On the ideology of Slavoj Zizek

How does one begin to describe Slavoj Zizek? Start with a picture of the larger-than-life character:

Zizek is a Slovenian-born philosopher and cultural critic. As a cultural critic, his most visible work has been ‘The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology‘, a documentary that uses inventive interpretation of moving (movie) pictures to examine ideology – the collective fantasies that shape our beliefs and practices. An example from the film is Zizek’s interpretation of a scene from Jaws is the following:

• “In Steven Spielberg’s “Jaws” a shark starts to attack people on the beach. What does this attack mean? What does the shark stand for? There were different, even mutually exclusive answers to this question. On the one hand some critics claimed that obviously the shark stands for the foreign threat to ordinary Americans. The shark is a metaphor for either natural disaster, storms or immigrants threatening the United States citizens and so on. On the other hand it’s interesting to know that Fidel Castro, who loves the film, once said that for him it was obvious that “Jaws” is kind of a leftist, Marxist film and that the shark is a metaphor for brutal, big capital exploiting ordinary Americans. So, which is the right answer? I claim none of them and at the same time all of them.“

Zizek has said publicly that he likes to write, over pretty much any other means. He published his first book, The Sublime Object of Ideology, in 1988 and has published over 20 books since (found here). A brief biography of Zizek can be found on IEP and EGS. Here are some of his critique of the ideology of international financial markets:

From his July 2014 Guardian Economic Policy: How capital captured politics

• The main culprits of the 2008 financial meltdown now impose themselves on us as experts leading us on the painful path to financial recovery. Their advice should trump parliamentary politics. Or, as Mario Monti put it: “Those who govern must not allow themselves to be completely bound by parliamentarians.”
• What, then, is the higher force whose authority can suspend the decisions of the democratically elected representatives of the people? As far back as 1998, the answer was provided by Hans Tietmeyer, the then governor of the Deutsche Bundesbank, who praised national governments for preferring “the permanent plebiscite of global markets” to the “plebiscite of the ballot box”.
• Note the democratic rhetoric of this obscene statement: global markets are more democratic than parliamentary elections, since the process of voting goes on in them permanently (and is permanently reflected in market fluctuations) and at a global level, not only within the limits of a nation state.

From his May 2014 Guardian Globalization: Who can control the post-superpower capitalist world order?

• To know a society is not only to know its explicit rules. One must also know how to apply them: when to use them, when to violate them, when to turn down a choice that is offered, and when we are effectively obliged to do something but have to pretend we are doing it as a free choice.
• The “American century” is over, and we have entered a period in which multiple centres of global capitalism have been forming. In the US, Europe, China and maybe Latin America, too, capitalist systems have developed with specific twists: the US stands for neoliberal capitalism, Europe for what remains of the welfare state, China for authoritarian capitalism, Latin America for populist capitalism. After the attempt by the US to impose itself as the sole superpower – the universal policeman – failed, there is now the need to establish the rules of interaction between these local centres as regards their conflicting interests.
• It is definitely time to teach the superpowers, old and new, some manners, but who will do it? Obviously, only a transnational entity can manage it – more than 200 years ago, Immanuel Kant saw the need for a transnational legal order grounded in the rise of the global society. In his project for perpetual peace, he wrote: “Since the narrower or wider community of the peoples of the earth has developed so far that a violation of rights in one place is felt throughout the world, the idea of a law of world citizenship is no high-flown or exaggerated notion.”
• Today, in our era of globalisation, we are paying the price for this “principal contradiction.” In politics, age-old fixations, and particular, substantial ethnic, religious and cultural identities, have returned with a vengeance. Our predicament today is defined by this tension: the global free circulation of commodities is accompanied by growing separations in the social sphere. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the rise of the global market, new walls have begun emerging everywhere, separating peoples and their cultures. Perhaps the very survival of humanity depends on resolving this tension.

In terms of YouTube, the speeches and interviews Zizek has conducted are widely available.

