Thursday, May 2, 2024
Latest:
Art

Slavoj Žižek: Political Correctness is a More Dangerous Form of Totalitarianism

Big Think



Slavoj Žižek doesn’t buy into political correctness. In fact, it frightens him. The famed philosopher and social critic describes political correctness as a tacit form of totalitarianism, an act of coercion built upon the premise that “I know better than you what you really want.”

This isn’t to say that people should be allowed to go around treating others poorly, but Žižek argues that employing coercion and scare tactics to instill a state of forced behavior completely missed the point. To Žižek, the kinds of obscenity targeted by political correctness are much more effective at breeding a sense of shared solidarity than most alternatives.

Read more at BigThink.com: http://goo.gl/X1zzcJ

Follow Big Think here:
YouTube: http://goo.gl/CPTsV5
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BigThinkdotcom
Twitter: https://twitter.com/bigthink

Transcript: Of course I have nothing against the fact that your boss treats you in a nice way and so on. The problem is if this not only covers up the actual relationship of power but makes it even more impenetrable. You know, if you have a boss who is up there, the old fashioned boss shouting at you, exerting full brutal authority. In a way it’s much easier to rebel than to have a friendly boss who embraces you or how was the last night with your girlfriend, blah, blah, all that buddy stuff. Well then it almost appears impolite to protest. But I will give you an example, an old story that I often use to make it clear what do I mean by this. Imagine you or me, I’m a small boy. It’s Sunday afternoon. My father wants me to visit our grandmother. Let’s say my father is a traditional authority. What would he be doing? He would probably tell me something like I don’t care how you feel, it’s your duty to visit your grandmother. Be polite to her and so on. Nothing bad about this I claim because I can still rebel and so on. It’s a clear order.

But what would the so called post-modern non-authoritarian father do? I know because I experienced it. He would have said something like this. You know how much your grandmother loves you but nonetheless I’m not forcing you to visit her. You should only visit her if you freely decide to do it. Now every child knows that beneath the appearance of free choice there is a much stronger pressure in this second message. Because basically your father is not only telling you you must visit your grandmother but you must love to visit it. You know he tells you how you must feel about it. It’s a much stronger order. And I think that this is for me almost a paradigm of modern permissive authority. This is why the formula of totalitarianism is not – I don’t care what you think, just do it. This is traditional authoritarianism. The totalitarian formula is I know better than you what you really want and I may appear to be forcing you to do it but I’m really just making you do what without fully knowing what you want and so on. So in this sense yes, I am horrified by this. Also another aspect this new culture of experts where an injunction is presented just as a neutral statement.

For example, one example that I like and let’s not have a misunderstanding here. I don’t smoke and I’m for punishing tobacco companies and so on and so on. But I’m deeply suspicious about our phobia about smoking. I don’t buy it that this can be really justified just based on scientific knowledge how cigarettes hurt us and so on and so on. Because my first problem is that most of the people who oppose smoking then usually are for legalization of grass and so on and so on. But my basic problem is this one. Look, now they found a more or less solution – e-cigarettes, electronic cigarettes. And I discovered that now big American airline companies decided to prohibit them. And it’s interesting to read the reason why. The reason is not so much that it’s not yet sure are they safe or not. Basically they are. The idea is that if you smoke during the flight e-cigarette you publicly display your addiction and that is not a good pedagogical example for others and so on and so on. [transcript truncated]

Directed / Produced by Jonathan Fowler, Elizabeth Rodd, and Dillon Fitton

Big Think

Source

Similar Posts

35 thoughts on “Slavoj Žižek: Political Correctness is a More Dangerous Form of Totalitarianism”

  3. Seems he is more interested in his coke habit that improving his speech impediment. I was born with one and put in the work to fix it

  5. lol I still remember the time my parents tried that we'd like you to go to your grandma's but it's up to you thing on me. I said I was tired and decided not to go that day. I thought it was great, had a good time relaxing at home, only to get scolded that night for not going. I was so shocked that night, cause I assumed they actually meant what they said. When they yelled at me I was like a deer in headlights, "But.. but, you said it was up to me"

  9. He's exactly right about political correctness and racism. In the UK we managed 19th century Jewish migration under the common law. There were Jewish jokes, fights, freedom of speech, and we discovered our common humanity. The end result was that the Jews joined the British tribe. The 'New Commonwealth' post war migration has sent the culture mad. We have passed Orwellian laws against free speech, which accentuate difference, fly in the face of natural justice and have thus been massively counter productive. The left has gone utterly insane and was on the brink of inflicting a disaster on us until the current reaction set in

  11. Very interesting. The message I took away was that by intentionally prohibiting real conversations, they are keeping all groups separate and grouped with their own identities. One more time the golden hearted liberals make things worse by imposing their moral correctness on everyone else.

  14. holy shit tbh he has problems as a public speaker. its been 3 mins and he is not going anywhere thats actually relevant to the title of the vid.
    He is fine, he is a good writer but really needs some more straight on social skills.

  17. This is what I discovered after I finished my degree and switched from working as a legal secretary at “mean” and “evil” law firms to working at a “nice” and “kind” non-profit university hospital. Turns out the purely capitalist lawyers who were more honest with their blatant heirarchy were much easier to work for than the faux “friendly” academics who insisted we call them by their first names, because, “Hey, we’re all in this together and equal!” yeah that’s why you make $300K and I make $50K). Give me a pure A-hole boss who tells me exactly where I stand right to my face and doesn’t treat me like a fool than one who tries to shine sunshine up my @ss all day

  18. I can’t believe he called a deaf guy a “crippled” person. Redards hate being called that. Mutes have worked very hard to be destigmatized and it’s so important to get it right

  19. 'Racist' and 'racism' are vacuous terms that have no meaning in science.

    Ethnicity and phenotypically expressed differences make us nonetheless human, related, and the idea of bringing charges against someone for making a mockery of someone from a different ethnic background is an insidious act of stupidity and ignorance.

    Political correctness, and the act of limiting, altering, and preventing peoples free expression is an affront to free speech and should be done away with. It in itself is a crime against humanity and human nature, ironically employed to prevent 'hate crimes,' which are little more than distasteful, offensive remarks.

    On point, I liked this talk, but I must admit I did lose track of his points. But he is a funny guy and insightful ?

  35. I get the feeling, he is a deeply corrupted man. A phony swami. Maybe im wrong, but i get the sense this is a man running from his conscience

Comments are closed.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com