Common sense is popularizing --
1. The patient asks the doctor for help. Their guilt does not stem from excessive pleasure, not because they indulge in pleasure, which goes against a sense of duty or morality, etc., but on the contrary, they feel guilty because they cannot fully enjoy pleasure, because they cannot to enjoy.
Desire is never the desire for something, it is always the desire for the desire itself, a desire to continue the desire.
2. All violence is fundamentally suicidal.
3. Fascism is fundamentally a conservative revolution. It requires economic development and a revolution in modern industry, but it is still a revolution that maintains and even reinforces a traditional hierarchical society—a modern, efficient society, but at the same time subject to the values of social hierarchy and not to class antagonisms and other influences. Fascists find a problem: antagonism, class struggle and other crises are inherent in capitalism, modernization, industrialization means the disintegration of old stable relations, it means social contradictions, instability is the basis of capitalism operation . So how to solve this problem? Quite simply, you need to produce an ideological narrative that explains that things in society deteriorate not as a consequence of the inherent contradictions of social development, but as a consequence of foreign invaders. (Explaining Fascism's Anti-Semitism)
Most of the elements that we think of today as fascism-related have their origins in the labor movement. Ideas like mass marching together, with strict physical discipline as an obligation, were all taken directly by the Nazis from Left Social Democracy, like the unity of the people - the question is, what kind of people? If you mean the "national community" (Volksgemeinschaft), the organic community of the people, and the enemy automatically becomes a foreign invader, then we become Nazis.
4. What the German Tank Band did was to free these "Nazi elements" from Nazi expressions, allowing us to enjoy their pre-ideological state. The way to fight Nazism is to enjoy these elements - by suspending the Nazi vision so that you can subvert within Nazism.
5. We see the devastated human world, half-empty factories, broken machines, and half-empty stores. At this moment, what we experience is the so-called "Inertia of the Real" in psychoanalytic terms, silence beyond meaning The presence.
6. "Titanic" is one of the most important instances of Hollywood ideology in recent years because of the looming tension that threatens the film's story. at least three levels. The first layer is ironically referred to as Cameron's Hollywood Marxism - absurd, false sympathy for the lower classes. First-class passengers, who are mostly evil, conceited, and cowardly, manifest in Rose's fiancé. The overall narrative continues through a more conservative and reactionary myth. What role did the iceberg play in the development of this love story? Personally, their elopement would be a real disaster. It is conceivable that after two or three weeks of passion in New York, love will inexplicably disappear. Rose is an upper-class girl in mental pain and confusion, her self-consciousness is broken, Jack's role is to help her rebuild her self, her self-image. It's actually a new version of an old imperialist myth: when the upper classes lose their vitality, they need to engage with the lower classes, use them ruthlessly like vampires, suck energy from them and regenerate , to return to the high life of isolation from the outside world.
The ship didn't hit the iceberg immediately after sex, but when the couple decided to stay together.
History often sees a seemingly catastrophic event that saves people, or an idea, that sublimates it into a myth. Example: In 1968 the former Soviet Union and other Warsaw Pact members intervened militarily in (former) Czechoslovakia in order to stifle the "Prague Spring". The ephemeral dream of the "Prague Spring" is usually thought to have been destroyed by the brutal Soviet intervention, and I think it saved that dream instead. Without Soviet intervention, the Czech Republic would have become an ordinary liberal capitalist country. Or, at a certain tipping point, this is also the general fate of reformist communists. The communists in power will need to set some sort of limit - you've had enough fun and freedom, OK, now it's time to set permissions again. The paradox is precisely that the Soviet intervention saved this dream, dreaming of the possibility of another communism, etc.
So, through a short-lived natural disaster, this love story is ideally redeemed for eternity. This disaster is basically a desperate strategy to save the fantasy of eternal true love. We can see how ideology works here on two superficial levels: the magic of accidents, love stories—all of which are traps that lower our attention. In fact, it is opening a cognitive entrance for us: the rich are trying to gain a new life by ruthlessly occupying the life force of the poor - there is one detail to prove it: when Rose found out that Jack was dead, she shouted: I'll never let you go, I promise. Yet at this very moment, she pushes him into the sea. We can ironically call Jack the disappearing mediator.
