A very good evening to you! I would like to welcome you to the Oprheum
in Graz this evening, We have a very illustrious guest who will
speak to us, to you, to me, My name is Sebastian Brauneis, and I'm here
to guide you through the evening. I am pleased that so many of you have come and taken your
seats. This evening's programme will be briefly outlined
for you like this: I will talk to you until everyone is here.
then I will greet Mr Žižek, he will come on stage, if you want you can applaud and
then Mr Žižek will speak to you and a little bit to me and then the whole thing will be
a conversation and the nice thing about the conversation is that we have such a large
forum here and that it is absolutely important and also wanted that you then mingle with
one or the other question or one or the other addition to what Mr Žižek will say.
There is only one other thing that is important, the whole thing ends at 7:30 p.m. and there
is a concert afterwards, so I would ask you to leave the hall in an orderly and calm manner,
but quickly, because the chairs on which you are sitting will also have to leave, and because
they have no legs - or they have four legs, but they cannot leave by themselves, they
will have to be removed by helpers who are on duty, and that will take a little time,
and that is why it would be good if we ended on time.
I won't spend too long introducing Professor Žižek, because I am almost 100% convinced
that they are all here because they know him, perhaps they want to form a different opinion
about him, about what he says, or they want to get to know him, but they have informed
themselves beforehand, for example on the Internet, so there are the worst things.
Yes, I swear, I'm there sometimes too, so I don't think I need to list all the book
titles or say which institutes he holds professorships at, or mention his notable, strong, and perhaps
controversial statements, or that he has received a lot of criticism for not developing and
defending his own thesis but rather relying on references.
Fortunately, the field of philosophy is vast, and especially in times like these, it is
important that we uphold the idea of communication and a forum together. The Elevate Festival also places this encounter
under the idea of "Unlikely Alliances," and I hope that such an alliance can take place
here today, despite the unfortunate segregation caused by this platform between you and what
is happening here. It seems that the discussion will revolve
around catastrophes, which is not necessarily a bad thing. These things can often be viewed
on the internet where the most severe things can be found, and in a certain way, they can
also act as the glue that brings us together and motivates us to create something together
that we could not achieve alone. However, on the other hand, catastrophes also
entail the risk that the individual may have to take a step back, and that may not be a
pleasant thing, especially in times like these, on a day like today. It might be interesting
to note that 90 years ago today, the first Republic of Austria bid farewell for the first
time, and the Ständestaat took over. The parliament was deactivated, and now 90 years
later, we still have trying times. This may be due to the fact that we are better informed,
or at least we think we are. Anyway, I am very pleased to welcome Professor Slavoj Žižek
to the stage. Please join me in welcoming him! Charles Chaplin does this in "The Great Dictator". He stops the applause. (in german) First, I have to apologise. I understand german, you can ask questions
in german. But I can't speak german fluently... and a small criticism, what did you call me? Professor, doctor? What did I do to you?
Did I rape your mother or what? Actually, I did the opposite, I said I don't
want to elaborate on your titles. I prefer playing with words, your are brown
eyes (Brauneis), I am blue eyes. More Nazi than you. Now it's serious, I will not try to be too
long. If you feel that some things are provocative, it's on purpose, not to hurt you but simply
to bring out the real debate. Because I think that on both sides, the so-called wokeness liberal side and so-called new fundamentalist right, this debate is less and less possible. So let me begin. I was so glad to learn that the general title of this event is Unholy Alliances, because this already provides the answer to my title. Only a catastrophe are
what can save us. Why? Because we live in a time of unholy
alliances. I will try. And then we go on a free dialog. I will try to ground this in even if it will sound sometimes funny. It's very sad and serious, but I think today we really live It is not an empty phrase in a complex time, not complex in the empirical sense. Yes, situation is always complex,
you know. So for example,
to make a jump to our actual situation, I am basically, of course in this war
pro-Ukrainian and I hate when some of my friends tell me,
but you know, Ukrainians are not so good. The situation is very complex
well, the situation is always complex. World War Two, if what look
simply democracy against Nazis. Because I am sorry
Stalin was not a Democrat and so on, and we had to join forces,
but let me directly bomb you with a great unholy alliance which Putin. Not only Putin is exploiting to the end, I know people who know
people who are close to Putin. And they told me that what Putin is doing
is interesting. On the one hand, he relies on Orthodox Church support, the how to call it patriarch
or whatever of Orthodox Church in Russia. In Russia. Kirill He's an old KGB-fellow of Putin? Putin No, but not only that, Putin did something very interesting. He prior higher okay controls a group of young leftist Marxists and they are
the ones who support his otherwise almost openly fascist conservative line of argumentation. You know, Western Europe
is the realism of Satanism. Kirill the patriarch even proclaimed Putin the greatest exorcist of our time. And for example, I watched
a wonderful debate on Russian TV. I follow it. You learn a lot there. I mean, about ideological madness
when somebody confronts fucking pro-Putin figure in press. But are you really sure that Ukrainians are degenerate Nazis? And the guy said, okay, even if you obstruct, ignore all other things. They allowed a pride parade in Kiev like the greatest horror you can imagine. But so what are the marxists
doing? they are providing be careful
this other line of argumentation. We are fighting for all the Third World people against the imperialist. Neocolonialist,
whatever, Western dominance. And the sad thing is, how these two axis first anti gay LGBT Western decadence and the other like Western imperialism and so on? They get together wich is a catastrophe. The first unholy alliance
check in your newspapers It happened a day or two ago. In, uh, in Uganda. The Parliament passed a terrifying law
that if you are caught in homosexual relationship, it not that you are a little bit
ostracized. You can even get death penalty,
but at least ten years of prison and all that. And then when a Western journalist protests that this happened
two days ago, uh, a member of Ugandan Parliament told him You are either we are supporting our anti-gay legislation or you are with the Western world. You see, this is a terrifying, unholy alliance that you address with a nation, but at the same time, playing this sexual conservative, anti gay rights, anti LGBT blast and so on, logic and so can you imagine for them, so-called, I hate the term,
but I will use it as an abbreviation for so-called non binary people, you know, tear them. Yeah. You know what the bad news that, uh, to fight for gay rights and all these is perceived
