Slavoj Zizek and the rise of authoritarian capitalism

[MrQwertyasd]

Slavoj Zizek claims that rather than being retrograde, places like Russia, China, Singapore are the future of capitalism, and capitalism is parting company with democracy.
Implying it’s only a matter of time before the US and Europe follow suit.
Is he right ?

[XT]

@MrQwertyasd

Slavoj Zizek claims that rather than being retrograde, places like Russia, China, Singapore are the future of capitalism, and capitalism is parting company with democracy.
Implying it’s only a matter of time before the US and Europe follow suit.
Is he right ?

To paraphrase Batman, not the Capitalism we deserve but the one we need? You might want to go into some detail about this instead of relying of people to watch the YouTube video. Haven’t watched it, but I’d go with ‘no’…Russia (Russia? seriously??) and China aren’t the new model of Capitalism the world is moving towards or the ‘future of capitalism’, and the US and Europe aren’t likely to follow suit with either of those examples. Possibly Slavoj Zizek hasn’t been keeping up with current events wrt either Russia or China’s economy or the rather disastrous decisions both governments have made wrt their economies, but I don’t see anyone eager to follow either of their examples.

[Amateur_Barbarian]

I’m intrigued by the argument that capitalism is suddenly the future of the world, only in dictatorial/authoritarian hands instead of nominally democratic ones. All this time I thought Capitalism was the enemy and the reason the western democracies were doomed to fail.

I guess if you’re succeeding as a capitalist but long for the Old Days, this is the path to take.

[Robert163]

@XT

To paraphrase Batman, not the Capitalism we deserve but the one we need? You might want to go into some detail about this instead of relying of people to watch the YouTube video. Haven’t watched it, but I’d go with ‘no’…Russia (Russia? seriously??) and China aren’t the new model of Capitalism the world is moving towards or the ‘future of capitalism’, and the US and Europe aren’t likely to follow suit with either of those examples. Possibly Slavoj Zizek hasn’t been keeping up with current events wrt either Russia or China’s economy or the rather disastrous decisions both governments have made wrt their economies, but I don’t see anyone eager to follow either of their examples.

Are you familiar with Slavoj Zizek? He speaks with so much passion… and his ideas are so novel and unique… but i don’t know enough about politics/economics to know if he actually makes credible statements or whether he is just a cool sounding radical…

[XT]

The name doesn’t ring a bell, no. But if he’s putting Russia and China forward as some sort of future of Capitalism I’d be pretty skeptical about the veracity of what he’s saying. Russia is an economic basket case, basically a one trick pony wrt their economy. China, while being the number two global economy has systemic issues that are directly related to them NOT being a democracy, and those systemic issue are what’s holding it back and what might drag it down.

[Robert163]

@XT

The name doesn’t ring a bell, no. But if he’s putting Russia and China forward as some sort of future of Capitalism I’d be pretty skeptical about the veracity of what he’s saying. Russia is an economic basket case, basically a one trick pony wrt their economy. China, while being the number two global economy has systemic issues that are directly related to them NOT being a democracy, and those systemic issue are what’s holding it back and what might drag it down.

Ok, he is a pretty interesting speaker… but if you’ve never heard him he is hard to describe… the video above looks fairly typical… but he talks so fast and has a strong accent…

[Northern_Piper]

Capitalism works best when there is a strong system of rule of law, to protect contractual and property rights. That’s really absent from China and Russia, so no.

[marshmallow]

It’s not an old idea. It’s not like corporations are particularly democratic.

Harold Meyerson lays out a related point:

Or we could argue that our onetime opposition to communism was noble and all that but that, unburdened by the illusions of the past, American business, backed by the American government, has realized that the problem with communism wasn’t that it was undemocratic but that it was anti-capitalist. And that once communism was integrated into a world capitalist system, its antipathy toward democracy not only wouldn’t be a bad thing but would actually be good.

I disagree that countries should emulate them. Maybe as a transition point, but not the end game. Western democracy is a more sophisticated system of control. Elites sometimes get skittish over excesses of democracy, like the turn of the century labor riots, the depression or the '60s, but look at the record. It’s co-opted, absorbed, and redirected hundreds of years of mass movements with nary a flesh wound. Russia and China are amateurish compared to what Western countries do with mass media and propaganda and consumer goods. What would a revolution in America even look like? Voting Green? The Tea Party was the closest thing in decades, and it was co-opted instantly. Rich people can sleep comfortably.

The beautiful thing is how everyone takes part. You, me, bloggers, corporate media, we’re all part of the window dressing. Real debate is going on, we’re making decisions, how can you complain? You could vote for Sanders!

