WE decide when it goes down. The problem is that not enough people are challenging the system.
@LizziesAnswers To be honest, it's a huge uphill battle to change the way our country functions. But something as simple as just talking about the issue and challenging people when they say things that aren't true can make a big difference. If you correct a facebook comment, for example, many other people will see that. And if it changes the mind of just one of those people, it's worthwhile.
@LizziesAnswers World Vision seems like a good charity, and it's better to donate than to do nothing. That being said, it's even more important to be openly against the system that perpetuates third world poverty; the US's (and other countries/the IMF/World Bank) foreign policy is centered around making other countries friendly to foreign investment. This prevents any local development and allows the people to be exploited. No permanent change is ever going to happen through private charity.
I like his idea and from it i have my own veiw on that of charity from goverments, try healing your population from poverty instead of other countries that will almost never survive.
thevideovan 3 days ago
SLAAHVOJJJJJJJJJJJJZIZAK
sofalofa77 1 week ago
I keep the idea of erradicating the roots of poverty and inequality which justify the existence of charities, welfare state and so on... In fact the origin of this mess is root in the origins of the fossil fueled, unsustainable civilization and I'm not sure we will be able to sort it out before a bloodshed ending of the current way of western societies and now China are doing its dirty bussiness
TheEdzombie1968 1 week ago
In the present, yes, we need to continue to provide to charity. However, as the argument goes, we need to look towards fixing the issue from its very starting point. We can't just continue to provide charity forever, that won't solve anything.
ReeceofConsciousness 1 week ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
people liking this are the same sheeple that supported communism and believed its lies
ShitboxXx360 1 week ago
@ShitboxXx360 What form of Communism Mr.Expert?
kabbinet 1 week ago
@kabbinet You know, the kind that ruined countries and killed millions of people.
ShitboxXx360 1 week ago
@ShitboxXx360 LOL, you think Slavoj Zizek is a "sheep"? What an idiot.
ThwartedVillainy 1 week ago
@ThwartedVillainy i think you need to learn to read buddy
ShitboxXx360 1 week ago
@ShitboxXx360 you obviously dont understand the basis of communism and see it as a terrible thing seeing as the most well known communists were self interested tyrants and the opposing forces were well, a little more subtle about their ideas about their controlling economic system. Communism without the military force and corrupt politics WOULD work beautifully IF society as a whole could even comprehend a world were you work for what need/want rather than the money.
edslerson 1 week ago
also i hope that racists and oligarch apologists soon appropriate and devalue all forms of the "[adjective]posting" construct because it is so wearying
6H39i2y5 1 week ago
i do not know what it means that we are using imageboard memes to discuss this in these comments
whatever it means, though, i assure you it is something bad, and bad for people
i don't know whom, yet, but i have a good idea
6H39i2y5 1 week ago
Ronald McDonalds says "YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID". - great I'm back to trolling.
ShadowHawkblack 2 weeks ago
>Calls charity idealisy
>Proposes Socialism.
Rofl
arrowdynamic 2 weeks ago
@arrowdynamic He didn't propose socialism if you actually payed attention. In fact, he said multiple times that it doesn't work.
ThwartedVillainy 1 week ago
a fashionable nonsense to blame leninism as the source of ethical catastrophe of 20th century.
if misantrophy fits the situation that we live in, then why leninist radicalism is not appropriate? I do not understand why zizek discredits it? these academicians do offer nothing to overthrow capitalism since like charities supporting the maintenance of poverty, these intelectual debates are also binded to the existance of capitalist corruption. social thought is zizek's occupation!
gilliali35 2 weeks ago
Charity is not demoralising!
Every one knows that the struggle for financial freedom is unfair. kids in africa, for instance, cant get the same eduation as us but that doesnt mean that we should stop doing the humanitarian thing and try to help the lesser fortunate! And it is by doing that countries with financial struggles can grow out of misery!
Feel free to disagre
GameAlot1231 2 weeks ago
....and so on.
MrMan322 3 weeks ago
No I eat organic apples because GMO is bad for you lol what a guy.
MrLettuceguy 3 weeks ago
Just a bunch of disconnected rambling.
NumberShift 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
sneakman23 2 weeks ago
@NumberShift Funny that you say that, because this is Zizek at his most lucid. "Having a clear point" is not something that he achieves very often.
sneakman23 2 weeks ago
I was once an active philanthropist, but then I took an arrow to the knee...
joking aside, this video actually presents a good concept to think about.