in many countries as part of Western Western imperialism, because this alliance had to be broken somehow that now I go to another example of this unholy alliance. It happened, I think maybe,
you know, more like two weeks ago or three when there was a big brawl, Friedman proposed demonstrations
in Berlin and in Dresden and so on. I mean, I almost cried. It's so sad, but part of the link. But die in Deutschland
Sara Virginia Connect uh gave a speech well this fall specifically stuff
why should we get involved? This is not our war blah blah blah. And then you know what he got next day? Not ironically, an invitation from a high ranking member
of alternative theater Deutschland. But. But you speak like us. Like join up and so on. And this is not a joke. This is now happening in my own country
in Slovenia, in England,
in United States and so on, that the pro Russian attitude is adopt that by extreme left and extreme right. Why when maybe you know this joke, but what came to my mind is this I even wrote a book with this in the title
Wonderful, simple,
but nonetheless joke by Freud from he from his book on the joke
where he quotes this joke where you give too many arguments for a thing,
but they are mutually exclusive. Like the book
What Brought Against the Iraq War? American Attack on the Iraqis, the title, The Broken Iraqi Cup or whatever? No, like I borrowed from you a cop or an adviser,
and I returned it to you. Broken. And you, of course, accused me. And my answer is, Hey, I never borrowed
from you D I returned it to you, fool. And three it was already broken when you gave it to me. I know this, that, this, but all sympathy for Russia argument has exactly the same structure. Did you notice
that there are three arguments for it is generally pacifist war are mad and that we shouldn't give arms because as the general wisdom
if you give arms you only prolong the conflict. This is, I think, a terrifying notion
because at the same time, these pacifists played,
but now there is the situation morally totally stalemate, stable position on front to push for peace. Yes. But how did we arrive at this position? By supporting Ukraine. Can you imagine
what would have happened there without? And then I draw a comparison for each side
got much hatred that I draw a parallel between today's the Cynic
and some crazy communist at the beginning of World War Two,
when on the West they had that phony war, who claimed this imperialist conflict. We should stay neutral and fraternize with German with German soldiers. This is not out of war and so on
and so on. So the first reasoning
is this abstract pacifism. I disagree with it not because I like war, but I think it's absolutely clear that Russia is engaged in a long term geopolitical rearrangement, and it's clear
not by any sinister hermeneutics, but they say there are some
that they want to go on. Moldova now
do officially claim to have a real peace. We have to push the borders of Poland
a little bit to the West. We already have Georgia and Greece. We already we already had Crimea and so on. So I think that is the paradox. I accept that, yes, we shouldn't aim at destroying Russia. That's unacceptable. But if Habermas European who we don't like each other personally,
but he put it very nicely, almost a year ago, yet
when he said we shouldn't speak the language of destroy Russia, but simply negatively Ukraine must not. Betty, it's in our interest, especially, again, in view of this more and more crazy directly male chauvinist ideological foundation
we treat Western Europe is the reign of shut down, unholy orgy and all that and all that stuff now and this here again, there is unfortunately a moment of truth that the West is still engaged. Many times in some kind of neocolonial post-colonial exploitation. But my answer to this is double first. Do you think that China is any better? I don't know what our media reported,
but do you know that when Chinese buy some resources, some mines in I think it was Zambia when they bought them,
there was a local rebellion because the local workers there wanted a monthly salary of $200. It was too much. Chinese brought their own staff,
people who were ready to work for a little bit over $200 per month
and so on. So neocolonialism is expanding, but it's but it's everywhere. That one thing that makes this alliance between left and Putin unholy is I don't know what the logic are. Yes. Another thing sorry. The first argument,
we want peace, peace at any price. And usually in my country, Slovenia,
and then the the politicians who follow this line add something very cynical. They say a, every war to end up with negotiations
and compromise. And my answer to them
is I really then we were taught wrong. You remember in 45 there were negotiations
and pact with Hitler? No, it wasn't. There was a clear decree. So. So, again, this general pacifist stance had to be rejected on behalf of real peace itself. Remember, one thing that I repeat
all the time, and peace is always in the interest of the occupier. I believe I'm not anti-Semitic. I'm totally Jewish. But on the West Bank,
Israel is colonizing it. And when Israel said We want peace there, I believe them because defeat means
they can occupy in peace. Yes, of course. Even Germans, when they occupied France in 39,
where they sincerely for peace. Of course, they. Well, peace means we can occupy that by general de Gaulle. You know, what was his great statement
which founded the resistance? You know, the war is not over. France did not capitulate. So I reject the general line. Then the second line of defense, if what you already mentioned,
the situation is complex. Nobody is clear of that. I know I will not bore you now with it,
but I can give you some once they enumerate that,
then from 15 to 20 points of mistake stupidity committed by Ukrainians. But started like condemning
and we shoot for example the allied attack in March 45
I think on Dresden, which was totally unnecessary militarily,
or for example, the allied bombing of Hamburg with those terrible storms. Why? Because apparently of my friend
in Hamburg told me, you know what they did the allies,
they were attacked with the idea that it's more important
to borrow the morale of the working class, then to destroy industry. So they focus their bombing
on working class suburbs and they left all the great villas
and so on and so on. But nonetheless, this doesn't change
the fact who was right. So often complexity is an excuse. And the third argument is a vulgar,
pragmatic one. It is not our war. Why should we? Because of two crazy nations fighting on the edge of Europe. Why should we pay more for electricity? And so on and so on? I find again, I find this the logic terrifying. It's true what my friends are playing
some pro-Russian, that the conflict in Ukraine is a conflict
between two visions of the world. But that interpretation is it's western imperialist vision and authentic multicultural vision of of of of of of great existence
and so on of different both. I don't like the coexistence
that Putin stands for, you know, where you get
a model of the free distance. You remember when Taliban took over the immediate he made peace with China. The deal was what you Chinese allow us in Afghanistan
to do what we want to treat. We mean the way we do, but we will not mix what you are doing with Uyghur muslin
in your country. It tells a lot if you look at
who are Russia's direct allies today Iran, North Korea and so on, Afghanistan, even it tells you a lot about how
