Philosophy

Like A Thief In Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity

Like A Thief In Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity

  • Downloads：8155
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-06-13 07:53:44
  • Update Date：2025-09-07
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Slavoj Žižek
  • ISBN：014198919X
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

In our brave new world of Big Tech， work is automated and money melts into air。 What comes next as the global capitalist edifice crumbles？ Slavoj Žižek shows how the answer is already stealing into sight， like a thief in broad daylight。 What we must do is wake up and see it。

'In a world determined to crush hope of radical change， where moral corruption poses as pragmatism and systemic oppression as the new freedom， Slavoj Žižek's excellent new book serves humanity in a way that only authentic philosophy can' Yanis Varoufakis

'The Elvis of cultural theory' New Statesman

'Master of the counterintuitive observation' New Yorker

Download

Reviews

Alina Lucia ，

Some brilliant ideas in here but after the first 2 chapters it feels as though one is at dinner with a distant uncle（a highly intelligent one nonetheless）， whose never-ending and largely niche political anectodes renders eveyone else rather bored。

Pablo ，

Zizek se ha convertido en un viejo eurocomunista， y solo las secciones centrales del libro tienen alguna de sus perspicacias ¡también él está cansado del presente！

Sergey Kruk ，

When listening to Žižek or reading him I enjoy two things: him being a harbinger of the Apocalypse and the density of the text。 Almost forgotten feeling where you need to pay attention and follow author's thought。 The scale of thought is astonishing。At the same time it's hard to get rid of another feeling。 Or rather an image of a very smart ageing man whose thinking ability is less flexible than it was when he was younger and he tries to make sense of the reality instead of embracing it。 Of cour When listening to Žižek or reading him I enjoy two things: him being a harbinger of the Apocalypse and the density of the text。 Almost forgotten feeling where you need to pay attention and follow author's thought。 The scale of thought is astonishing。At the same time it's hard to get rid of another feeling。 Or rather an image of a very smart ageing man whose thinking ability is less flexible than it was when he was younger and he tries to make sense of the reality instead of embracing it。 Of course that can be said about all the philosophy or rather about why I'm interested in it。All in all a very thought-inducing read with a lot of questions hanging in emptiness。 No answers or recipes or anything like that。 Only a lonesome mind trembling in existential horror of the chaotic present。 。。。more

EppicNinjaBunny ，

Often denounced as a man lacking historical knowledge， the "most dangerous philosopher of the west" nails every word。 The failure of the liberal left， the danger of the （extreme） right， the lack of democracy in western society and the hypocrisy to justify our goals。 He does not shun to criticise his own beliefs， which makes it remarkable for a philosopher， who often go to great lengths to defend their views on the world。 Best book I've read in my life Often denounced as a man lacking historical knowledge， the "most dangerous philosopher of the west" nails every word。 The failure of the liberal left， the danger of the （extreme） right， the lack of democracy in western society and the hypocrisy to justify our goals。 He does not shun to criticise his own beliefs， which makes it remarkable for a philosopher， who often go to great lengths to defend their views on the world。 Best book I've read in my life 。。。more

Nikola Todorić ，

Scribbles of a madman。 Surprisingly amusing。

Kasey ，

This book has been on my shelf for a couple of years now and I’ve known of Zizek for just as long as I thought his introduction in both Slavoj Zizek Presents: Mao: On Practice & Contradiction and Slavoj Zizek presents: Trotsky: Terrorism and Communism where both decent enough。 But holy shit what the fuck is this book。 I think I liked reading this？ There’s a LOT going on in this work， as Zizek uses pop culture， movies， USSR and Nazi historical references， sexual relations and politics， Hegelian a This book has been on my shelf for a couple of years now and I’ve known of Zizek for just as long as I thought his introduction in both Slavoj Zizek Presents: Mao: On Practice & Contradiction and Slavoj Zizek presents: Trotsky: Terrorism and Communism where both decent enough。 But holy shit what the fuck is this book。 I think I liked reading this？ There’s a LOT going on in this work， as Zizek uses pop culture， movies， USSR and Nazi historical references， sexual relations and politics， Hegelian and Lacanian and Platonian thought and bible verses， among many other things， to bring up and point out contradictions of the current world order and the geopolitical turns towards nationalism， far-right populism that most of Europe and the US are currently taking （even if this did come out in 2017）。 Zizek talks a lot of about Trump and a little bit about Kim Jong Un as this was likely at the height of the US-DPRK negotiations。 This book was a wild ride but I’m not really sure what I got out， nothing in one singular idea that could serve as a theme for the entire book。 。。。more