AlizarineSilvermoon 1 month ago
I completely understand his arguments and issues with cultural capitalism - my criticism then becomes that all he has done in this lecture is complain. You've see the problems, cool. So do we. Now what do you plan to do to change it?
songaway13mkify 1 month ago
@songaway13mkify There are four steps to problem solving. Step one, understand the problem. Step two, devise a plan. There's a reason he doesn't offer a solution; too many people still misunderstand the problem. Once enough people realize the problem, then we can progress towards devising a plan as one.
c0unterph0bia 1 month ago 13
@songaway13mkify
Well at least he correctly interpreted the problem.
machinevos 1 month ago
@songaway13mkify
> implying this video is about cultural capitalism
> implying your "understanding" doesn't contradict his arguments
> implying he complained
> implying he has to offer solutions for all problems everytime he speaks
> implying he has to offer solutions at all
> implying he doesn't discuss solutions in other videos or books
bulbulxp 3 weeks ago
@bulbulxp
more like
this is the first time i've been introduced to the topic
> implying i don't really know anything and i was curious
> implying jesus, chill.
songaway13mkify 3 weeks ago
Wish i could understand wtf this guy is saying.
truhls 1 month ago
@truhls
He is saying that we are fucked.
machinevos 1 month ago
Zizek better explained by this way, drawings. It's hard to perceive what ideas he's trying to explain while I'm only focusing on his wild way and words that are often used.
banyganteng 1 month ago
I was having a discussion about this earlier. Does Zizek think that people should actively participate in the escalation of the problem, or is he merely stating people should withhold from buying organic (bio/fair trade etc.) to shortly alleviate a certain guilt?
nomologic 1 month ago
@nomologic he is simply stating that buying organic apples is an ideological pseudo-activity that is not adequate in any way to solve the problem of ecology. I do not think it would be his position that we should actively escalate the problem. We should be aware of the ideology that causes our actions, and start to think about how to go beyond capitalism with a human face because it will not save us.
MiPerson 1 month ago
Hi,
where can i find original record (Zizek's lecture?)
rieux1947 1 month ago
Why his analyses are theoretically brilliant, Zizeh has done nothing real. This is a contrast to Muhammad Yunus for example, a theorist who also make his point on the field. Theories without practical application, or at least experimentation, are as superficial as religions
rjgm02 2 months ago
is there a written version of this speech?
blacklotus13 2 months ago
@blacklotus13 Is there a downloadable version of this picture?
Kosorovich 2 months ago
@Kosorovich If you get real player (free) it allows you to download the youtube videos.
stickynickel 1 month ago
I was hoping for the resulting image more than anything else so I could study it at leisure.
Kosorovich 1 month ago
@Kosorovich :L
Kosorovich 1 month ago
In general, without preserving the threat or fear of poverty and its consequences (such as charity as a form of humiliation), there is no real motivation for individual success. This may be better than the motivation by fear practiced in comunism. It appears that curiosity and ambition are not enough for the good functioning of our society. If we eliminate poverty or the illusion called 'money', these strongest thugs and gangs will rule without any of current false appearances of fairness.
amarin8909 2 months ago
Boy Zizek took forever to get to his f*cking point. I agree with it wholeheartedly, but RSA could have edited out about 5 minutes of this video.
hrolvnir 2 months ago in playlist RSA Animate
@hrolvnir I found the whole thing interesting actually, and I'm glad the first half was in it to give us some background on where we are today.
grayfoxv 2 months ago
An excellent visualization, but Zizek's full of shit. We have plenty of examples of societies where the rich give -nothing- to the poor (See: Angola, India, Brazil up until quite recently), and it didn't trigger any sort of grand movement or improvement in living conditions.
It's no mistake that democratic revolutions tend to only happen once people reach a certain level of material wealth (or a baseline level of welfare); someone who is starving cannot worry about rights.
paulblaq 2 months ago
@paulblaq
Holy christ, has the message of this video flown completely over your head? Not only does Zizek admit that charity is better then nothing, but that the point is that we should not demolish charity, but demolish what caused the point to charity.