and this is a horrible thing to accept. But yes, world imperialism
and so on and so on. But my God, can't we accept that in spite of all the horrors of Western imperialism, what Putin stands for
is nonetheless worse? And now I come to first time I returned to my title, Catastrophe
You Can Save US. You know that the latest news
I got from my friend in Ukraine a little bit of hope. Ukraine, no doubt was an extremely corrupted country
and so on with all the oligarchs. But do you know that now the left is awakening slowly
that they said organizing themselves? Wait a minute, half
even more of the oligarchs? I don't think it is. Here in Austria, for example,
many of them came to Slovenia and close to Austrian border. Rather than start a big spa,
they simply rented for a month the biggest luxury hotel and so on. And people in Ukraine are asking,
we are doing the fighting, they are doing that. It's under their pressure
that Zelensky is now or is now organizing
the anti-corruption campaign. He knows that
people are not simply fighting. They are raising the crucial question
we keep. But what is the Ukraine
for which we are fighting? We need be the same extremely corrupted
oligarchic system. And that's why I wrote a text
for which I was attacked. Maybe I didn't know it appeared in Germany with the tie
to Ukraine between to colonization. Yet Russia want to colonize it. But what do you think the West is doing? Do you know that they have in the South
that term of the black earth, allegedly
the most fertile back in the world? But do you know that one of the best in
the world is already owned by American agricultural corporations? Do you know that? There is all the time. But I saw also from the way on Ukraine that it should become neo economically,
at least dependent on the West. My hope is that now maybe something
will come out of it, maybe not that Ukraine will begin to awaken,
you know, to ask the question again. Again, not just free Ukraine, but what kind of Ukraine. So another thing that people tell me
and I come again to this unholy alliances and to what other people are telling me,
but these are just, well, okay, Putin
talk against Satanism, world domination. But few really want
just a piece of land that a little bit. No, sorry. This is a big philosophical,
even mistake ideology. It's never that ideology. It gets its own power. You pay the price for it. Look at the Nazis, the standard market nation. This anti-Semitism was rough
and it was not for clashing camp, really. They wanted to keep capitalism, Nazis
and so on. Yeah, but the result was nonetheless
millions of deaths and so on and ideology get its own efficiency. Like, I don't know why this anecdote,
but so deeply in my mind when in 44
Germany was withdrawing from Greek Island. They they note these debt on one island they left 150 Jews in the crazy situation
where they needed every soldier. They sent a military boat back to get those Jews. They didn't help them militarily
in any way. So, again, I don't buy this story. It's really just about material interest. No ideology is to be taken seriously. My next conclusion here to provoke you
a little bit, which philosophy? And this is why I am sick and tired
of this critique of capitalism that we can only for our interests. No, the problem of capitalism is if Walter Benjamin knew
that it's a religious phenomenon. Religious in the sense of a radical
sacrifice, a true, fanatical capitalism. He doesn't enjoy good life. He's ready to work
all the time, fanatically so that capital reproduces itself. No, we need today more egotism. We need to ask not. What about the fate of living on earth? But my God, how will I and my children live in in 20, 30 years from now if we go on
with this destruction of nature? No. We should appeal to good egotism
against this false capitalist and false capitalistic ethic. Now, then, the next point. I now think that this was
nothing is a provocation more than that unholy alliance that I see trigger warning. This will be problematic for some of you,
although I am, I cannot say it more. I have a whole school of followers among trans people, real trans people. Not just that again, you know, now
I'm a woman, I feel like a man and so on. But people who went through
all the painful operations and so on and it's not the same men into a woman,
but trying to invent something for it. And you know where I agree with them that LGBT plus in principle I totally supported not just in what I was engaged in and so on, but I don't like this entire psychoanalytic trend. The commonplace
in many of these characters in Germany, especially in the United States, it's
oh, Freud is an old white dead man. He still thought in binary terms,
Oedipal complex and so on. No, you know what? My problem, you know, these big conflict,
especially in United States and in that state between between let's call it
biological determinism and LGBT feminism by
I simplified to the utmost biological determining claim
that sex is even if take is confused, you don't know what you are,
but basically it's a predictor to meet with your genetic structure
or education or whatever. And it's not a matter of free choice. On the opposite hand,
you can nonbinary in the wrong way. I think people who claim people
should be allowed to freely choose. It's a matter of choice. How you feel. I claim there is an unholy alliance here
because they both became. Indeed, Freud didn't exist for an authentic Freudian. Of course, sex is human. Sexuality is not directly a biological phenomenon,
is how some groomed get some foundation
if mediate that caught in a totally different logic and it can even be I a friend even can be demonstrated with experiment. I have a friend who studies
sexuality in apes. Well developed eight gorillas, orangutans and men, and discovered
that apes are much more rational. Sorry for my tasteless way of saying
let's say you are and a beautiful ape woman. I am an orangutan, but. All right, good. And also, I would like to have sex
with you, but I see. No way. So. Okay, fuck off. I turn attention elsewhere. It's only with humans
that you get this type of attachment that the more you are inaccessible to me,
the more I am a problem. To. Study. Yeah. So the whole logic chain, this second point of Freud, crucial and come through LGBT
people are well aware of it you know that if not in this vulgar sense,
a matter of free choice. I feel like that
no to the revolution of Freud is that one could treat him properly, that this patriarchal symbolic order, male position,
patriarchal, feminine. It's not natural. It's a long and painful process because we have something we humans unique,
what Freud characterized as childhood infantile sexuality. It's something very strange. Animals, as far as we know, don't have it
because of the delayed puberty. Puberty we have it. This idea that you get caught in
crazy fantasies how other children born in this fantasy can be very beautiful. Let me tell intimate confession
do of I clearly remember then do of fantasy from my own youth when I vaguely knew that had to do something with health sorry with it carried better reproduction. Yeah, yeah, with reproduction. With population. But I didn't know exactly how. So one of my infantile
theories was and women like it very much later,
that sex is long product work. You have to ask again and again like you talk to your lover
now again, orangutan and his wife. I tell you, let true let's have sex today. Today
we will work on the hand tomorrow again. On that you have to. Do it. I like this. Friend until the whole thing is different. Body. Yes. And then we may check if we like the hand. If don't like that. We didn't do it again. Yeah, yeah,