Now that’s a 21st century model. The old totalitarian police state system is downright antiquated in comparison.

[MrQwertyasd]

Yeah it’s not really clear what he means in the vid. And he’s heavy on lacanian folderol anyway.
I’m guessing he means something along the old idea of corporations subverting democracy, but not being so plain speaking about it. TTIP and such secret things being decided out of reach of the populace ?

Or maybe he simply thinks there will be a new wave of enclosure sending the developed world back to the 18th century before democratic emancipation. So we expect the Chinese and Russians to follow a British and American trajectory and complete the road to a post industrial landscape, with democratisation and rights - but that won’t happen now ?

No i don’t know what he means.

The European Graduate School

[marshmallow]

@marshmallow

It’s not an old idea.

I meant to say it’s not a new idea.

[MrQwertyasd]

@marshmallow

It’s not an old idea. It’s not like corporations are particularly democratic.

Harold Meyerson lays out a related point:

I disagree that countries should emulate them. Maybe as a transition point, but not the end game. Western democracy is a more sophisticated system of control. Elites sometimes get skittish over excesses of democracy, like the turn of the century labor riots, the depression or the '60s, but look at the record. It’s co-opted, absorbed, and redirected hundreds of years of mass movements with nary a flesh wound. Russia and China are amateurish compared to what Western countries do with mass media and propaganda and consumer goods. What would a revolution in America even look like? Voting Green? The Tea Party was the closest thing in decades, and it was co-opted instantly. Rich people can sleep comfortably.

The beautiful thing is how everyone takes part. You, me, bloggers, corporate media, we’re all part of the window dressing. Real debate is going on, we’re making decisions, how can you complain? You could vote for Sanders!

Now that’s a 21st century model. The old totalitarian police state system is downright antiquated in comparison.

…sounds similar to Sutton

One barrier to mature understanding of recent history is the notion that all capitalists are the bitter and unswerving enemies of all Marxists and socialists. This erroneous idea originated with Karl Marx and was undoubtedly useful to his purposes. In fact, the idea is nonsense. There has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists - to their mutual benefit. This alliance has gone unobserved largely because historians-with a few notable exceptions - have an unconscious Marxian bias and are thus locked into the impossibility of any such alliance existing. The open-minded reader should bear two clues in mind: monopoly capitalists are the bitter enemies of laissez-faire entrepreneurs; and, given the weaknesses of socialist central planning, the totalitarian socialist state is a perfect captive market for monopoly capitalists, if an alliance can be made with the socialist powerbrokers.

[MrQwertyasd]

Another quote from Anthony Sutton

Wall Street went to bat in Washington for the Bolsheviks. It succeeded. The Soviet totalitarian regime survived. In the 1930s foreign firms, mostly of the MorganRockefeller group, built the five-year plans. They have continued to build Russia, economically and militarily. On the other hand, Wall Street presumably did not foresee the Korean War and the Vietnam War - in which 100,000 Americans and countless allies lost their lives to Soviet armaments built with this same imported U.S. technology. What seemed a farsighted, and undoubtedly profitable, policy for a Wall Street syndicate, became a nightmare for millions outside the elitist power circle and the ruling class.

OK let’s say that’s true. Now we have what many call a victory of capitalism over communism - Russia is now a market economy (kind of), China is a producer for the markets.
Ideologically the West got what it said it wanted, and now finds these to be competitors, complains that Russia and China are competing with them on the global stage.
If democracy and capitalism lead to productivity and power, and communism leads to weakness, wouldn’t it have been better for America to allow the soviet union to continue unmolested ?

[puddleglum]

@MrQwertyasd

Another quote from Anthony Sutton
OK let’s say that’s true. Now we have what many call a victory of capitalism over communism - Russia is now a market economy (kind of), China is a producer for the markets.
Ideologically the West got what it said it wanted, and now finds these to be competitors, complains that Russia and China are competing with them on the global stage.
If democracy and capitalism lead to productivity and power, and communism leads to weakness, wouldn’t it have been better for America to allow the soviet union to continue unmolested ?

It isn’t true but if you ignore that, the answer is no. A strong acquaintance is better than a weak enemy. What is the west competing with Russia and China for? If the answer is market share, then it is not a conflict in any meaningful way. In the Cold War the Communists and the West were competing for global power and allies in case of a shooting war. Now it is just competition for where a factory will be located.

[MrQwertyasd]

@puddleglum

It isn’t true but if you ignore that, the answer is no. A strong acquaintance is better than a weak enemy. What is the west competing with Russia and China for? If the answer is market share, then it is not a conflict in any meaningful way. In the Cold War the Communists and the West were competing for global power and allies in case of a shooting war. Now it is just competition for where a factory will be located.