MAH Hinton ，

A timely book if there ever were one。 Recommend！

Slavica ，

E s dušom se rastadoh， nikad pročitati， a potanja je knjižica。 Selberschuld （da malo i ja ubacim fensi njemačku riječ :p）， u'vatila sam se filozofskih eseja a 'Ne zna[m] Hegel， ne zna[m] Kant ， bog je htio da [ovo] dijete bude。。 informatičar'。。 nit sam čitala Hegela， ni Kanta， nit proučavala marksizam， ni Lenjina， ni Lubičeve filmove nisam gledala。 Ali cijenim anegdote i prikaz savremenih političara / društva/filmova itd。 Prevod je btw。 odličan， uopšte ne 'škripi'， tj nisu mi se prividjale sklad E s dušom se rastadoh， nikad pročitati， a potanja je knjižica。 Selberschuld （da malo i ja ubacim fensi njemačku riječ :p）， u'vatila sam se filozofskih eseja a 'Ne zna[m] Hegel， ne zna[m] Kant ， bog je htio da [ovo] dijete bude。。 informatičar'。。 nit sam čitala Hegela， ni Kanta， nit proučavala marksizam， ni Lenjina， ni Lubičeve filmove nisam gledala。 Ali cijenim anegdote i prikaz savremenih političara / društva/filmova itd。 Prevod je btw。 odličan， uopšte ne 'škripi'， tj nisu mi se prividjale skladnije orginalne engleske rečenice umjesto prevedenih。Iz radoznalosti odradih 'word count' i evo:Hegel* 56Kant* 49Lubič* 55ontološki* 10dijalektika/čki itd 15objektivno* 26subjektivno 33 。。。more

Jacob ，

"Relations between people are not so much hidden beneath the veneer of objectivity， but are themselves the very material of our everyday exploitation。。。 social relationality， in its very fluidity， is the object of marketing and exchange。" "Relations between people are not so much hidden beneath the veneer of objectivity， but are themselves the very material of our everyday exploitation。。。 social relationality， in its very fluidity， is the object of marketing and exchange。" 。。。more

Kris McCracken ，

Žižek is a funny bugger。 This is more a collection of essays with a loose connective thread than a consolidated and coherent thesis。 I very much enjoyed （perhaps not the right word） those elements exploring the breakdown of any ideological consensus。 For mine， Žižek accurately identifies the failures of the left to reconcile with those most disaffected by prevailing neoliberal globalism that has seen an immense benefit to the few at the expense of the many。 Conversely， I have no interest at all Žižek is a funny bugger。 This is more a collection of essays with a loose connective thread than a consolidated and coherent thesis。 I very much enjoyed （perhaps not the right word） those elements exploring the breakdown of any ideological consensus。 For mine， Žižek accurately identifies the failures of the left to reconcile with those most disaffected by prevailing neoliberal globalism that has seen an immense benefit to the few at the expense of the many。 Conversely， I have no interest at all in those sections exploring the revolutionary potential of Hollywood musicals or his musing on the #MeToo movement。 On that， while he is closure to the mark when it comes to Weinstein， masculine ideology and the dominant power structures at play in sexual dynamics， his resistance to the embrace of active consent did read a little too much like self-justification by an old， male academic for my liking。 From my time in that glorious world， a genuine reckoning is long overdue！Nevertheless， he does a great job in finding the appropriate balance between the need for focus on particularities - which have dominated contemporary radical and academic discourse since the 1970s - with a cogent argument for not throwing the universalist baby out with the interdisciplinary bathwater。The ground covered bears the heavy hand of Hegal， but I appreciated the attempt to reconcile Marx and Lenin's work with that of Freud and Lacan。 While this can be hard-going for the old brain-box， but through it， he has given as convincing analysis of the emergence of Trump as I have seen coming from the left， and his skewering of the false dichotomy between Macron and Marine Le Pen should present food for thought for the Australian Labor Party。As with such collections， it has its highs and lows！⭐ ⭐ ⭐ 。。。more