SpartanM621 2 months ago 45
seria tão legal se alguem postasse essa video com legenda =/
GinkoKurokawa 2 months ago in playlist Mais vídeos de theRSAorg
1:55 - You misquote Zizek. He says one and the same GESTURE not CLUSTER
skinny326614 2 months ago
All socioeconomic systems relying on the altruistic, honest, right thinking limits on human behavior the majority would deem prudent, are doomed to fail; capitalism, communism, it doesn't matter (set aside the obvious complication that neither capitalism nor communism have ever been implemented in a fashion consistent with the ideology as originally imagined).
strapmonkey 2 months ago in playlist More videos from theRSAorg
it doesn't matter what system you use, it is the people that run it that are the problem, as long as there are selfish ambitious people more interested in being worshipped or above others these problems will never be solved if all people both at the top and bottom were people of integrity then the problems we have would be reduced by 80 percent or more. you would still have sickness, death and imperfections but it would be a ton better.
the real hinderance is satan sin and death.
TheRosa63 2 months ago
The power of nationalism, patriotism, racism, religion and culturalism is innate; it's just below the surface of society. Our plutocracy and corporations will unleash this monster (fascism) if they're pushed to the wall. Real democracy and political philosophy is alien to most people. It scares them. We have to get philosophy and real history into the schools and create an entrenched process of bottom-up democracy without creating a crisis. Crisis usually gives the advantage to plutocracy.
TheForwardGaze 2 months ago 2
@TheForwardGaze There is always a ruling elite. Democracy's ruling elite usually consists of whoever can best deceive and manipulate the public. Humanity progressed mostly under forms of constitutional monarchy (renaissance, enlightenment made possible by kings rejecting the pope) and as monarchy left the world, so too did humanity's progress.
ALL republics/democracies have a civil war or genocide or both within their first century. USA, Weimar, First French Republic, Soviet Republics, etc.
Cyrus255 2 months ago in playlist More videos from theRSAorg
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This guy is pure evil. Just another communist/socialist.
ziploc100 2 months ago
Love Zizek. He's twitchier than a twitchy thing that's twitchy!
dseeto88 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Good idea, but I do not like those "so on and so on.." plus his accent is frankly annoying.
glorafa 3 months ago
@glorafa You can't seriously be saying that non-native English speakers should not talk, are you?
poszmete93 2 months ago
Capitalism requires growth and the ceiling is approaching. A shorter ceiling wrecked Song China and Rome. Our recent ancestors pushed through it thanks to the Industrial Revolution and the advent of modern science, but we shouldn't assume that it was our only ceiling. It's naive to think that technology will step in to save us. The Song and Romans were very advanced compared to what came directly before and after. It didn't save them.
TacticusPrime 3 months ago
Love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal!
Just as true today as it was back then.
TacticusPrime 3 months ago
Comment removed
MrGoofyfooter 3 months ago
I tought I heard a putty tat
siralucard19 3 months ago
It*s SOOOOO funny! and so important to know and so on and so on!
i love "Coffee Karuma" ;))) i am wondering if mine is fair enough...
Let*s Go Occupy ugly Capitalism all around our world!
travelingjojo 3 months ago
Love Zizek. Also, wonderful illustration.
EnigmaticNeurosis 3 months ago
Comment removed
EnigmaticNeurosis 3 months ago
The graphist is really good. Not stepping on the talker's toes and having the liberty nonetheless to produce something personal and enjoyable. Kudos.
etbadaboum 3 months ago
I am so glad that I have come across this channel. This is one of the best things that I have seen.
Brilliant.
TheBestInterest 3 months ago
Has everyone seen Zeitgeist Moving Forward? A Resource Based Economy makes so much sense on so many levels.
efortune357 3 months ago
This is absolute garbage. Charity is the basis of faith. We help one another to construct a better world for all of us. There are different types of charity and Soros is not a charitable man. Charity is sharing knowledge and lift up one another.
jbaquinones 3 months ago
@jbaquinones I kind of disagree. If you consider charity from a more psycoanalytical point of view it is more like stress release. Thats just my opinion.
kefalonitis666 3 months ago
@kefalonitis666 Human beings are not horses that only think with their stomachs. We are creatures of empathy and compromise. I lived in many parts of the world and being nice to one another always builds better societies.
jbaquinones 3 months ago
@jbaquinones How is this in contradiction with what Zizek said?
LokHangLorraine 3 months ago
@jbaquinones "We help one another to construct a better world for all of us"
Yes, and it was Wilde's rational observation that charity does the opposite of "helping" the poor.
This insight is everything BUT garbage. It is intelligent. "sharing knowledge" sounds like "education or communication" to me and "lifting up each other" means "motivation" to me. Maybe your image of charity is incorrect? Sometimes "concepts" that in truth are "illusions" are very hard to get rid of.
