{"id":8636,"date":"2011-11-27T22:01:05","date_gmt":"2011-11-28T03:01:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=8636"},"modified":"2011-11-27T22:50:24","modified_gmt":"2011-11-28T03:50:24","slug":"zzek-birkbeck-college","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2011\/11\/27\/zzek-birkbeck-college\/","title":{"rendered":"\u017di\u017eek Birkbeck college"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u017di\u017eek Birkbeck College, The Silent Voice of a New Beginning<\/a> November 20, 2011<\/p>\n

What is now here has emancipatory potentials. Certain forms of religion: radical Islam has a radical potential? That’s an open debate.<\/p>\n

My problem with Ranciere<\/strong>, his re-aestheticization of politics, too much anti-representational, developed in his Disagreements<\/em>, Police (policing the ordinary run of things) and Politics proper.\u00a0 But is all Police (positive social order) is it one big homogeneous mass, or is thre a gap there?\u00a0 That is to say what I find problematic in Raciere and Badiou, of Authentic politics as an exceptional moment, things follow their inertia, non-authentic representation and there are magic moments of the event<\/em> when people demonstrate a new aesthetic spectacle.\u00a0 My big problem : Freedom is not just this exceptional moment.<\/p>\n

That part of these exceptional moments then reinscribes itself into the new positive order.\u00a0 That is a politics which changes at least minimally the policing.<\/p>\n

The ecstatic moment of direct democracy, non-representational freedom, how do you translate this into everyday rituals?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Chantal Mouffe, she oscillates, she sounds as if from antagonism to agonism, we have pure antagonism, and the point of successful democracy is not just neutral technocratic rule, but you translate your antagonism which would otherwise have been destructive into minimally regulated agonism. My answer here: No castes without outcastes.<\/strong>\u00a0 The very transposition of antagonism into political agonism, strengthens antagonism in the sense that “yes we can compete on condition we that exclude that jerk.” Some bad guys must be out so the field of agonism sustains itself.\u00a0 Agonism relies on a certain field, set of rules and this set of rules of agonism is never neutral<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

The true struggle for hegemony is not the struggle of who will win withing the given set of democractic rules, from Marx, the true struggle is the struggle for the set of rules itself.<\/strong>\u00a0 We dont just fight within a regulated field, we alsways at the same time fight for the regulations itself.
\nOn China and the State<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Socialism 20th Century really existing socialism may have failed economically, but it did invent a form of governance which is displaying its efficiency today.<\/p>\n

Here I diagree with Badiou who proposed this formula of Party-State, the total identification of party with state.\u00a0 NO you have a Distance: You have the State, but the party is always in a kind of legal vacuum at a distance from the state.<\/p>\n

China functions at this level. In China the communist party legally doesn’t exist. A dissident wanted to prosecute the Chinese communist party, sorry said the lawyer there is no communist party. Party is always at a distance, outside the law, able to intervene. It reaches madness in China, in one way they pretend to have a normal state, passing laws, but also standing committee of Politburo, every 4 yrs. the party congress meet, nobody knows who will they be. It’s totally non-transparent. This model is highly original, it doesn’t function in fascism or in other authoritarian regimes, it works well today. The Brit capitalist were smart enough, if they wanted direct political power, the political field wouldh ave factional struggles, the aristocracy is the best class to represent the collective interests of capitalist class. And in China today, the best representative of the capitalist class, you have the communist party to represent them.<\/p>\n

Totally arbitrary Master Signifier, brutal master that was the Soviet Union. Deng-Xao Ping, resisting the temptation to allow with capitalism, full democracy. Capitalism itself would function most smoothly with the communist party running things.<\/p>\n

Fukuyama thought communist loss, the irony is that commie become capitalism best managers. Only China can save capitalism now.<\/p>\n

If you mean by moralism simply honest ethical concerns, ok I’m for morality. Moralism is for me though, invoking morality to mask non-moral economic causes. Through ethics is ready to relativize itself, in the sense that its somehow integrates its awareness of its own contextuality. We need political suspension of ethics. It means KANT: Kantian categoric imperative has a good point: you can’t simply say this is my duty I have to do it, you are not only responsible to do your duty, you are responsible to decide what is your duty. NO you can’t instrumentalize yourself. If I think my duty is to kill you, it’s my responsibililty to fully assume it. Translating political problems into moral problems involves a brutal depoliticization.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u017di\u017eek Birkbeck College, The Silent Voice of a New Beginning November 20, 2011 What is now here has emancipatory potentials. Certain forms of religion: radical Islam has a radical potential? That’s an open debate. My problem with Ranciere, his re-aestheticization of politics, too much anti-representational, developed in his Disagreements, Police (policing the ordinary run of … Continue reading “\u017di\u017eek Birkbeck college”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[83,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8636","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-agency","category-zizek"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8636","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8636"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8636\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8649,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8636\/revisions\/8649"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8636"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8636"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8636"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}