Boni Aditya ，

Absolutely random and chaotic。 Not sure what the author is really trying to say and how it would help anyone。 This is random commentary about ideas spread across various fields， like finance， capitalism， economics， production， politics， gender politics， feminism， technology， But I am absolutely certain， this book adds little or no value to anyone who has tried to read it。 I would strongly recommend against reading this book。 You will end up disoriented and bamboozled with the huge amount of rand Absolutely random and chaotic。 Not sure what the author is really trying to say and how it would help anyone。 This is random commentary about ideas spread across various fields， like finance， capitalism， economics， production， politics， gender politics， feminism， technology， But I am absolutely certain， this book adds little or no value to anyone who has tried to read it。 I would strongly recommend against reading this book。 You will end up disoriented and bamboozled with the huge amount of random nonsense that the author tries to stuff into your mind， without any proper sequence or about what one seems to gain by reading the book。 Last but not the least， the book isn't entertaining either。 It is painful to read this book。 。。。more

Jon Baldwin ，

It doesn't really work as a book， not even as a collection of essays。 Like a thief in broad daylight is a consecution of ideas and reflections， some of them extremely good。 My problem lies with the structure and rythim of the book， not with Zizek's approach to the question of "power in the era of post-humanity"。 I feel that in this messy collection of ideas he focuses too much on irrelevant questions like the contracts signed by couples before they have sex （to which he dedicates pages and pages It doesn't really work as a book， not even as a collection of essays。 Like a thief in broad daylight is a consecution of ideas and reflections， some of them extremely good。 My problem lies with the structure and rythim of the book， not with Zizek's approach to the question of "power in the era of post-humanity"。 I feel that in this messy collection of ideas he focuses too much on irrelevant questions like the contracts signed by couples before they have sex （to which he dedicates pages and pages in the last chapter of the book） and barely touches much more relevant questions like power relations in sexual encounters or the ideological implications of late capitalism in drug use and abuse。 The conclusion is very inconclusive， works alright as an essay but not as a conclusion for the book。 To summarize， great ideas and reflections are present throughout the pages （even when often mixing them with opinions and complaints of an old man）。 A better structure and filtering of these ideas would make the book more understandable as a unified piece of literature。 However， the book is very easy to read and quite fun。 Probably not recomended for everyone but there aren't many books where you can read essays on emancipatory politics in late capitalism while jumping from a Hegelian lecture of Blade Runner to a Leninist interpretation of La La Land。 If this sounds like something appealing to you I strongly recommend the book， if not you'll probably want to read something else。 。。。more

Nikola Jovic ，

This one I read， or rather listened to， two years ago， and even at that point it has started to become dated with its references to events in the everyday news cycle and with its predictions。 Generally not bad， and could be a really good introduction to his oeuvre， but if you've already been introduced to Žižek proper; then I believe this one is not an essential read。 Still， good time， but kind of like listening to his talks。 Meaning， lots of name droppings， concept droppings， unclear references This one I read， or rather listened to， two years ago， and even at that point it has started to become dated with its references to events in the everyday news cycle and with its predictions。 Generally not bad， and could be a really good introduction to his oeuvre， but if you've already been introduced to Žižek proper; then I believe this one is not an essential read。 Still， good time， but kind of like listening to his talks。 Meaning， lots of name droppings， concept droppings， unclear references， referring to anecdotal evidence to then derive a more general claim， self-repeating （radio Aravan， coffee without milk， light at the end of the tunnel etc。 ） 。。。more