MrGoofyfooter 3 months ago
@MrGoofyfooter There's no semantic argument for mutual love and respect.
jbaquinones 3 months ago
@jbaquinones If I've understood that right, it's absurd! Every anthropologist or sociologist will prove to you that any form of social binding is and has been crucial for the evolution of humans and many other known species.
if you see (and one must in fact) love and respect as a form of social binding...
MrGoofyfooter 3 months ago
@MrGoofyfooter I agree with the anthropologist or sociologist on this matter.
jbaquinones 3 months ago
You sit are an artist.
deutschbuch30 3 months ago
I know that the whole video was about how charity was now a basis for our economy, but I'm really troubled finding a concrete answer of.... why? haha can somebody tell me please? (:
tigresacute 3 months ago
@tigresacute
As far as I understand it, it is because charity mystifies the true problem. It functions as ideology.
Ideology functions as a mystification of the core problem + makes people behave so that the system keeps functioning and creating poverty, "overproduction" and antagonisms + it hides the "helper's" elements of hypocricy etc.
Ideology plays a central role in his criticism of capitalism and it is the basis component for our economy.
also, check again 6:30 - 7:05
bulbulxp 3 months ago
I'm not convinced that by making things worse for the most oppressed and exploited will lead to social change. It is true that the corporations are now using philanthropic tokenism to gain competitive advantage but that is better than them using design or further screwing their suppliers on price. Marx supported the Factories Act.
satheist 3 months ago
fairtrade is better then the deal that was being made before, so at least that's progress ?
firemachima 3 months ago
Comment removed
tkendirli 3 months ago
Hay amk. Slavoj biraz daha uğraşırsa. Ne yapacağımızı bulmak için işi gücü bırakıp oturup birbirimize bakmaya başlayacağız. Ve sanırım bu iyi bir şey olacak.
tkendirli 3 months ago
why so many anti-capitalist videos?
marcdaddy33 3 months ago
@marcdaddy33 Because capitalism isn't working? Unless you are mega rich of course. Why not more anti-captialism videos?
satheist 3 months ago
@satheist
Anti-capitalist vids tend to go like this: "People have 2 much freedom to make their own economic decisions; they're not smart enough to know what it is they want or they tend to consume excessively. Let us modify the typical consumer economic activity via distortions thru government involvement. Yes, government interaction has largely failed in the past. In fact, at times they have produced disasterous nd DEADLY results. But let's fix government problems with MORE government"
marcdaddy33 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@satheist
Anti-capitalist vids tend to go like this: "People have 2 much freedom to make their own economic decisions; they're not smart enough to know what it is they want or they tend to consume excessively. Let us modify the typical consumer economic activity via distortions thru government involvement. Yes, government interaction has largely failed in the past. In fact, at times they have produced disasterous nd DEADLY results. But let's fix government problems with more government"
marcdaddy33 3 months ago
it's great
all congratulation.
from chile
proyectos1000 4 months ago
very sound logic, very well explained. more, please :D
cykotoxick 4 months ago
First off, your voice is Badass. Second, reread my first point
YUNODERP 4 months ago in playlist More videos from theRSAorg
zizek, was it as good for you as it was for me?
fightpollution 4 months ago 2
Hes got good artistic skill.
Whatever4690 4 months ago
your english really sucks .
LACOMISTEMILANESAH 4 months ago
Let's do away with the neo-liberal paradigm, which sees everything as something which the economy can overtake and market. Perfect example is green capitalism, which pushes green living as green consumption without attacking overconsumption at all. Or charity as something that can be packaged with a coffee to make people feel like they're doing some good for the world.
Neoliberalism can eat a turd!
stickbugg 4 months ago
Sure sounds like he's itching for a society that 'forces' its people (removes the role of charity) to take care of the needy.
benfly 4 months ago
@benfly To me he sounds like he wants to stop the factors that cause needy people in the 1st place. He wants to stop papering over the cracks in society that people fall through and rebuild the whole thing so that it's much more solid.
corktoronto 4 months ago 2
Genius, both Zizek and this animator!
lodproductions90 4 months ago
Essentially, What I see as the main point from this is that prevention on the long-term will always be better than trying to cure the short-term.