yeah. The different one I have. I hear this story that starts. How do proud
and the stupid birth upbringing. Yeah yeah. And my dream was this one that did better. If you want a nice child
or a child to do it with open windows because staff are observing you and if you make love in a nice way,
you get the kind you know. Now, this is not that's the you know,
because the big Freudian theory, if not, then once we become mature, we know how we know all the time to the end. Human sexuality is accompanied
by tentative Freud. Big question
is not this vulgar psychoanalytic. Whatever you are doing,
you are always thinking about death, you know, like that's it. On the contrary. But what are you thinking
when you are doing? And here you Austrians
published a wonderful book by my friend. You know, they discovered
didn't Stein became a target became from World War One and he's brutally open. He describes what he's thinking about
when he was masturbating. You know what? He was not getting sick. But discussing with colleagues,
philosophical questions and so on. That's the spirit. So what I want to say,
not what you see what I'm saying. Freud makes me aware that that human sexuality is a very complex phenomenon. It doesn't emerge naturally,
but through a theory of dramatic gap. And in this sense,
the process is different triadic theory, mostly unconscious
and so on. So it's not a some LGBT plus. People like to simplify, you know, okay, I feel that I am that. My point is, how do you know that
you really feel right? It was clear
that feeling cannot be relied on. They often keep elementary stupid example
you, you or me. Okay, I will not blame you. What if I'm secretly gay? But I don't want to admit to myself. Right? And that this is homophobia? No So what I'm saying and again, please don't buy this stuff. People should be allowed to choose their sexual identity. Yes, but it's not as simple as that,
because it's not simply a concept. Right. It's not that you sit there and think,
okay, it would be nice to ask a lady. It can be funny, the men,
but other options. Okay, this sounds the best one. No, I will give you an example
which I always like. Love. Love is free. Otherwise it's not true. Love it. I cannot tell to you I will try not to be accused the time
because I think I tell you love is not. I compare you,
you and you and think, okay, you have a nice leg,
you have an eye, you love life. Okay, then I make a list. You are the best and I being true,
you know love the structure of theology
wear a skirt that got my favorite guy said if to choose your religion, it's not that you
compare different religions and then follow like I compare Buddhism,
which is not even a religion. Moslem Jews, I don't know whom. And I said, My God, Christ,
Christianity has the best argument. No, you get the argument,
only you understand the arguments. Only once
you believe when you already believe. Now you may say religious obscurantism,
no shop market saying the same when he said proletarian position is not. I look around he study, I see oh,
workers will win so let's join them. Know it. If market truth is a truth which appear
only from subjectively engaged position. So you see what my point here that let all the right to class but really listen to them and be aware of the of the complexity
like I was now involved. Some people attacked me,
totally misunderstood me because I am into a polemic about so-called puberty blocking. I don't know if you do use them them,
but in England they widely use them. The idea is different
when you are ten, 11, if you are not full independently of biological sex, if you are not sure what chick you are at that point
you are not you cannot decide but so that you will not be pressured under the conditions of heterosexual patriarchal domination
they give you puberty blocking with delay postpone for a couple of year your sexual maturation with a horrifying for me totally naive idea
that in these couple of years you will become mature enough to see what you want. Of course, now they are discovering slowly that lot of the puberty blockers
do many problematic thing. They disturb the whole process of your biological development, not like sexual identity,
but other think it's very risky. But also I think this idea
is totally wrong. Namely the idea that with maturity
you are free to truth. No particular identity for me like love
I appeal to your if you were lucky enough to be in love with men woman I'm not playing this game. Anybody You never fall in love in the sense of,
Oh, now we decide to fall in love. Beware of temporality Here
you all a sudden discover that you are already in love
Maybe you even hate that hate that had the problematic relation
to that man or woman or whoever. But all of a sudden you become aware,
my god, really? I am in love with him or her. That is the structure of love it. And these are our deepest choices which are precisely
not experienced as simple. Three choices love or sexual identity is not like going to a patisserie
and oh my god, I take cheesecake, strawberry cake
or chocolate cake, you know. No, you are chosen in some sense. And the most radically free choices
work like that, like something imposed on you, but freely imposed here. Again,
I think we need today psychoanalysis. We need psychoanalysis more than ever. I talking to matzoh, I will cut it short. No, you do it because then you. You, my orangutan will not like me. I do that. As long. As we can later
on, you know, like work on the hamster. Yeah. Okay. He is my type, you know, I discovered
that behind all his tenderness, deep in him, he can be very evil. Also. And I think this is the fold,
the hope today. You know. We are sitting here just like. A half an hour ago and I said,
we have a lot of things in common and. Yet they come to death,
you know. What I mean? And now you are gradually
coming out of yourself and telling me that I'm telling you. But you are telling me. Yeah, yeah. No. Because, you know, once they ask me what makes a fool if we can talk
about these two dates from first, I'm a fool, normal human being,
I said, did anything for him. My metaphysical dedication
to some serious called socialism. Whatever freedom ready to work
anybody point to some kind of group pragmatism? There are people who are principled
but enjoy being principled losers. Many leftists today
they wait for the revolution. But whenever something theories
that they tell. No, no, that's not yet, you know. Well,
let the others do it. Let, let out. Yeah. And that is the whole history of the left. You know how they European left after 68 it just looking at some point
it was Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela. Now we are
no the revolution place elsewhere. We want here to enjoy our academic or what the jump and the revolution there. You know, like what I what I wanted to say is that let me go on. Okay. I mean, blocs cover of the unholy
alliances and catastrophe we can save up. Okay. Another example of catastrophe can save us something that worries me very, very much. I got off that line. I know. I said enough about LGBT plus. And the one I wonder
if you will agree with me. A very intelligent critique
from Bernie Sanders. My God, good
old fashioned American Social Democrat. Very make love. Sunny. Never make love. Yeah, yeah. Complicated. I think. I know, I know, I know. No, no, I'm not. I just think that he noticed something. You know what? My problem with the certain time of woke 50 that the good old left at least pretend that to be unifying