Elhaym Andreasson ，

I just want to post some brief thoughts to help me remember my takeaways from this book。 This was my first Zizek book。 I appreciated his style， and how he centers writing about current events and politics as a phenomenon， as spectacle but one still worth treating seriously， because the ridiculousness of modern politics isn't a reason to dismiss it。。。 In fact the opposite。I previously had only seen Zizek talk and always watched said videos for entertainment primarily， though also I was aware I ag I just want to post some brief thoughts to help me remember my takeaways from this book。 This was my first Zizek book。 I appreciated his style， and how he centers writing about current events and politics as a phenomenon， as spectacle but one still worth treating seriously， because the ridiculousness of modern politics isn't a reason to dismiss it。。。 In fact the opposite。I previously had only seen Zizek talk and always watched said videos for entertainment primarily， though also I was aware I agreed with him on important points。 Reading him is a similar but thankfully more coherent experience。 The main "problem" with his writing is that he still tends to jump from subject to subject pretty rapidly， but at least each subject is written about with a clarity that does not always translate to his real life talks （you will read it in his voice， though）。 Also， the change in topics keeps things fresh。I do want to mention that one thing I appreciated almost above all else was the fact that his writing style often included short explanations of certain concepts or references after making them。 I have a passing familiarity with philosophy and sociology， but without those in-line notes I would be much more likely to get lost as I do in the majority of "theory" books I've read。 It's a small effort， but one that can retain entire audiences of people like me who are interested and want to understand but often don't have the context for what Hegel or Lacan or Kant thought about topics X， Y and Z。I definitely don't agree with him on everything and I want to read more of his stuff to get a better idea of why he tends towards certain beliefs， but this was a good read。 。。。more

Adam Reinhold ，

A bit scatterbrained but still contains some valuable insight to the forces behind our rapidly evolving society。

Lea Sophie Reinhardt ，

So， this is hard。 Starting this book， I was convinced I would give it 5 stars。 I discovered Zizek on YouTube and already watched dozens of his interviews and debates and judging from his argumentations， I absolutely love him。 But it´s the same for his work: He´s jumping from topic to topic （topics which ARE connected， seeing that is just really really hard if you don´t want to completely analyze everything and know everything that he does） and reading about an analysis of La La Land and then som So， this is hard。 Starting this book， I was convinced I would give it 5 stars。 I discovered Zizek on YouTube and already watched dozens of his interviews and debates and judging from his argumentations， I absolutely love him。 But it´s the same for his work: He´s jumping from topic to topic （topics which ARE connected， seeing that is just really really hard if you don´t want to completely analyze everything and know everything that he does） and reading about an analysis of La La Land and then somehow jumping back to how it has leninist characteristics。。。 it´s confusing。 The first part up until chapter 3 was the best！！ His argumentation and way of connecting the dots （here it was， in comparison， quite "simple" to follow） is amazing and makes a lot of sense。 But I do have to say that I wanted to read more about the actual topic of this book， posthumane capitalism， and not so much about sex and Ernst Lubitsch。 Again！ Maybe these are the parts where I´m not advanced enough to see the connections。 But overall Zizek delivers a fine piece of work with a lot of humour and sharp witted consciousness about what´s really going on in our world。 Even tough this is not one of his first books， I think that it involves some of the most important thoughts he has。 I do have to say that I had to google A TON of names and words， because Zizek simply starts off by stating these as common knowledge。 On the other hand， you can´t really want him to define some foreign word or something to readers， his train of thought is simply to chaotic for that。And honestly， if it wasn´t for chapter 4， I wouldn´t have noticed that the whole thing is a collection of essays and not a book as a whole。 。。。more

Chris Blatchley ，

i like zizek， this book talks about a few interesting more modern topics， but isn't much new。 go back to his more foundational texts for more *sniff* pure ideology i like zizek， this book talks about a few interesting more modern topics， but isn't much new。 go back to his more foundational texts for more *sniff* pure ideology 。。。more

Sara Walker ，

تیکه‌ی بلیدرانرش جالب بود。اون تیکه‌های محورمقاومتی و حمله‌ها به جنبش می‌تو 😒😨🤮واقعاً این غربیا درکی از وضعیت ما در ایران ندارن。Time and again I have I have observed that in their writings。

Iron_Dwarf ，

If one scraps the namedropping （14！ names on page 1）， unfounded assertions， needlessly obscure appeals to Hegels or Lacans authority， copypasta'd Wikipedia entries and random asides， a couple of decent The Guardian op-eds remain。 If one scraps the namedropping （14！ names on page 1）， unfounded assertions， needlessly obscure appeals to Hegels or Lacans authority， copypasta'd Wikipedia entries and random asides， a couple of decent The Guardian op-eds remain。 。。。more