MovedByWillAlone 4 months ago 4
I really love the way this is presented.
greatauntprune 5 months ago
Researching TOMS, came upon this. An interesting look at charities and capitalism--I don't know much about our world at all, and it's nice to have a much more expanded look at the root of the world's problems.
inu671 5 months ago
The wellfare state did hold us back, it bribed us, made us think that we where living in a democracy, that maybe our society wasent the best but it was okej anyway.
That time has come to a final end, the welfare state is going to its grave because the capitalist class dont need it because i think they dont fear the people anymore. The working class movement has decayed much thanks to the welfare state, and now finally we are moving again, thanks capitalism!=)
BlueFrog83 5 months ago
The hypocrisy of these cheap and half-arsed attempts at charity is clear, which is why in terms of charity itself, it's best that they are being properly governed and observed instead of just letting them loose, because, LET'S BE FRANK HERE, you do NOT know if the money you donate would actually come to the people you want to help, especially with the rogue organizations who manipulate your sympathy to gain money (possibly for their own narcissistic profits...)
MrEvergreen0375 5 months ago
Good way to make a point. I am afraid this system is hard to change and would we really want it? Would it really be better? I don't know.
howtogetyourexboyfri 5 months ago
The us will collapse with osama bin laden 911 attacks are illuminati everyone will die jesus is coming!
batataloca77 5 months ago
91 people sentimentally set themselves to the task of remeding the evils that they saw ;-D
MrGoofyfooter 5 months ago
Is there a transcript available for this?
flippinsweet1132 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Check out HPWE episodes! Weekly! Started August 19 2011. Stop Motion Pivot Animated Wrestling.
TheTytytyty12 5 months ago
And, what is the conclusion of all this? I haven't got the point.
anutosho1 5 months ago
@anutosho1 In this short RSA Animate, renowned philosopher Slavoj Zizek investigates the surprising ethical implications of charitable giving.
Specklepirch 5 months ago
@Specklepirch Yes, I understand that. But what is the alternative? In my opinion it's just a nicely made rant.
anutosho1 5 months ago
@anutosho1 the next generation has to come up with the alternative. he's saying there needs to be a radical system shift.
jmrhq 5 months ago
@jmrhq Yes, but where to?
In my opinion we don't need a shift, we just have to turn back. (At least in Germany) we had a well functioning social system from the 60s - 80s with a working medical system, unemployment security and adequate wages for the working. Then they decided to pump all the money from the bottom to the top, and now we can watch everywhere: A constantly raising numbers of millionaires and billionaires and a growing amount of people struggling for a decent life.
anutosho1 5 months ago
This video cuts the session off too early. You can tell that it's right in the middle of his speech. Otherwise, it's exellent.
In an unrelated, I had never heard of "meliorism".
mowgli2071 5 months ago
rofl @ the picture of "capitalism with a human face"
moceanu 5 months ago
this kicks so much ass.
Gonko100 5 months ago
Zizek has some great ideas but I think he got too apologetic toward the end. His opinions are well-supported and thought out. It's unfortunate that he couldn't cite an idea or two to correct the problem, but that's much harder than talking about it.
sporkonomix 5 months ago 3
@sporkonomix
Inclusive democracy, participatory economics, decentralised planning, guild socialism, are all alternatives to capitalism.
GodOfTheInternets 4 months ago
Never accept the proposition that just because a solution satisfies a problem, that it must be the only solution. ~Raymond E. Feist
GeorgeTVP 5 months ago
..i never really know what they're saying, the drawings get all of my attention. the comments explain everything to me
soccergirl2900 5 months ago
for how long time we are going to figure out that we must make each other life worth leaving, lets hope the Sol don't expand faster enough to forbid this this
euzebiogb 5 months ago
Starbucks get full tax relief for their 'charitable' donation, it is not altruism.
The same with McDonald's with their children's $1 from every Big mac day it is all tax deductible and no one buys just a big mac. NOT ALTRUISM just maximizing profits good capitalist business practice.
It is wiser to give to charity yourself and get the tax relief yourself rather than giving greater profits to cynical big business.
ozweblogs 5 months ago
@ozweblogs Hey, why don't YOU spend your money for charity too? You will get the same tax relief as Mc Donalds and Starbucks.
I don't want to speak for Mc Donalds here, but your saying is bullshit. Getting tax relieves doesn't mean it costs me nothing. Stop spreading lies.
anutosho1 5 months ago
Zizek - I understand your point of view, but why don't you come up with a potential solution instead of making me feel so helpless?
