At the end of the second year of the global epidemic, Zizek felt tired.
Slovenia has just opened another round of blockade, and it is a high-risk group of diabetes. He just finished the booster shot and had a slight reaction. He stayed at home and had a rest. He stipulated that he would only brush the news at a fixed time every day to avoid getting too depressed when he saw bad news. The endless epidemic has made people impatient and killed some of his work enthusiasm. Although he still writes crazily, and his critical articles often appear in newspapers-just like the “crazy philosopher” expected by the world-he also admits that he sometimes wants to escape. He and his old friends formed a little habit in the epidemic, that is, watching some ancient TV dramas together to immerse themselves in another world, an old and familiar world.
“But we are tired of doing this now.” He told me, “I’m 72 years old. If the epidemic is not over, what is the significance of all this?
Slovenian philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Zizek is one of the most active public intellectuals in the world today. In December 2021, Zizek accepted an exclusive interview with Interface News.
This is my third interview with Zizek. The first time was in the summer of 2019. I visited his home in Slovenia with curiosity about this man who is called “the most dangerous philosopher in the West”. The second time was in the summer of 2020, when the COVID-19 epidemic had just swept through Europe. He grounded himself at home, actively participated in public discussions, and initiated a philosophical discussion on epidemic prevention with agamben and Badiou. This interview was received at the end of 2021. In the second year, the epidemic still showed no signs of ending, and he was exhausted. At the other end of the screen is a tired old man-I have felt this many times in interviews-although his thinking is still sharp.
The interview topic started with the COVID-19 epidemic that is still spreading. We talked about vaccine nationalism and conspiracy theories in Europe and America, and then talked about global warming and the difficult Glasgow Climate Conference, the J.K. Rowling incident and the abolition of culture, the return of the Taliban to Afghanistan and its enlightenment to modernity, the merits and demerits of Biden’s administration, and Merkel’s 16-year political legacy in Germany.
[Interview] Zizek: What do you think of the German and climate crisis after Merkel’s resignation?
Epidemic prevention needs more centralized authority, which is not contradictory to freedom.
The last time I interviewed you was in the summer of 2020, when the COVID-19 epidemic was just beginning to sweep across Europe. I said I hope the epidemic will be over by the time I chat with you next time, but the reality is that we are facing a new round of blockade, which is really frustrating.
[Zizek] To my dismay, even doctors are telling us that the epidemic will last for another two years, maybe the third year. But is it true? Now that the fourth wave of epidemic has come, people are already talking about the worse situation in The 5th Wave. Isn’t it?
I hope it won’t come true. We have entered the second year of the epidemic. On the one hand, a new super variety has recently appeared in South Africa, partly because of the low vaccination rate in African countries, which is related to vaccine nationalism, and fragile countries have failed to obtain sufficient vaccine supply. On the other hand, some people in Europe and America have a strong anti-vaccine mentality. Those who could be vaccinated refused to be vaccinated, and anti-vaccine demonstrations broke out from time to time. How to treat these new problems around vaccines?
[Zizek] The new variety Omicron seems to have originated from South Africa, but it may not be accurate in fact, which is one of them. Not only the left, but also some sincere centrists claim that the almost scandal-like behavior of developed countries is reaping the consequences. First of all, in the face of the epidemic, the world should work together with Qi Xin and stress unity, but the West has not taken the initiative to distribute vaccines to the world, even though its own vaccines are still in surplus. Some places simply throw away expired vaccines, but no one wants to distribute these vaccines to African or Latin American countries in an organized way, and countries with low vaccination rates are excellent hotbeds for virus variation.
Secondly, many countries call for granting vaccine-related patents free of charge. They hope to expand vaccine production in third world countries. For example, South Africa’s medical insurance system and pharmaceutical industry are still relatively developed, but now it is necessary to purchase relevant licenses from companies such as Pfizer and Madena. Many organizations and even individuals in the west are calling for free authorization or exemption of patent fees, allowing production when conditions are right. Big companies defend themselves by saying, “In order to develop vaccines in the laboratory, we must invest a lot of money and many other things.” But these companies have also received high government financial subsidies. In view of this, I think the state has the right to put pressure on these companies and urge them to license for free and not to set up patent barriers.