you address the people you say we may have differences, but let's say even be just these better healthy. Let's get all together. Well,
did you notice how the vote logic is? On the contrary and extremely divisive. The logic of his people. The first thing they note is yeah,
but the expression that you use there may be misunderstood in that way. It's very sad that why I think vote logic of this universal speaking were traces of racism and so on in in bloc solidarity. But let's not get lost quickly to the end. Another unholy alliance
what they already hinted that I think Zionist anti-Semitism it's not a joke we have now at a very delicate level, a strange alliance
between the truly crazy Zionist, those who now want to throw Arabs
out of the West Bank. You noticed what happened? I cry in Israel. Now, how about that
treaty for one terrorist act? They want a minister of finance of them
propose to erase the entire city
of 7500 people into one. They speak openly about annexing
and so on. Okay, there are a lot of problems here,
but what I want to say is that did you know this, how these radical Zionist Jews who want strong Israel are getting gradually into an unholy alliance with even anti-Semitic Western conservatives? For example, if there was somebody who was not really feeling optimistic,
it was Donald Trump. He was supported by a series of extreme
right, openly anti-Semitic organizations,
but he supported Israel. Now, you will say what my point
now can come back to the price. Not now. Looking through my books, I have a quote. You know who is at the origin of the right hydra in he the one of runs the conference wrote about in 36 or seven. He wrote a letter where he said,
Jews are an ingenious act. These people,
we would like to collaborate. Great.
We then we just don't want them here. We shall then to move to Palestine and so on. And that's why when Bibi Netanyahu some seven years ago called Frank Bruce come to Israel, the right wing, really
anti-Semitic circle celebrated. Yeah, yeah. You see, go
that list out of France, you know. So what time? What makes me what makes me here? So it so sad if if if again this weird alliance, then people tell me that Jews suffered
too much during the Holocaust. I told them, no, this is an obscenity. What you are saying because it's Arabs are saying the same thing like some stupid pro-Palestinian,
not because he's pro-Palestinian. In Ljubljana, in front of my house
did a graffiti. If I were to leave in Gaza,
I would also deny Holocaust. Like when you suffer,
you know this is totally wrong. You know what is for me I hope will agree
the only here yet ethical he the struggle against anti-Semitism
unconditionally and the struggle for Palestinians,
not the terrorists on the West Bank should be part of the
same struggle point deftly that those who manipulate the memory of Holocaust to justify what Israelis today
doing on the West Bank. Those are the true manipulators we follow because they use a mega traumatic event to justify
that the colonizing land politics. Now you know who I was
asked at the year 2000? An extremely stupid question. Naive. Elaborate. No, no. I have not elaborate too much because then
we can take a break, go to sleep and make you who is for you ethical woman. You got a true
ethical hero of 20th century. I said, Mark Edelman,
this was remember the name Foley drew? Absolute hero. He was wounded there in Poland
before World War Two, fighting for workers
rights leftist. He was among the coordinators
of the Warsaw Ghetto Rebellion. He somehow survived it. He then organized advanced uprising. After the war, he remained there in Poland,
although communists wanted to throw him out
with the beautiful argumentation. He said, I see Auschwitz stones there and I think I don't have anything to say
that out of respect for the victims, somebody has to be here
to look at those stones and then stopped in 67 eight. One of the last thing he did,
if he wrote a message to my Palestinian brothers,
he told them as a Jew who went through all of it,
I advise you ready? Not with terror, but ready. You have the right degree through ethic. Know that so that we don't go on. Just to conclude, I find the same problem with ecology. You know that my philosophical training, you know how often I am totally against pro ecology,
but again, it's complex. One ideology I hate is deep, deep ecology, which is secretly too anthropocentric. You know, when ecology talked about safe saving environment,
if you read it closely, what they mean
is let's maintain environment that we can live in it,
which means for put on that, it's an arrogant reason that nature in itself
is somehow more harmonious. But we egotistically think
people threw it out of balance. No. The first statement of true
a polar region, each calling for this vulgar statement
you may have heard it. If if nature is our mother, it's a dirty
because this mother a proof. What is our main source of energy
today or in goal? Can you even imagine
what ecological catastrophes get to happen on earth
before humans emerge? That we have all these sources of energy, no nature already in itself,
not some kind of a harmonious cycle. It's it is destroying itself. So it's not just that
we humans screwed it up. Then there are so, you know, ecology
for me, ambiguous again, I'm absolutely for it for all the managers
and so on. Radical managers. But don't fall into simple, simple ideology. What do we mean by this often, my friend
Alain Badiou, the French guy the of this night how today we have a problem
of the so-called death of God. There is no authority
which is untouchable for us that if that authority says this,
we should be relativist. Everything. And I think often ecology flirts with this kind of unconstitutionality
in the sense that. But we can we have nature at least put limits to us. No, I don't buy this. I think again, keep the complexity. What is a real problem to date
is that it's not only nature that is disappearing, but also we humans. As humans, I've written a book about it. Maybe some of you know it, Cargill
in In the Wired Brain. I mean, they tried to pull that. Well, I'm not so much afraid of all this fake stuff
or the wonderful things happening now. I will conclude, you know, that,
for example, did you hear about this face swap hardcore boring if done, very simple. You take a hard core shot
and then you just need a couple of photographs of a woman and you put it in and then the computer does all the job and then you have
that woman doing all that. Yet you can make a hardcore porn with every person that you had enough photos of a proof. I apologize. I'm open here to you
for the tastelessness. I saw one with the German Green
Foreign Minister. Annalena baerbock
fucking like crazy screaming. It face swap. Then you can accompany this with and we can now
that's perfect voice imitation no that you can completely do it
so may maybe to conclude we are coming close to something
that I almost find attractive. I will conclude with an old joke of mine,
which some of you may be. No, The Guardian Journal asked me from ten years ago if Roman's still alive today. My answer was difficult,
but maybe what would be today then? A really nice romantic sex encounter. Men can't keep it, they call it. It's so valuable
stamina training, unique in German. You call it even more rugged, narrower. You call it a plastic one. It's wonderful. You can regulate the density,
how you take, you put your finishing. Then of course, women
have this deal that whatever a plastic penis both work on electricity. So let's say you are a woman. I am a man this time we are not eight