Raulthomas30 5 months ago 25
@Raulthomas30 Totally agree, this is a problem which is obvious if one were to spend the correct amount of time thinking about. If anyone were to stop and think before they invested into charity, surely they would realize they are just prolonging a person's state in poverty. It IS pointless.
Zizek does say that the solution would be to create a society in which poverty is impossible, but he never addresses how, or in which ideals could it be built. Instead, he elaborates further on the issue.
gmedr 5 months ago
@Raulthomas30 can't you think for yourself? I bet you can!
jorgisdenaam 4 months ago
@Raulthomas30
They have already been made, just pick one. Inclusive democracy, participatory economics, communism, and so forth.
GodOfTheInternets 4 months ago
@Raulthomas30 Zizek is a philosopher first and foremost and the essential nature of philosophy is to ask more questions than it answers. It is a problem posing study not a problem solving one. It empowers us with a new perspective and its up to us to act on this new found knowledge.
Sehaj3 4 months ago
@Sehaj3 Ironic really as Marx said "Philosophers have merely interpreted the world. The point is to change it."
satheist 3 months ago
@Raulthomas30 You could come up with your own. Why rely on some guy to tell you what to do when you've got the capacity to think for yourself? We have to stop relying on 'experts' politicians or business/the market to solve these problems and do it ourselves.
DavidCoy99 4 months ago
@DavidCoy99 Everyone is not cut from the same cloth. I am not a strategist, I am an implementer. I am not a person consumed with pride to ignore the gudiance of others (especially people whom I respect) in favour of my own. Tell me what I need to do to save the world and I'll do it.
Raulthomas30 4 months ago
@Raulthomas30 Zizek has stated that the role of today's philosophy is to better understand the questions we put forward. Today's "left" needs criticism to better orient itself around a goal (ie, tackling poverty).
tombeddoe 4 months ago 37
@tombeddoe No! 'tackling poverty' IS liberalism because it assumes the non-existence if ideology. That's his entire point: to destroy the reason that poverty exists in the first place.
Maxstate 1 month ago
@Maxstate Wow, excuse the crazyposting. Please let me rephrase: Zizek talks about liberalism as being the underlying philosophy of capitalism. He describes 'liberal communists' just in the way that you are talking right now: in terms of the environment, poverty, etc. - problems free of ideology that we must come together as a movement or people to solve. But Zizek's point is, was and will always will be that the problem is capitalism; ideology not only exists - you're a part of it.
Maxstate 1 month ago
@Raulthomas30 Do you want 1 person to tell you what you should do? Why don't you contribute and offer a solution with the rest of the population. I hear democracy is a great concept.
lmuthali 3 months ago
@Raulthomas30 As Zizek says himself - it is not the purpose of public intellectual to provide solutions but to ensure we're asking the right questions.
xkristianx 3 months ago
@Raulthomas30
so we can all think of a solution?
why do people always need someone to think for them?
and also he gives a solutions: don't buy from corporation. Don't ask evil to do good! thats all. Buy locally.
bobthechipmonk 3 months ago
@Raulthomas30 Because people need to be able to think for themselves instead of depending on others to make solutions for you. Thats the problem, no one is thinking for themselves anymore, everyone is expecting it to happen for them. This isn't a one man solution.
FanaticDrummer 3 months ago in playlist More videos from theRSAorg
@FanaticDrummer Can you please elaborate at what point in history it was that all humans did 'think for themselves' (using your definition of that term). Because I'm going to posit that the mass existence of critically aware people has never existed.
KRistos20x6 3 months ago
@KRistos20x6 This must have wen't over your head, and you just reiterated what i what said. I said thats the problem, people "don't" think for themselves,ever. Everyone expects one person to lead or follow, wrong, in todays world where only the elite and corrupt run this country, its up to the small people to change this. We need the wise to overcome the clever, because the weak will never think for themselves.
FanaticDrummer 3 months ago
@Raulthomas30 There is a potential solution. The end of the system of cultural capitalism.
smile221 3 months ago 37
@smile221 yes! total equality, including class equality. Oh how that day will make me truly happy!
benjaamin8 3 months ago
@smile221 easier said than done. this monetary system suits only to people with lots of money since they can pile even more of it. this people moreover, have no sympathy for no one else but themselves and do not want to share money with the rest of us so they will do anything do sustain this system.
Money=power
who in this modern society or any society in the past for that matter doesnt like or want power?? why lose power if you can perserve it or think that you can?