This couple logic has a long history in Hollywood. No matter what the story is about, as usual, we always see a couple whose relationship is threatened, through a tough test, and finally reunited. This logic doesn't just apply to Hollywood. In the late 1940s, they produced one of the most expensive films in Soviet history: The Fall Of Berlin, which chronicled World War II from the Soviet standpoint. Surprisingly, the movie also follows couple logic. The underlying logic of the film is to reunite the couple, who eventually reunite as a result of Stalin's victory in the war—that's how ideology works.
7. Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal - American soldiers humiliated Iraqi prisoners, not simply "arrogant Americans humiliating others". What those Iraqi soldiers experienced was a display of the obscene and dark side of American military culture.
At the end of "Full Metal Jacket", why did the soldier shoot himself? Instead of keeping the proper, ironic distance from it all, like his fellow soldier, he identifies too directly with these obscene rituals and takes them too seriously. If you become the face of these rituals, it will be self-destructive: you will kill those around you, and ultimately yourself.
8. One of the most disturbing aspects of The Dark Knight is the elevation of the lie as a universal social norm, as if telling the truth would mean the collapse of the social order. To maintain public trust in the rule of law system, we need to lie to maintain order. Plato called it a "noble allegory". Power requires authority. Even the most democratic state must always need some kind of rhetoric in order to demonstrate its true authority: "We are legally recognized through elections -- but basically, we can do whatever you want with you."
10. The cliché of the moment: when we are confronted with violence, we quote Dostoevsky's famous quote (from The Brothers Karamazov): "If there is no God, nothing is forbidden." First question The fact is that of course he did not write this sentence himself. The first person to deduce this sentence from his works was Jean Paul Sartre in 1943. Second question: This sentence is wrong. Precisely: even if God exists, nothing is forbidden. If you see yourself as a direct instrument of the divine will, then of course all petty moral considerations disappear. How can you think so narrowly when you are a direct instrument of God? That's how so-called fundamentalists work -- but it's not limited to them. Every form of totalitarianism works this way—even if it presents itself as atheist. Take Stalinism, for example: Officially Stalinism is a Marxist theory based on atheism. But if you carefully observe the subjective experience of their political representatives or leaders, they are not in the position of an arrogant master, a master who will do whatever they want, on the contrary, they are in the position of a perfect servant. In a Stalinist universe there must be what our psychoanalytic theory calls "The big other." This "big other" has many names, the most well known being "the inevitability of historical development leading to communism". A communist uses himself as a mere instrument to realize the inevitability of history. And the "people" for whom totalitarian leaders serve is never simply an actual individual or group, but an imaginary, idealized reference that works in every situation. Even when there is a revolt against communist rule - like in Hungary in 1956, even when the vast majority of actual popular uprisings are against the regime, those in power still say, "No, it's just individuals, they're not the real people. Of course. , my heart bleeds for all the poor victims, but it's not entirely my responsibility, I'm just acting on behalf of the 'big other'." Stalinism presents Lenin as a man who loved children and cats— It is implied that although Lenin had to order massacres, etc., this was not his intention, he was just fulfilling his duty - as a functional tool for the advancement of history.
The way to subvert Stalinism is not just to laugh at the leader, but to destroy that mythical reference - the "people" that legitimized the Stalinist leader.
What exactly is the "Big Other"? As the foundation of various ideological systems, it has two contradictory sides. On the one hand, the "Other" is the secret order of things (God's reason, destiny, etc.) that controls us and governs the meaning of our actions. On the other hand, the "big other" is order as representation. Many things that are forbidden are not simply forbidden, but that they cannot happen to the Other. In the face of intruders, we need the "big Other" to maintain stability, and it is the reason why we maintain appearances. Our tragedy is that in order to be fully individual, we need to make up a vehicle such as the "big Other" to record our predicament.
But what if such a vector does not exist? For the women who were raped during the post-Yugoslav war in Bosnia in the early 1990s, this was their greatest despair. What keeps them going is the belief that I will live until the day I tell the truth. Had they survived, they had discovered something terrible: no one was really listening to them, and what they had discovered was exactly what Jacques Lacan claimed: "The 'big Other' doesn't exist." Maybe There is a virtual "big Other" that you cannot talk to; there may be a real Other, but he is never like the virtual one. We are alone.
11. I agree with Kafka's statement: "For a modern, secular, non-religious person, the bureaucracy, the state bureaucracy, is the only remaining connection to the divine dimension." There is a relationship between bureaucracy and enjoyment. close relationship. The impenetrable omnipotence of the bureaucracy is a sacred enjoyment. The purposeless performances in the institution generate a kind of intense enjoyment, and they keep replicating themselves forever.