and we want to have sex. Wouldn't you like to do it this way? You come. If you are a woman with your dildo,
I come with my vagina or we sit down, we plug them both in. We put a dildo in Virginia,
all the machines are barking. They're doing it for our career. Talking about philosophy. You actually can start. The good thing is we can both use
the vaccine of what actually? Oh, yeah, because I. Want to have sex with you if you are. Also okay. So I want the machine. But I didn't. Know. Wouldn't be a wonderful thing today
that we do the same thing. We take a really hot couple in a heart for and just exchange faith and then observe this on screen and give a nice drink and talk
and so on and so on. Maybe this is the future of our sexuality. Thank you very much. I finished. Yeah. Stuff. You see that there must be discipline. Before I hand you
the microphone, I'd like to like. I like to follow
that thought a little bit with the it doesn't matter if you see me as an ape
or a woman or whatever. I'm not a native. I'm a big. Thing is you. Mention the interesting thing
because nowadays we do so much related on technology
and in in a in an abbreviation
of the popular quote of nature. The longer you clear into the
and this starts to play to you isn't it like the longer we look into
the Internet, the Internet looks into us as well. So then do you think
that we are already beyond that point? The we, you know, started to speaking
about catastrophes, that that's us educating the machinery,
the web, everything like that. What do you think? We already past the point
where the machinery started to educate us. And this is like opening up a whole new
field of catastrophe is going to happen. This is a very good question
because for the simple, dogmatic reason, because it sounds very lacanian
letting them develop in detail this idea, which is,
I think, very profound, that in order to really look at, to think in some sense, the thing is to look back at you and you experience this
as the so-called blind spot in the picture,
the point when it's looking back at you. And I think that speculative theory, but it can be argued that that every sex act almost has at least a to some deep unconscious level this idea of voyeurism when I enjoy sex,
I don't enjoy it directly. I imagine being observed by somebody
and so on and so on. And it's a very good question of yours. What happened with this technology
where it's no longer a fantasy, but you are really observed, everything is recorded and so on. And my quick answer
because I've spoken too long, is that maybe what we are
losing is precisely this deeper metaphysical loop, how the order returns the gate. It's no longer this mysterious echo. We simply see where
the machine really looked at us. You know,
that would be my brief answer. That on my second answer would have been that
you remember. Maybe you do. Some Italian guy did something
and I didn't like it then. Sorry. It was supposed to be an endless
artificially generated debate between me and that in their here, which you can listen to it endlessly. And I had an exchange with you, mate. The last piece of chocolate,
I guess. Yeah. And I told him, my God. And listen, couldn't you like. I'm too fluent. Damn. Then none of my dirty dick,
none of my vulgarities and so on. Would you include it? So the real problem with computers
imitating cars or controlling cars, if the greatest thing about our humans
speak, you know, who knew they didn't? Clive. Henry Fonda. Clive wrote a wonderful
a couple of pages short it they own Uber I nigga I don't know
from where his idea is that all great inventions in language idea happened
so that you misspoke you say something wrongly
and then you try to say the situation and try to include
then can computers do this? I'm not going to know. Me, not either. But that's a good thing,
because as we talk about this fellow and the things that happen
and then you try to cope with that brings us back probably brings us back
to the topic of tonight and your read. Yeah, I love your lecture
like catastrophe with safes because like what
Christ says in little in language, it's. Like a little catastrophe. Happens
and something good comes out of it. Yeah. Isn't it that even today. Yeah. So yeah. No. No, no. It's interesting that it is. Many Jewish friends are telling me,
you know, this catastrophe now colonizing the West Bank, direct racism
and so on. It's not that hypocrisy
when white liberal Jews are protesting it, but this was such a shock
for the majority of half eighties. What I like Jews is that, you know, they have the greatest percentage
of AP in the world, the Jews. And it's this wonderful paradox. As a Jew once told me,
we don't believe in God, but nonetheless we believe that
God gave us the land there. But they don't believe in God. But we know that God believes in yes. We are the now you said. Something so profound the time that said
that we cannot go on indefinitely because I think that like says it, the true metaphysical question is not
do we believe in God? Some people do, some not. Who cares? The problem is, does God. God is not a fantasy for me. That's God believing himself. And the answer of all truly profound, the all of this is No, no, you know the problem. The problem is that the problem is dead. The problem is that we made him up yet. But what does he know? Which is why I have another theory. I wonder if you like it the most hit me. The most materialist film that I saw
I've written about it is downloaded. You Get the rapture at 2530 years old film with when she was younger
Mimi around. Yes. It's an incredible story. I really condense it as much as possible. An ordinary jump, jump off
an ordinary girl. Ock is promiscuous,
then she falls in love, her husband dies, he has the children. He and she has an obsession that God will, in the Rapture call her up. So he goes to a desert near Los Angeles, to desert, to desert, to to wait for God. God doesn't do that. Nothing So she kills her daughter. Nothing. Then he's arrested for this. Now comes the miracle. He did this
point and is arrested at this point. The movie is realistic. It can happen. Disappointed Crazy believer
then the miracle happens. It's the end of the world. All of a sudden
the walls disintegrate of the prison. He takes the car. She goes to somewhere
to the edge of the valley where she keeps up there paradise. And the ending is incredible. They're from the other side of paradise that husband and daughter approach her and ask her, Mummy, come to us. You have to say I love you, God. And she said, No, I mean after God did what God did to me
with all this meaning, is that not? And then her daughter said, But Mommy,
you know what this means. You know how long you will stay there. And she says, I know forever. This is the end, that death, the true undermining of religion
from within, much better than God doesn't exist. Because for me, people say
God doesn't exist. They usually but nonetheless
it's a noble idea, you know, like if I talk too much bitter. No. Two things. First, this reminds me a little bit
in the very abstract me of the story of Lillian from more now
you know the play, the play of Lillian. Are you familiar with that? You okay? We talk about it later
when we work in the house. And the good thing about the film or a movie is that you can make
like a really hard cut. So we make a hard cut now
because I promised the people that they can ask you questions and
we've got another 15 minutes running. So I and I will try to be. Yeah, you have to believe me. No, you try to be the good thing. The good thing is
you're straight to the point. You're not very elaborate.