Another depressing thing is that although everyone is talking about unity and cooperation between countries, the reality runs counter to it. As you said, the COVID-19 epidemic has revived nationalism. The first reaction of Europe, America and Japan was to isolate South Africa, as if to punish it. But on the contrary, we should thank South Africa, whose scientists have done an excellent job in identifying varieties and sharing information. Now, a new type of “apartheid” has emerged, which has isolated the whole country.
This matter is not only related to the COVID-19 epidemic, but also related to global warming. Activists like Greta Thunberg repeat these cliches over and over again. People are diligent in making promises, but ignore their own actions. I’m fed up with this stupid behavior. Prince Charles once said at the Glasgow Global Warming Conference that “we only have this earth, what should we do”-but these are all empty words. There is no follow-up practical cooperation. In principle, everyone is eager to try, but they don’t seriously implement it and don’t honor their promises with actions. Of course, I am pessimistic about this issue, and there may be even greater disasters waiting for us. The present situation of western developed countries is not enough to really wake us up. Do you remember the super high temperature last summer? High temperatures of 50 degrees Celsius occurred in southern Canada, the northern United States and the west coast.
All in all, I think the real disaster for my region, that is, Europe and of course the United States, is that vaccination is not compulsory. On this issue, I support the regulations of some countries. I still remember when I was a child, not only Yugoslavia, but the whole of Europe was threatened by the epidemic, and the country immediately organized a national vaccination. I think this is the disadvantage of individualism and liberalism. Now everyone can have their own views on this. It seems that each of us can rely on ourselves. Whether or not to get a vaccine and how to get it depends on them. But obviously, these principles have failed on issues such as the COVID-19 epidemic and global warming.
We need more centralized authority, which is not inconsistent with our freedom. I don’t object to freedom, but I think our freedom-effective freedom-can only be best realized within the specific coordinate range that we accept together. For example, I didn’t get the vaccine, but it limited my freedom to be with you, because we all knew that you might be infected by me, and so on. If we want freedom, we must have some rules. I often like to use this simple example to illustrate the problem: the premise that I can walk freely in the street is that I must more or less assume that everyone I meet will abide by some basic rules, such as not fighting, being polite to each other and so on. The problem is that we don’t regard this epidemic as a purely medical emergency. It is politicized and in a bad way. We need to expand unity and cooperation, but we have gone astray.
Nowadays, where the basic truth no longer exists, liberal pluralism has made new development. Every group is competing to express their views. I can choose my identity or something at will. As a result of this ultra-free individualism or clique, we no longer belong to the same country, but only to different groups, and there is no basis for sharing. Once this trend is combined with the epidemic, the result is disastrous. I think the real trouble in the west is yet to come, because I think the reason why we don’t actively cooperate and do what we should do is not only the demand for big capital, speculation and a country’s economic interests, but also some more dangerous factors.
Westerners have become accustomed to a certain way of life. It contains elements such as free flow and consumerism, and people obviously don’t want to give it up. Those who oppose the vaccine or deny the COVID-19 epidemic just don’t want to give up their accustomed lifestyle. I think this is one of the reasons why there are so many infected people in western liberal countries. They simply think that if we really want to fight the epidemic and even global warming, we will lose our freedom and dignity, and there are many other things. I think this is a disaster, and westerners urgently need a real awakening.
I have noticed that the epidemic has developed in Europe and America for a year and a half, but the topics of debate seem to have not changed, and topics such as the boundaries of government control and the authority of individual freedom are still being repeated.
[Zizek] Not only are they arguing, it’s worse than that. A year and a half ago, we all realized that the epidemic was an emergency, and we had to abide by certain rules, impose a blockade, and so on. But the reason we obeyed was that we thought the epidemic was not serious and would not last long. This is the problem. A year and a half ago, the most common time unit was two weeks, and the popular saying was “it will be fine in two weeks”, even American medical authorities like Fauci thought so. By the summer of 2020, the time frame has changed from two weeks to two months. People think it would be better to stick to it for another two months. But in the spring of this year, the argument became half a year, and now it is uncertain, and people don’t even say it.