GammaBoom 1 month ago
@Raulthomas30 It wouldn't leave him in a very interesting position if he were another man with the answers.
CorvidaeHerald 3 months ago
@Raulthomas30 He has. Many times. It's called Communism.
jenlight 3 months ago
fuck yeah zizek
Mustamaggara 5 months ago
Capitalism is no longer relevant. It is the cause of many ills in society. It is ruining the planet. Capitalists expect infinite growth from a planet with finite resources.
Laoch111 6 months ago
"the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society, and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an over-riding law. It is unfit to rule because it is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery, because it cannot help letting him sink into such a state, that it has to feed him, instead of being fed by him. Society can no longer live under this bourgeoisie, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society."
AlemanJuan 6 months ago
great to see zizkes thought materialised. i'd like a copy of those illustrations. hes hard to follow when ur just listening to him, and people get confused and think his thoughts are all over the place and illogical etc. but get a copy of that train of thought and u'll see a coherent message
jsg236 6 months ago
Capitalism, Socialism, or any "ism" that has been created by man has got to go. Capitalism was good in the 20's or 30's, but that indeed led us to where we are today, which is a mix of a lot of things. I like to say we in the the U.S. are a Corporatocracy, since Capitalism is all about self serving interest, which gave incentive to get to where we are today. We know y Socialism does not work. It is time to get rid of money, private property, and start using our resources more efficiently. RBE.
benandreas369 6 months ago
@benandreas369 Your proposal is a rather internationalist socialist one. Are you sure you did your homework on socialism?
joelpilotf15 6 months ago
@joelpilotf15 I sure did. Socialism has money involved... I think you need to do your homework on what an RBE is. An RBE feeds the world/ creates abundance using science and technology and has no money involved aka the scientific method for social concern. It uses science & technology to solve our problems, not politicians or religion. So, I think I do not need to be the one to do my hw. Since I assume you have very limited thinking on how the world can be a better place without any "ism".
benandreas369 6 months ago
@benandreas369 That "ism" thing. Can't you name anything with an "ism"? Whatever you support could be an "ism" it just takes someone to name however he or she wants to. Would you reject you own proposals if someone "ism-ed" them? C'mon. If RBE's fed the world and created abundance, which is a huge word, 6 million kids wouldn't die of hunger each year. That's what the video is about, they don't solve any problem at all.
joelpilotf15 6 months ago
@benandreas369 The problem lies in zoning socialism. I have more in common with a student/worker from ur country or even with u than with the rich here in PR. You can't achieve socialism by zones just like u'll never fix hunger or poverty by zones. It has to be a conscious, well-spread effort to educate and then work on a real and permanent solution. Up to date this has never happened. It is obvious that the past socialist project failed but u need to stop participating in charity capitalism
joelpilotf15 6 months ago
@Dissimul I think you might have dumb down Zizek's argument a little too much. I've read numerous books of his and I don't think the point is to "embrace true altruism" as an a priori, on the contrary he would call that pure ideology.
BigVic405g 6 months ago
@Dissimul I was just about to say this so thanks for voicing my thoughts!
Wheelsgr 6 months ago
1:11 why there are 6 seconds missing in the audio (woodstock)?
douzilles 6 months ago
wow - nice work!!!
dominik13579 6 months ago
@Dissimul ayn rand sucks though, she had it all wrong and IS and WAS the cause of the financial and economic collapse and depression we live in now....
pellebee 6 months ago
Assuming that 'alleviating the symptoms' is a bad thing is a potentially disastrous downfall of this argument. I agree in the old feed a man a fish/teach a man to fish argument, but in many cases just dealing with the circumstances is enough. Who's to say that one of those cleft-palate children, after his $20 operation, won't make a million dollars US and come back to make sure that thousands of other children will have his opportunity? Long-term fixes are best, but we must help now too.
PratzStrike 6 months ago
@PratzStrike The "a person might go on to do something great!" argument isn't very reasonable; even though we can't say he/she won't go on to become a philanthropic millionaire, we CAN say that the vast, overwhelming majority won't go on to become millionaires.
The problem he describes is small amounts of charity keeping people satisfied/complacent enough to not push for real change (I disagree that individual, rather than systemic, acts are harmful, though)
BenkaiDebussy 6 months ago
@Dissimul On personal terms the two are quite different. By most all accounts Ayn Rand was a control freak BITCH from hell. I've heard repeatedly that Mr. Zizek is a nice fellow. (Although he protest and claim he'd prefer to be considered the other thing. haha.)