You have straight answers, very short. It's a very. Good
you are writing something. I know that. Great are in books, in films
if the proper time at the end did you see the new Spielberg
and I don't like it very much. Fabelmans Yes, that ending with John Ford. If you have one of the best endings. All and now the fuck. Get out of my office. Yes, bitte! Bitte. You know what song I will sing about you. You know, you are a Sebastian. Yes. Yeah, somebody called me Sebastian. No, no, no, no, no, no. You know, do
you know the old DDR there from early 50s brought stallion song stallion
trying to get not very good. I think about you Sebastian and okay and. I and the song that I will sing for you
from Dirty There is sodomy for two days. I know, but yeah. Yeah, it was no questions. Bitte! I already criticized him. I told him as a true Stalinist. Did you organize the questions? Yes, of course. They are all censored. Come on. That's so pass. The Nomenklatura is watching. Now bitte, you can if you want also ask the question in german I can say. Yes, I hope that's ok dear Mr. Zizek? I have two short questions, the first one: You have elaborated on this unholy alliance between Wagenknecht, the left and the AFD. But if you look at the other side I say a lot of left-liberals say there is a need for endless arms deliveries and discuss about a no flight zone. Isn't there also a certain ideology behind it? That war and death are seen as something virtual One discusses it but does not think of the consequences and also not about the fact that also Russians are dying the same as Ukrainians and whether the structure of fetishistic denial is behind it. I know that a war is going on
but I pretend as if all the death toll doesn't exist and what's your opinion about this and my second question would be where do you see the role of philosophy during all that crisis, somehow I have the feeling that during the pandemic there wasn't a lot of space for philosophy, it was argued more with basic virological concepts and now during war with military terms now also Jürgen Habermas was attacked for what he wrote, same goes for Alexander Kluge Where is the role of philosophy in the sense of an intervention? Danke! I hope that I understood the question correctly. Yes I totally agree again
I already said I can give you a whole list of crazy things
that Ukrainians swear and are doing, but none the less I will tell you one thing first I don't buy this argument
that is really a proxy war between United States and Ruslan and that is just to support
our military industry. Tell this to an Ukrainian
and he will explode and justly he will say, Do you think that we are so stupid
that we said to ourselves we could have lived in peace,
but wait a minute, why don't we sacrifice? Okay,
you support the Western military industry. They for them, it's not a proxy war. They fight for their survival. And I say so openly saying Ukrainian
nation doesn't exist and so on and so on. I know I didn't really,
but what I like very much is this how you applied to this also that logic did understand you correctly. Why is there a goal are better
because these think is something absolutely crucial that's happening today. This formula, as we well know, is the formula of, again, 33 day survival. I know very well,
but but I don't really believe it. I act as into one. But today I bloody right
here, my good friend. You should invite her here. I envy and hate him. This means love
because he he's very bright I don't want to talk about
it may be more bright than me Alain can you pancake making me and develop
that today? It's not just that you know something
but at the same time you don't take it seriously ignoring. No, it's that the fact is become your knowledge itself. I will give you an example
how I claim more and more. We live in an absolutely cynical era where the official ideology situation can only reproduce itself by,
in some sense limit that saying the truth about itself
and doing nothing. You know,
I give you to make it clear what I mean. Two examples that I like. First, I hate the passive DNA. I live in de la la
because I look at the program, they always say, even
we are caught in capitalism again. It's all colonial exploitation. Yet they say this,
but they function perfectly. They are playing this capitalist game. And why can they play? Because they proclaim it, you know, deeply and a new version of this old Peter
Cloth Updike. His early work maybe
still the best critic, their 2010 cartoon, where he defines it as the victim
turning around thematically. Yeah, reflecting reflection youth. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We know very well what we are doing. But Vietnam, the left doing it. The second example is I really hated it. You remember it
now, two years to go already in Glasgow. I think that big meeting of Prince Charles was there every, every body
for fight against global warming. Global warming
conference. Yeah, conference. And they were saying all the right thing,
but it were like, okay, now we said it, now we can go on as usual. So big mechanism. I'm sorry, I shouldn't talk too much,
but this is absolutely a crucial mechanism which works in different ways. What you said about it, present pandemic philosophy. I must say that maybe I speak now in a negative way for saving my own profession,
but in some sense we live in a time when philosophy
is that more than ever. Why? Because in the confusion in which we are today, like in confusion
which concerns even everyday people, you know, like how much I don't agree
with his solution. But he raised the right question
when he said, do we have the right to mix with our brains? Because then we may manipulate our psychic
properties and so on and so on. But this is a problem for all of us. I read somewhere it's a horrible reason,
so horrible that they must like it, that now a guy with some Arab name is opening
a clinic in far from Berlin, where you will have a perfect reproduction
of not vagina, but the inside with the roof transparent and you want to have with your wife's partner a child, you just give them sperm
and what is the feminine counterpart? And you do nothing. Then you fill out the form. They give you 200 choices how to manipulate
before even starting the process. An experiment. The one like choice of color
or color of the eye. Like brown or that blue. Yeah. And all that stuff entirely. Genocide and hate and so on. I mean how they have. Had. So many. All Yes. And then they produce the child
and their hope is that so you know all these things and already basically already the abortion
debate confronts us with some basic philosophical problems,