Well, there’s supposed to be a new cold war on. Syria etc. Competitions for where to locate factories can be armed fights too. And if capitalism is better than communism then Russia will be an improved fighter on what it was 25 years ago.

[MrQwertyasd]

In fact don’t Russian fighter planes outperform the products of US corporate graft nowadays ?

[XT]

@MrQwertyasd

In fact don’t Russian fighter planes outperform the products of US corporate graft nowadays ?

Doubtful, but if you have a cite demonstrating this to be the case I’m all ears…well, all eyes anyway. Serve it up.

[MrQwertyasd]

@XT

Doubtful, but if you have a cite demonstrating this to be the case I’m all ears…well, all eyes anyway. Serve it up.

It’s what I heard. Then again, I just heard this

Russia's Su-30SM vs. America's F-22 Stealth Fighter in Syria: Who Wins?

So F22 beats SU-30

But this http://in.rbth.com/blogs/stranger_than_fiction/2015/08/07/flanker-fury-how-the-sukhois-blanked-the-typhoons-12-0-in-british-skies_382281

Says Su-30 beats lots of other planes.

[XT]

@MrQwertyasd

It’s what I heard. Then again, I just heard this

Russia's Su-30SM vs. America's F-22 Stealth Fighter in Syria: Who Wins? | The National Interest

So F22 beats SU-30

But this http://in.rbth.com/blogs/stranger_than_fiction/2015/08/07/flanker-fury-how-the-sukhois-blanked-the-typhoons-12-0-in-british-skies_382281

Says Su-30 beats lots of other planes.

But the Russians only have a bit over 200 of the things and they don’t have the budget to build a lot more (Russia’s annual military budget is around $70-80 billion, much of which goes to maintaining all their old crap and paying their soldiers). The US, by contrast, has thousands of F/A-18’s and F-15E Strike Eagles, which, according to your first link are doing fine against the things. This leaves out the F-22, which is a pretty small production run (less than 200 currently)…it’s a 5th gen fighter, and totally outclasses the SU-30, but there are very few of them. The F-35 is going to be the more common US 5th Gen fighter once production gets rolling (the British are planning to buy some as well btw).

As to the jet the SU-30 beat (Eurofighter Typhoon from your second article), that was a plane developed in the 80’s (by the Europeans, not greedy Corporate America™), so it would be pretty bad if it DIDN’T beat them at 2 to 1 odds. So, I think your statement that ‘Russian fighter planes outperform the products of US corporate graft nowadays’ (by pointing out how a new Russian design of limited production beats a European designed fighter from the 80’s) needs a bit of refinement on your part…no?

[MrQwertyasd]

OK.
Which system would Lockheed Martin prefer to work under - Chinese state commu-capitalism, or US oligarch capitalism, or Russian authoritarian democracy ?

Zizek says the future is something like the latter two. Let’s say LM could get rid of all democratic impediments to it’s business (if it has any) ?

[XT]

[QUOTE=MrQwertyasd]
Which system would Lockheed Martin prefer to work under - Chinese state commu-capitalism, or US oligarch capitalism, or Russian authoritarian democracy ?
[/QUOTE]

I’d say they would rather be under US capitalism and democracy with it’s rule of law than either of the others, where arbitrarily bad things could happen to them. Certainly the owners of LM would rather LIVE here than in either of those places…as would wealthy Chinese, many of who have taken their assets and moved to the US, Canada, Europe, etc, to get away from the CCP.

Zizek says the future is something like the latter two. Let’s say LM could get rid of all democratic impediments to it’s business (if it has any) ?

I think that Zizek has a very rose colored view (if he even knows anything about it at all) of China and Russia as they actually are, and doesn’t see the real systemic problems in either. He also seems to have a distorted view of the US (and other western countries) ‘capitalist’ systems, and doesn’t seem to grasp the differences between them.

What ‘democratic impediments to it’s business’ do you presume LM would want or need to get rid of? The only thing I can think of is that if they were in China or Russia, and presuming they were state run or tied to high officials in the state they wouldn’t have to compete for contracts, so would be granted them by fiat (or competing against other select companies in very narrow competitions). Be a lot less work that way. Would LM like that? Sure. Would they trade what they have in the US for that? Obviously not, since they don’t seem to be looking to move lock, stock and barrel to either China or Russia and sever ties with the US. They might build a PLANT in China or Russia, say, to take advantage of things there or open up new markets, but actually moving everything there? Not happening. When you see rich people in the US moving to China and Russia, when you see US or European companies moving their head quarters to Russia or China permanently and not just building plants there, THEN you could make a case that the model is moving that way.