Alana ，

the intro and conclusion were da best bits but still catch me reading all his shit cause major zaddy vibes

John Bleasdale ，

Good old ZizekThe thing with Slavoj is if you’ve read one you’ve kinda read em all。 Here he offers the usual mix of jokes and analysis ladled with many a bit of counterintuitive reasoning but much is recycled and there’s a flair to his delivery that sometimes looks like laziness。

Jon Wlasiuk ，

Žižek does not introduce new ideas but is best when connecting desperate ideas。 Although he acknowledges the historical failures of 20th century revolutionary socialism， he is far less pragmatic in analyzing contemporary politics。 His suggestion that the defeat of the fascist Marine LePen by the neoliberal Emmanuel Macron puts France on a worse course than had the population faced a fascist reckoning represents a naive and dangerous accelerationism。

Ivan Herrejon ，

https://hbookreviews。blogspot。com/202。。。Capitalism with a Humanist Interface: A leftist critique of UBI-Zizek， UBI， and the American electionWith the upcoming American presidential election， it is increasingly evident how change， as a concept， is interwoven in the political landscape。 On one hand， to return to the political environment of the pre-Trump era， voters can choose to elect Vice President Joe Biden， but wasn’t this the exact climate that gave us Trump in the first place？ On the other h https://hbookreviews。blogspot。com/202。。。Capitalism with a Humanist Interface: A leftist critique of UBI-Zizek， UBI， and the American electionWith the upcoming American presidential election， it is increasingly evident how change， as a concept， is interwoven in the political landscape。 On one hand， to return to the political environment of the pre-Trump era， voters can choose to elect Vice President Joe Biden， but wasn’t this the exact climate that gave us Trump in the first place？ On the other hand， voters have the option to re-elect Donald Trump， who needs no introduction to his list of defects。 This can take us back to Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek’s quip about Stalin: “back in the late 1920s， Stalin was asked by a journalist which deviation is worse， the Rightist one （Bukharin & company） or the Leftist one （Trotsky & company）， and he snapped back: ‘They are both worse！’” Isn’t that the case with the options of Trump or Biden？ “They are both worse！”But if both are worse， is there a “better” option？ Just like the main character in the movie The Matrix， we are given two choices: a blue pill， which can represent the usual Democratic Party candidate and/or their liberal policies， and a red pill， which does the same for a Republican Party candidate and/or their conservative ideas。 But， just like Zizek in his documentary A Pervert’s Guide to Cinema， “I want a third pill。” The question then becomes who or what is that third pill， especially for those who consider the red and blue pill as being essentially the same option in different colors。When Senator Bernie Sanders became the frontrunner in the Democratic Party primaries， he had been proposing a series of policies that could potentially create a change by working within the system: Medicare for All， Housing for All， College for All， etc。 However， the establishment on both parties did， and continues to do， everything possible to preserve the status quo， which included deterring him from securing the presidential nomination。 In other words， the establishment must change the system in order to maintain it。 For example， when Biden was asked， after the pandemic had started， what he would do if the House passed a version of Medicare for All， he responded by saying that he would veto it。 Not surprisingly， when Biden won Super Tuesday， which led to him securing the nomination of the democratic party， healthcare stocks went up。 Or recall when the Democratic presidential candidates were asked whether the candidate with most votes， but not plurality， should become the nominee and all candidates except Bernie said “no。” Again， changing the system to preserve the status quo。 On the other side of the same coin is Trump， who is trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act while the U。 S。 keeps breaking record numbers of daily COVID-19 cases。 In other words， one candidate would actively stop progress while the other one has been actively trying to revert it。 All of this is happening while most Americans support progressive policies （Medicare for All， College for All， boosting minimum wage， paid maternity leave， government funded childcare， etc。）。Here we encounter the paradox of change。 It becomes evident that there’s two options that can impact our system due to its unstable politico-economical structure。 Agents can either actively engage with the system to maintain it or not change it in order to transform it。 For another example， recall how Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi didn’t want people in Congress to endorse primary challengers against incumbent House Democrats。 In fact， the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee stated that the political strategists and vendors that supported said candidates would be cut off from the party。 However， when Rep。 Joe Kennedy ran against Sen。 Ed Markey， Pelosi broke her own rule and endorsed Kennedy， who represents the democratic establishment over his more progressive opponent， while citing that her family and herself had worked with different generations of the Kennedys as the reason for doing so。 