Big Think

And probably my favourite:

On Augustine’s supposition of Cacus

From Book XIX of The City of God by St. Augustine of Hippo, the following passage I believe most appropriately describes at least one person in your life, namely your boss:

“Let us, however, suppose such a man as is described in the verse of epic legends, a creature so unsociable and savage that they perhaps preferred to call him a semi-human rather than a human being. Now although his kingdom was the solitude of a dreadful cavern, and although he was so unequalled in wickedness that a name was found for him derived from that quality; although he had no wife with whom to exchange endearments, no children to play with when little or to give orders to when they were a little bigger, no friends with whom to enjoy a chat, not even his father, Vulcan; although he never gave anything to anyone, but took what he wanted from anyone he could and removed, when he could, anyone he wished to remove; despite all this, in the very solitude of his cave, the floor of which, in Vergil’s description, reeked ever with the blood of recent slaughters his only desire was for a peace in which no one should disturb him, and no man’s violence, or the dread of it, should trouble his repose. Above all, he desired to be at peace with his own body; and in so far as he achieved this, all was well with him. He gave the orders and his limbs obeyed. But his mortal nature rebelled against him because of its insatiable desires, and stirred up the civil strife of hunger, intending to dissociate the soul from the body and to exclude it; and then he sought with all possible haste to pacify that mortal nature, and to that end he ravished, murdered, and devoured. And thus, for all his monstrous savagery, his aim was still to ensure peace, for the preservation of his life, by these monstrous and savage methods. Accordingly, if he had been willing to maintain, in relation to others also, the peace he was so busily concerned to preserve in his own case and in himself, he would not have been called wicked, or a monster, or semi-human. Or if it was his outward appearance and his belching of murky flames that frightened away human companions, it may be that it was no lust for inflicting injury but the necessity of preserving his life that made him so savage. Perhaps, after all, he never existed or, more probably, he was not like the description given by poetic fantasy; for if Cacus had not been excessively blamed, Hercules would have received inadequate praise. And therefore the existence of such a man, or rather semi-human, is discredited, as are many similar poetical fictions.“

On your first and/or current job(s)

If you could take a minute and step back to give yourself an opportunity to imagine (yourself) looking down on society from a bird’s-eye view, you will realize that, in the ‘grand’ scheme of things, the issues and problems that you are faced with in your day-to-day lives provide you with a continuous and invaluable opportunity to change your path with each decision you make. This stands regardless of whether you believe you made the right decision, deal with it.

Is this possible while you are asleep? I don’t believe in quite the same way. So what does sleep propose as an opportunity? You should learn to make use of your time while you are awake (metaphorically and literally) to educate yourself through your experiences and also keep an eye out for what opportunities lay in front of you, regardless of your gender, race, wealth, and situation. Thus, you are left with sleep to make the most of the time while you are not awake, as this is time you should be counting most dearly in preparing yourself for the next day – make the most of what you can, and respect the things you can’t.

In conclusion, you should wake up to everyday and inspire yourself in challenging yourself, whether you have a job, are a student at school, or even a retiree: what can you be doing with your time? Are you simply there to make ends meet? Are you there to pay off your debts? Are you here to live out the rest of your days and as Socrates put to Crito upon deciding not to exile, “an old man with probably only a short time left to live, [whom, upon deciding to exile,] had the nerve to cling so greedily to life by violating the most important laws.”

In the end, it doesn’t matter what ‘job’ you are doing in your day-to-day lives, it should be a matter of what life you are choosing to live, that should be what is worth living.

Above is one of my favorite videos of Alan Watts, who concludes at 2:53, “So in this idea then, everybody is fundamentally the ultimate reality, not god in a politically kingly sense, but god in the sense of being the ‘self’ that deep down, basic [and] whatever there is, you are all that, only you are pretending you are not.”

Following up on yesterday’s post, on our hierarchical system

The below video is from today’s daily vlog by Casey Neistat, a film maker and popular YouTube star.

The section of the video starting at 4:42 discusses the reason why Casey decided to let Owen, his son, work at a fast food restaurant instead of a glamorous internship. While Owen was born when Casey was only 17 years old, it is evident that Casey has done almost everything he can do in order to give Owen the best childhood possible.