like what are we as humans? When do we exist? A human
we live in a time of ethical confusion where even every day decision, every demand from a kind of spontaneous, basically philosophical,
philosophical decision, you know, like the youth, again,
have a much more tried. But I don't think the solution is that
when he said that when we will be able to do that, the big task now to somehow implant this knowledge in our mind, either through sleep, hypnosis
or other way, without doing okay, what does this mean
for our whole concept of education? Let's say you are much more honest
and bright than me, but I get the proper B manipulations
and I can be more efficient. The new what happens with our addition. To the wonderful vision that Stanislav
already wrote up in the fruit of all ecological conquest, that we. Can be virtualize our whole. Existence. Isn't that happening right now? Already, like we, we translate ourselves
much more in images than in writing. It's like all the social media, much more
like an image media than written me. Yeah, I agree. That's right. But we don't get time for this. That's why I much prefer links northern
then striker the film. Yeah me too. Novel if not floating Solaris also. Because. That that in the film that are both he does the have religious obscurantism
the object a mere of the details desires of our soul
while in length novel became a dramatic external object which simply remains nontransparent. We know they're doing something with us,
but we never learn at the end. What, what? What? So just. Okay, let's not lose time. What I'm just saying
is that precisely philosophy. Every great philosophy always happens in the time of a crisis, credit crisis, YouTube, Plato, Aristotle. It's the end of college. It's already the decadence of Polish. And Hegel was quite aware
the new book of philosophy from time to Hegel and later comes with the problems of our classroom
and printing revolution. When we draw and so on, things went wrong. Then we need the crisis ready. We need the crisis. To think properly. Absolutely. I don't believe that to be a philosopher,
you know, to be screen time, no true philosophy
for the times of humanity. But we can peaceful times,
if they so peaceful and you have no challenge at all,
can be a great burden by itself as well. Absolutely. So maybe I'm of this. Absolutely. So I mean, I, I cannot even
I am an absolute workaholic, even tonight, because I was not able
do my work. I go back to Ljubljana and. You finish. It 2 hours minimum. It's very important to have a regime. Up, keeps. You going. Because. You need a task in life. I will end with a few obscenity,
but take it friendly. It's not a bad joke. When the German journalist asked me,
What is your favorite motto? I said, Are my friend? And then of course I said,
I don't mean it in that way. But the Nazis brutally misused that word, simply didn't make you free. But the horror of the Nazis
is that a motto? Which is, for me, at least in itself,
a good one, three, one. They misused it
in the most horrible imaginable way. But it's always like sovereignty of interpretation means you control
how you propagandize for things. You have it. So but that's why I believe in failure. Mistake me speaking
that the only way even in love. Don't you agree that when you declare love this is for me the most dramatic moment always when you declare love to somebody. If you don't do it with some of relations
stumbling, there is something wrong. It means you are perfectly
trained to do it. It's not. Did you see a stupid movie?
I didn't write. I hated it for weddings and the funeral. But there is a nice detail
that where when Hugh Grant declares love to Andie MacDowell,
he gets in his typical bake stand base. Repeat himself. That's how you declare love. Yeah, true. So the thing is, we the end, unfortunately. I want to ask you one last question, if you like. In my head. If no, no, if the challenge if. The challenge attached it, that you have
to answer, it's like really shortly. Okay. And we see
and if you can like the first thing is you were talking about the role
of philosophy nowadays times we have very challenging times
so do you generally like it's more like a yes or no question
do you generally think that that the biggest challenges that we live in times where we, you know, have a lot of reflexes
to counter stuff that is coming to us and especially in times
when there is a high pressure of reflex that we should take our time to reflect
instead of just reflex. For me decreased by two. For two
to annoy many of my leftist friend. Maybe, you
know, maybe we need more time to think. This is my standard answer. Like if Marxist theses 11 philosopher have only interpreted the world,
we have to change it. I claim that it's a correct phrase
for today that we should turn it around in the 20th century. We want that to change the world too fast. Now we need to interpret it more. Exactly. Never were we so epistemological
with our knowledge, disoriented. I you a simple question. What is China today? It's still communism. It's authoritarian. The basic orientation is missing. You have to finish now,
ladies and gentlemen, thank you to see so often
it's up to you out. You know, if you're going cannot get nothing in 30 days. You won't do. It is a pleasure. So I'll stop because we believe you'll. Always pay the price
since you applaud that I will tell you a wonderful dirty joke Yeah yeah. Is we have to work on the hands
and you have to go and work on the hands. I don't say, oh no, no, no, but. A dirty joke which is philosophically correct. And that's
I think if I had a man in the evening go out and bring me some cigarettes
from the traffic across the street, the taxman goes out,
the traffic is closed. He goes to a nearby bar to buy the cigaret
and there is a nice waitress there. They begin to flirt, they end up in a flat screwing
like crazy till three in the morning. Then he said, Oh my God, I must go home. What will I tell to my wife? And he finds a solution. He said to the lady,
Do you have some of these? If you do believe
and had to say about them. Mm hmm. Okay. Bowling for the bowling. Okay. He puts this on and go show. Be careful for the dialect. You know, the wife asked him,
where were you such a long time? And he said, just he said, you know,
I went the traffic was closed. I went to a bar. I flirted with the lady.
We sat like crazy. And you know what? The ethnic the wife said,
why are you so miserably lying to me? I see the powder. You went bowling with your friend. That's that political art. Tell the truth in a way
that will confuse the enemy,