Again， actively engaging the system to retain it。 Otherwise， there would be a gradual erosion induced by its structural imbalance if left alone。 Specifically， one of the pillars of this unsustainability is our current economic system， which facilitates these changes or the lack thereof。 Currently， as a reaction of the establishment in a panic， policies keep being proposed and enacted that extend its lifetime。 But before delving into the policies that prolongs its collapse， we should explore what makes it unable to stand the test of time。There are multiple characteristics that define this unsustainability。 One of them is that capitalism always pushes towards unskilled labor。 Since employers want to increase their profits， they can either increase the price of a product or decrease the cost of manufacturing said product。 The former is not always a viable option since consumers may not be willing to pay more for a product when there’s an option to purchase a similar and cheaper one。 Instead， employers have attempted different ways to attach additional charges to the main product such as offering the option of accessories that are to be used in combination with it。 For example， in the videogame industry， new physical copies are typically available for $60， but to increase revenue， publishers offer the option of additional content that gets charged as paid DLC， microtransactions， collector’s editions， season passes， etc。 This at first might seem fair， but a common practice between publishers is to remove some of the original content of the game and sell it separately after its release date。 Or recall similar avaricious practices conducted by EA， a videogame publishing company， when they introduced advertisements into the videogame UFC 4 after the game was released， which were removed following an outcry from its player base。 Similarly， the game NBA 2K21 introduced unskippable ads one month later after its release （when reviews have been published）。 After an outcry of its community， the publishing company reported that it was a mistake and that they will place them on different sections of the game in future installations。 As it becomes evident， this might not be the most cost-effective strategy。 Employers then have， as mentioned before， the option to cut the cost of production， which is usually done by underpaying workers。 The first time this culture was made public in the videogame industry was in 2004。 An anonymous author， known as EA Spouse， wrote a post detailing how workers at EA， who became the first company to consecutively be awarded Consumerist’s poll Worst Company in America， were not being paid for their overtime work。 This letter eventually led to a $14。9 million settlement to programmers for overdue overtime。 Another letter published in 2010 by a different spouse， detailed the same type of work culture at the publishing company Rockstar。 This letter also led to a class-action suit where the publisher settled for $2。75 million with over 100 ex-employees due to unpaid overtime too。Evidently， this second option of crunch culture also leads to companies bleeding money due to illegally cutting costs。 This drives employers to look for appropriate ways， in the eyes of the law， to reduce productions costs。 One way to do this is to replace skilled labor with unskilled labor and unskilled labor with automation。 Let’s look at the food industry as an example。 In the food documentary Ugly Delicious， Chef David Chang visited the pizza chain Domino’s to observe how they operate after he discussed with other chefs the differences between traditional cooking methods and the incorporation of technology into cooking。 After seeing Domino’s cooking process （e。g。 a tracking app takes into account the information of an order， it calculates the time left depending on the oven setting， and once it is dispatched， it can calculate how long it took to leave）， he comments that it’s obvious how it’s “years and years of a lot of people’s efforts to make it as streamlined as possible。” Chang comments at the end of the scene that Domino’s is no longer a food chain， but rather a technology company。Technology has always been creeping into the workplace。 There was a time when most cooks had to know how long to cook ingredients for them to be ready， and cashiers needed to be able to perform mental calculation。 Now， cooks wait for a cue in the form of a light or a sound to know when the food is ready to be flipped， and cashiers have a machine that does basic arithmetic for them。 An example of this is how McDonald’s now includes screens next to its cashiers as an option for people to order by themselves。 This sort of automation saves companies money for three main reasons。 The first reason is that they can produce the same product for less money due to three causes。 The first one is that machines replace workers since the purchasing and maintain of machinery costs less than the employment of them。 The second cause is that the work becomes unskilled labor， which is cheaper than unskilled labor。 The last cause is that employers need less employees as before to create the same product。 Returning to the reasons why automation increases profits for companies， the second reason is that employees become part of an unskilled labor force。 This means that they are easily replaced due employers having access to a larger pool of possible employees and lacking the need to train new hires。 