S2Cents 6 months ago
I made zizek's last argument to my dad - about a charity that was doing facial reconstructions for poor people - he said - no it makes a huge difference - he was right - please consider donating to "Operation Cleft" - run by rotary australia.
GosseBosma 6 months ago
this is silliness he doesnt propose anything constructive
truestorm94 6 months ago
I think there's a HUGE problem with how the world is working right now, that is impossible for the almost 4,000 people who have liked this video to solve. Doing things like sponsoring a kid in Africa to feed & educated him/her may just be alleviating the symptoms of this HUGE problem, but I believe that we still have a moral obligation to do good things that alleviate the symptoms. This world is never going to perfect. But with our time & money we can make bits of it better.
LizziesAnswers 6 months ago
@LizziesAnswers The problem is that there is literally no way that individual acts of charity can make a dent in the massive amount of poverty/suffering perpetuated by the society in which we live. It's not just "not perfect." I don't think individual charitable acts are necessarily bad, but they are if they make a person feel that they've done "their part." Africa has a serious problem where nations are in a never-ending debt cycle with Western nations, profiting the West at their expense.
BenkaiDebussy 6 months ago
@BenkaiDebussy I agree with you. If I send a $50 check to Africa, it's not gonna really do anything. But if 600,000 people did. It TOTALLY would! I think the real problem is that when people realize they can't make that big of a difference, they choose to instead not make any difference at all. If I sponsor a kid in Africa through let's say, World Vision, no, I'm not ending poverty. But I'm saving one LIFE. And I believe that that's amazing.
LizziesAnswers 6 months ago
@LizziesAnswers jea, but again people in africa dont need $, they need food, shelter etc, they dont have food because they don't have $, so is the problem , that they lack funds to fill their stomachs, or , that the system is inherently inequal and absurd, that they need to have $, while facing starvation and malnutrition, Your feel amazing by keeping the poor aliv instead of challenging the system which makes them poor, Shame
kaleo183rd 6 months ago
@kaleo183rd I can't challenge the system. I'm only 17. But if I can provide food & shelter for a family, then I AM making a difference. And if everyone had the same mentality as me, we would be changing the world. But people like you are preventing that change.
LizziesAnswers 6 months ago
@LizziesAnswers you're 17 then you should know well enough that firstly, not everyone is gonna have the same mentality as you. And secondly, yes you are making a difference to that one kid by keeping that kid alive, but you're not gonna help the kid get the education they need to step out of it, and you're not making life any much better for the kid or their future generations anyway... if you keep giving the man fishes, who will ever realise how important it is to teach the man how to fish?
huanhuan861 6 months ago
@huanhuan861 I actually agree with the whole "give a man a fish and feed him for a day. teach a man a fish, feed him for his life." And actually I'm sponsoring a kid through World Vision and I'm giving her not only food and water, but also medicine and education. World Vision gradually makes villages self sufficient, meaning about 30 or 40 years after they enter into the village. SAME with Compassion & Heifer International. The problem is that not enough people are sponsoring kids =(
LizziesAnswers 6 months ago
@LizziesAnswers There's less people able to sponsor kids than people able to challenge the system. WE are the system WE decide when it goes down. The problem is that not enough people are challenging the system.
joelpilotf15 6 months ago
@joelpilotf15 Are you suggesting a socialism parade? That'd go over well w/ the Tea Party-brainwashed ppl.
LizziesAnswers 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LizziesAnswers To be honest, it's a huge uphill battle to change the way our country functions. But something as simple as just talking about the issue and challenging people when they say things that aren't true can make a big difference. If you correct a facebook comment, for example, many other people will see that. And if it changes the mind of just one of those people, it's worthwhile.
BenkaiDebussy 6 months ago
@LizziesAnswers World Vision seems like a good charity, and it's better to donate than to do nothing. That being said, it's even more important to be openly against the system that perpetuates third world poverty; the US's (and other countries/the IMF/World Bank) foreign policy is centered around making other countries friendly to foreign investment. This prevents any local development and allows the people to be exploited. No permanent change is ever going to happen through private charity.
BenkaiDebussy 6 months ago
freaking smart monkey..
xxxlastmigxxx 6 months ago
this guy is not human...hes not going to be alive for long ...
xxxlastmigxxx 6 months ago