Slavoj Zizek Hardtalk 3/3

No description available.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Slavoj
• Zizek
• Hardtalk
• Marxism
• Hegel
• Communism

[incaayoub]

Zizek really is impressive. The interviewer asked interesting questions although I seriously doubt he understood any of the answers. All in all, thanks for uploading

[LamparinaFilmes]

I do not think the interviewer is petulant, he is playing a part, he is a teaser, using words easily understood by his audience. Zizek is naturally a hyper active talker. With mannerisms, such as nose grabbing and hair touching, he explains clearly as a philosopher a possible utopia. Zizek and Badiou, plus Negri, Hardt, Jameson, Chomsky, are alive and on the Internet, establishing truthful clues to create a new framework to think solutions. "We might not have the answers."

[444damn]

@IStehSHIT Could you clear up something for me about the difference between socialism and communism? Is it that socialism, in Marxist theory, is the stage before communism, when the state is supposed to whither away? Is that the case? I am unsure

[IStehSHIT]

@loboarmado I only found on obvoius fault: COMMUNISM IS NOT SOCIALISM and but the socialist revolution is by nature international so it's theory have to be to!!!!! doesn't match.

[waadalbawardi]

my goat. 

[16thHop]

Let me try to comment on what he said about economics (feel free to critique):

If there are three people rich, middle, and poor and each gets ten dollars to raise their social status, no revolution.

If the rich gets 100, middle gets 50, and poor gets 25, then will there be revolution?

Also, I don't think the interviewer is stupid. Zizek proposes quite radical ideas and to most people they need serious clarification. Clarity isn't always Zizek's strength btw.

[loboarmado]

...the burocratic theory of the XX century socialism should be critizice and reduse to ashes XD!!!!! but latin-america have come experiences to! a will like to some european or american (we are all americans but lets say it in easy terms) theoretician read Mariategui or Ludovico Silva or Nestor Cohan or some other... but the socialist revolution is by nature international so it's theory have to be to!!!!!

[loboarmado]

... NO!, because a revolutionary marxist is (by definition) against all types of ideology, all of are theory have to be extremelly scientific and extremelly critical, and that's also a good point in Zizek's theory (he also think this) but never the less he insist on saying that the XX century exp. was a catastrophy... NO, there's some acpects that we can bring back! but i agree non of then are in the burocratic theory of any of this experiences!!!! ...

[loboarmado]

...I don't think the CCCP, Chinese or any pseudo-socialist experience was a victory in long terms, but political theoreticians as Lenin and Mao are extremelly helpfull an beyond, extremelly necessary... Their analysis still applicable and even i claim that leninist form of organization is viable, Mao's critic theory about how contradictions work are also viable and a REVOLUTION can not be made, it organized!... And this not mean that we will thing all the same and that stupid notion...

[loboarmado]

...many ways but there is people that is organizating and trying to make it more deep, more radical and less liberal (even if this mean sometimes to be against some governamental politics) but i claim that: Communism is not an IDEOLOGY, it can be treated like one (the same think in a different way happen with Marxism), communism is a social phenomenon, it can't be proclaim, it can't be declare... COMMUNISM IS NOT SOCIALISM, matter of fact they're antagonic in many aspects...

[loboarmado]

...i'm A pro-comunist (i say it in this way because i don't thing that a man nor woman rise in capitalism can call itself a COMMUNIST) but for me the first problem whit Zizek is that he say that what happened in the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, East-Germany and what IS happening today in China can be call COMMUNISM... I don't agree with this. I'm an activist of the so call "bolivarian revolution" (that's looks to me more like, in Zizek terms, capitalism with a human face) and it's wrong in...

[loboarmado]

I love Zizek, i love his style, his genious, his analysis... but what i love more about Zizek is his ability to contradict himself. I know i'm gonna get all kind of comments about what i'm writing but come on people this great (and i mean this in all it's terms) thinker very often doesn't see the fault of his premise. I'm from Venezuela (Oh my god!, THE HORROR!)...