Thus， if a group of cashiers go on a strike because they wish the minimum wage was raised， their employer can fire them and replace them through a fast and inexpensive process since it is unskilled labor。 The third reason is that whoever has the means of production has the power。 For example， in California a group of graduate students from the University of California went on strike for higher wages。 The students， who did not hold the means of production， were fired from their teaching assistant positions even though they’re from part of the skilled workforce。 With automation， employers hold securely the means of production because the employee is no longer manufacturing the product， but rather machinery owned by the employer。 All of this makes it evident how we are moving to a point where the employers are systematically replacing skilled workers for unskilled one and those for automation。This has increased dramatically the rate of unemployment， which creates a problem for the capitalists。 True， the capitalists can increase profit margins by paying less for labor while getting the same product， but an increase in unemployment means that there’s less consumers able to buy their product。 What capitalists need are consumers and with rate of unemployment increasing， they lack this fundamental group to continue “earning” money。 This is where we reintroduce the paradox of change （changing things so they remain the same）。 On the conservative side， you have people like Fox News host Tucker Carlson， who advocated for restrictions on A。 I。 with the ability to drive cars， in a conversation with conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro for two reasons。 The first one is that wages for truck drivers are going down。 The second reason is that with self-driving cars， those jobs would disappear， which would be devastating to the working class since truck driving is the most common job held by men with only a high school diploma in the United States。 Here it is exemplified two of the reasons described before why automation increases profit margins for employers。 And with this discourse， we return to the idea of stopping progress to maintain the system by actively changing it （e。 g。 restricting developing technology in the form of A。 I。 to leave unaffected the working class represented by truck drivers through action shown as new policies）。On the other side of the same coin is the idea of Universal Basic Income （UBI）， which at first appears to be a light at the end of a tunnel in this series of economic problems。 However， the underlying reality is that the light is from an incoming train。 UBI is similar to other policies that delay the collapse of capitalism while simultaneously driving us deeper into the system that created the problems in the first place。 UBI， who entrepreneur Andrew Yang calls the Freedom dividend， consists of providing a monthly payment to citizens。 In Yang’s plan， Americans would receive monthly checks of $1，000。 As mentioned before， this appears to give power to the working class。 One reason why UBI is advocated for is that individuals have more freedom and flexibility to pursue more non-lucrative jobs that they were interested in by receiving economic help。 However， this is nothing more than ideology and for Zizek， explaining this starts with a cup of Starbucks coffee。There’s guilt attached in transactions under capitalism since workers have to be exploited。 This is what the phrase there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism refers to。 For example， customers could ask themselves why they engage in purchasing a product， or in this case a coffee， when the money could be spent in a more moral/ethical way。 Capitalism， however， found a solution to alleviate this guilt。 Ingeniously， capitalists have attached an idea to the product。 In terms of the previous example， this would be an ethical conduct。 Could the coffee at Starbucks be cheaper？ Yes， but now every time someone purchases it， a donation is made in order to remove the guilt。 An example of this is their One Tree for One Bag initiative， which ensures that a tree is planted for every coffee bag that is sold。 Of course， Starbucks is not very vocal about the fact that the trees that are planted are a coffee trees， which expands their business and reduces costs。 But even if the company did， the purpose of the act is to benefit the company。 Ideology masquerades from people how the world functions while simultaneously shapes how people interact with it。 Recall one of the episodes in The Simpsons when Bart falls in a well and， instead of truly helping him， celebrities engage in symbolic behavior by singing a song for him。 Isn’t this similar with what happened during the pandemic when model and actress Gal Gadot gathered an array of celebrities to singalong to Imagine？ The emptiness of the gesture is noticeable with the joke made by stand-up comedian Tom Segura in a podcast with Joe Rogan when he said， “I lost my job at the meat packing plant but Gal Gadot sang Imagine。” Or recall when celebrities uploaded a video of themselves urging citizens to vote while being naked。 This is what ideology is。 Another similar act is philanthropy。 It appears like it benefits people， specifically the working class， when in reality it only helps the donor due to them receiving tax breaks。 It is true that Jeff Bezos has donated to charity， but the need of these charities is caused by the。。。。 。。。more