As you can see, what I am increasingly worried about has happened again. The epidemic has become so serious that it is inevitable that some people will resort to various conspiracy theories or skepticism to escape from reality. These theories are varied and varied. On the one hand, there are right-wingers such as Trump and European populists. It is not uncommon to say that “all this is a conspiracy of great powers to manipulate the people, and we must never be the puppets of Bill Gates or other conspirators”. At present, although it is only a narrow view in some small circles, its influence is increasing day by day, which makes me deeply worried.
On the other hand, there are not many conspiracy theories on the left. They not only claimed that global capitalism tried to use the COVID-19 epidemic to strengthen control, but also suggested that as early as 2018 and 2019, some intelligence analysts working for capital institutions or big capital predicted that a more serious crisis would occur in the future than the 2008 financial tsunami. It is on this basis that those leftists believe that big capital wants to stop the global economy through blockade, thus avoiding the financial crisis.
My position on this issue is that conspiracy theories do exist, but I don’t buy it. Why? Big capitals in different countries are taking advantage of this epidemic and will also use global warming to advance their capitalist and authoritarian agendas. This is of course true, but the problem is also true. Obviously, unrestricted market capitalism will also bring epidemic diseases and ecological problems. Unfortunately, many leftists in Europe and America describe the new ecological protection measures as “ecological fascism”. They claim that ecological problems and global warming are not so serious, but some people deliberately exaggerate these problems in order to strengthen control. In this sense, we may have encountered the worst combination boxing: the left has joined the conspiracy theory camp with the right.
I understand why there are conspiracy theories to some extent. At least as far as the west is concerned, most people are just confused. We don’t understand what happened. Conspiracy theories give a clear answer. Some of my friends have excellent comments on this. On the theological level, we no longer take God and divinity seriously. West Renye Fang just pretends to believe in God, which is just part of some narcissistic image projects. “My inner life, I want to …” But under the current confusion, we no longer believe in God and don’t care about some higher beliefs that promise to bring us greater progress.
What conspiracy theories put forward is quite absurd: a bad god is better than no god. If you believe that there is a bad and evil God-not just literally, but an evil master who controls everything-your life will still be meaningful. You can see the situation clearly. We must fight this master. It can help you avoid a more tragic situation, that is, after all, nothing can control the game. All of us are at this juncture, just like a flock of sheep sailing in stormy waves, but without a compass and a clear direction. The situation we are in today is difficult to solve. Conspiracy theory is so attractive because it exaggerates that some terrible and secret owner is trying to control and exploit us, but it also provides a clear view of the current situation. In this way, we know the progress of the situation and where the enemy is. But in fact, we don’t know anything
I think this is why I often mention communism. The communism we need is the minimum control of the market and large global enterprises. I can’t imagine that we can cope with the epidemic or global warming without a higher level of control over industries and multinational companies. In this regard, I am a pessimist who still has a glimmer of hope for miracles. Generally speaking, we are in deep crisis, but miracles will happen. The progressive movement will always break out here or there inadvertently, which gives us a glimmer of hope.
Now the technology giant is the new feudal owner, and our bank collects rent by enclosure.
Let’s start with global warming. I was in Glasgow during this year’s climate conference. Greta, a climate girl, launched a parade on the street with many supporters. On the one hand, young people are enthusiastic about climate action. On the other hand, people inside and outside the venue are actually very different. Politicians and scientists in the venue talked a lot, while the marchers outside accused the people inside of doing very little. Now every country pretends to care about climate issues, but if it needs to take action on its own or is related to cooperation between countries, there is often no following. In your opinion, has the climate issue become a puppet in international politics? Can we still hope that?
[Zizek] This is an area of struggle. Many people have seen this problem. Protesters, experts, ordinary people, especially young people outside the meeting saw this problem. But as you said, those in power, big companies and most governments only acknowledge the problem verbally. Once they have to make actual sacrifices, such as some restrictions in economic life, everyone will basically stay put. A person who doesn’t want to take practical action is full of empty talk, and no matter how serious it is, it won’t help.
Now even many leftists are like this. They criticize capitalism while enjoying the comfortable life in the ivory tower. They are always talking about it, but the purpose of talking about it is precisely that they can’t promote any actual change. In Freudian psychoanalytic terms, this kind of person belongs to obsessive-compulsive neurosis. To talk big is to stand still and make sure that the status quo remains unchanged.