So during Casey’s ‘Q&A’, someone asked Casey why Owen worked at a donuts shop. The video (above) will explain Casey’s thinking.

Comments on finishing university and in the (endless) pursuit of “what’s next”

In today’s society, there is an undying and unwavering desire for everyone to step over each other in their pursuit to get ‘ahead.” This has been a feature I have observed having lived in several international financial centers, and I believe, this is also one of the greatest flaw in the manner by which citizens live their lives.

So this poses a question, should we provide ourselves with intrinsic or extrinsic motivation?

The case for extrinsic motivation:

Marc Bain, a fashion reporter with Quartz, released an article on Quartz today about the price we pay as a materialistic society. According to the recent BAML report, “Vanity Capital: The global bull market in narcissism”, Bain says that it “put[s] a price tag on the amount we spend globally on products and services that enhance our appearance or prestige,” a price tag of approximately $4.5 trillion, amounting to approximately 5.16% of global GDP PPP. Although Bain signifies that, “just the fact that Bank of America Merrill Lynch, one of the largest banks in the US, would try to quantify the size of worldwide vanity spending indicates that this is a market worth watching,” the intrinsic motivation discussed below does not address a point highlighted by Scott Galloway, a professor at NYU Stern, who says that “the cachet that all vanity capital carries is distinctly libidinous.”

According to Bain, there has been a large push for self-help and money gurus in pushing debt ridden citizens towards “the pursuit of, and the accumulation of, attributes and accessories to augment self-confidence by enhancing one’s appearance and prestige. It is self-actualization through self-improvement and self-focus.” So are Gordon Gekko and Abraham Maslow truly wise? I think not.

The case for intrinsic motivation:

In the below video, Alan Watts, the late British philosopher, talks about the idea of ‘purposelessness’.

Alan Watts has talked at length about ziran, the idea that something exists in itself. I have extensively disagreed with the attitude of Hong Kong citizens in saying it is because it is in shying away from systemic problems of the broken oligarchy. The idea of ziran is thus somewhat different to “it is because it is,” and poses as perhaps a more purposeful idea of purposelessness.

In the below video, Bertrand Russell, another late British philosopher, shares two pieces of advice: one intellectual and one moral:

On the intellectual front, Russell asks you to be steadfast when inquiring on any ‘matter’, whether it be considering any philosophy or studying some material. Russell recommends that you should always “ask yourself only, what are the facts and what is the truth that the facts bear out.” In my experience, this takes a form of patience and maturity to allow yourself the adequate time required to fully asses what truth lays out in front you; otherwise, “you will be diverted either by what you wish to believe or by what you think could have beneficent social effects if it were believed.” This resonates with an interpretation of what Aristotle talks about in Book I of Politics, “In this, as in other fields, we shall be able to study our subject best if we begin at the beginning and consider things in the process of growth.”

On the moral front, Russell says that, “love is wise, and hatred is foolish.” As Russell lived between 1872 to 1970, he would have witnessed the rise and fall of several institutions, nations, and intellectual thought. Yet what he saw was the onset of globalization in the form we see it today, especially on the interconnected interdependence we have with one another. Even prior to the advent of the Internet, Russell foresaw that in order for globalization to be for the ‘good’, we needed to “learn how to tolerate each other… [as] we can only live together in that way, if we are to live together and not die together, we must learn a kind of charity and tolerance that is absolutely vital to the continuation of human life on this planet.”

In light of the intellectual advice, a key word is truth. In my experience, being truthful and humble have been a “winning formula” for me in dealing with certain obstacles and goals that I have faced along the way. When you are faced with a problem, be open with yourself and look to what is required to solved the problem. If you cannot deal with it on your own then be open with yourself and ask for assistance or help as this will help you gather the right knowledge and learn from mistakes. In a recent sit-down I had with a recruiter, I felt it necessary to be open and honest about my intentions working at the firm. The firm presented an invaluable learning opportunity with a prestigious alumni, but more importantly, I openly said that it could help shape me into an individual that had the right ‘tools’ to tackle real world problems necessary to mend our broken system for future sustainability.