12. In the theological universe, your duty is given by God, determined by society, or by another higher authority, and your duty is to accomplish it. But in a radically atheist universe, you are not only responsible for fulfilling your obligations, you are also responsible for deciding what your obligations are.
13. In psychoanalytic theory, hysteria is more subversive than perversion. A pervert has no uncertainty, while hysteria is a state of skepticism, a highly productive state. All new creations come from hysterical questioning, and Christianity is unique in that it places this hysterical questioning on God.
There is a neat idea in The Last Temptation of Christ: When Jesus Christ was told in his youth that he was not only the Son of God but God Himself, he did not simply accept the statement. It was traumatic news for the young Jesus Christ: "Oh my God, why am I dead? Am I really dead?"
How do we come to the conclusion that Christianity is an exception (to other religions)? It all starts with the Book of Job. Job started to suffer, he lost everything. Three friends visit him, each trying to justify Job's misfortune. And the great thing about Job is that he doesn't accept this deeper meaning. When God appeared at the end of the Book of Job and gave Job back his rights, God said that the words of those theological friends were wrong, Job was right, and disasters were meaningless. We have taken the first step in the direction of "delegitimizing suffering".
The difference between Judaism and Christianity is the difference between anxiety and love. The God of Judaism is the abyss of the desires of the Other: something catastrophic happens, and we don't know what this God of the "Other" wants from us and what God desires. To name this traumatic experience (the crucifixion), Jacques Lacan used an Italian phrase "che voglio" - "what do you want?" meaning that Judaism clings to this anxiety: God remains It is this inscrutable, terrifying Other. Yet Christianity resolves this conflict with love. By sacrificing his Son, God proved that he loves us. This is a hypothetical, even sensational, solution to a situation of radical anxiety.
I think the Christian posture can be read more radically. What died on the cross is precisely the assurance of the "big Other". Christian revelation here is extremely atheistic. Christ's death was not out of any kind of redemption or payment for sin, it was the disintegration of God - the God who ensures the meaning of our lives - "Eli Eli lama sabachthani? (Father, why have you abandoned me?)"
Before Christ died, we saw the "subjective destitution" of psychoanalytic theory. Completely walk out of the field of symbolic identity, cancel or suspend the entire control field of symbolic authority, the entire control field of the "big Other". We certainly don't know what God wants from us, because God doesn't exist.
Christ said, "I didn't come here with peace. If you don't hate your father or your mother, you're not a believer in me." Family relationships here symbolize relationships of social hierarchy. The revelation of Christ is: I am dying, but my death is good news. It means that liberty has been handed back to you, bathed in the Holy Spirit - who is the community of believers - who are wrong to think that Christ will somehow return. Christ was already here when believers formed liberating collectives.
- That's why I think the real way to be an atheist is to get involved with Christianity, which is atheistic, more so than any other conventional atheism. Those atheists claim that God does not exist, but still retain some kind of trust in the "big other" that can be called natural necessity, evolution, etc., then we humans are still reduced to evolution a member of the harmonious whole. - But once again, the difficulty lies in accepting the fact that the "big other" does not exist, and there is no reference to guarantee its meaning.
14. The first step towards freedom is not simply to transform reality to match your dreams, but to change the way you dream. It's painful because all satisfaction comes from our dreams. All the great revolutionary movements of the twentieth century (including the Soviet Union, Cuba, China) had a common problem: they did change the social identity, but an egalitarian communist society was never achieved. Dreams are still old dreams, and they all become the ultimate nightmare. What the rest of the radical left is now waiting for is a magical moment - when the real revolutionary subject finally awakens. And the frustrating lesson of the past few decades is that capitalism has become a truly revolutionary force, even if it serves itself.
15. In revolutionary turmoil, some energy or some utopian dream emerges and then gets shattered, and even the actual result of a social turmoil is just a consumerist everyday life. This excess energy not only remains in reality, but also haunts our dreams, waiting to be redeemed. In this sense, whenever we engage in radical liberation politics, we should never forget what Benjamin said a century ago: "Every revolution, if it is a real revolution, it Not only towards the future, but it will also redeem the failed revolutions of the past. All those wandering, discontented, ghosts of the revolutions of the past will find their home in the new freedom.”
View more about The Pervert's Guide to Ideology reviews