Rhys ，

The last number of Zizek's books have been similar: a loose group of essays， thoughts and ramblings about current society。 I don't mind them。 Kind of like visiting an eccentric uncle now and again， and then spending the next weeks trying to figure out exactly what was said。 The last number of Zizek's books have been similar: a loose group of essays， thoughts and ramblings about current society。 I don't mind them。 Kind of like visiting an eccentric uncle now and again， and then spending the next weeks trying to figure out exactly what was said。 。。。more

Miguel ，

In listening to Zizek’s podcast for the past few years， even though I might not fully take in all of his ideas and points， I can at least appreciate his many themes and of course always be entertained with his humor and very wide criticism on a range of topics。 All of those tropes are on display in ‘Like a Thief’; the philosophical musings that always seem to involve Hegel， the dirty Communist-era jokes， the film criticism， and the social commentary。 Films reviewed range from Lubitch to Black Pa In listening to Zizek’s podcast for the past few years， even though I might not fully take in all of his ideas and points， I can at least appreciate his many themes and of course always be entertained with his humor and very wide criticism on a range of topics。 All of those tropes are on display in ‘Like a Thief’; the philosophical musings that always seem to involve Hegel， the dirty Communist-era jokes， the film criticism， and the social commentary。 Films reviewed range from Lubitch to Black Panther （！）， and the social commentary touches on quite a few of the current hot button social issues – ones that others tread lightly on but Zizek appears more than happy to expound on。 Always entertaining， sometimes baffling。 One unfortunate issue is that the audiobook is read not with the very familiar and iconic Zizek voice， but by a voice actor and unfortunately a difficult-to-understand British one at that。 。。。more

Harry Allard ，

The lack of connective tissue really makes this collection of disjointed essays feel a bit mental， but Zizek’s authorial voice jumping from Blade Runner 2049 to Hegel to Corbyn to Marvel’s Black Panther to identity politics etc is a lot of fun

Theo Bennett ，

Good food for thought。 Pretty pertinent to a lot of things I've been thinking about lately。 Good food for thought。 Pretty pertinent to a lot of things I've been thinking about lately。 。。。more

Hendrik ，

In seinen Essays beweist Pop-Philosoph Slavoj Žižek einmal mehr seine unkonventionelle Art und Weise， sich mit den Problemen unserer Zeit auseinanderzusetzen。 Ausgehend von der Prämisse einer Krise des Kapitalismus， stellt er die Frage wie grundlegende Veränderungen unter den aktuellen ökonomischen Verhältnissen überhaupt erreicht werden können。 Das Veränderungen notwendig sind， um globale Herausforderungen wie den Klimawandel zu bewältigen， ist aus seiner Sicht unbestritten。 Er macht auch keine In seinen Essays beweist Pop-Philosoph Slavoj Žižek einmal mehr seine unkonventionelle Art und Weise， sich mit den Problemen unserer Zeit auseinanderzusetzen。 Ausgehend von der Prämisse einer Krise des Kapitalismus， stellt er die Frage wie grundlegende Veränderungen unter den aktuellen ökonomischen Verhältnissen überhaupt erreicht werden können。 Das Veränderungen notwendig sind， um globale Herausforderungen wie den Klimawandel zu bewältigen， ist aus seiner Sicht unbestritten。 Er macht auch keinen Hehl daraus， dass am Ende ein Teil der Lösung in einer Spielart des Kommunismus besteht。 Nicht als marxistische Utopie， sondern im Sinne einer stärkeren solidarischen Gemeinwohlorientierung。 Konkrete Vorschläge bleibt er allerdings schuldig， was ein kleines Manko des Buchs ist。 Žižek sieht die Aufgabe des Philosophen wohl eher darin， die richtigen Fragen zu stellen。 Um die Umsetzung müssen sich dann andere kümmern。 Adressat seiner Kritik ist aber nicht nur das kapitalistische Establishment， sondern explizit auch eine impotente Linke， die sich in eine Sackgasse manövriert hat。 Statt sich den ökonomischen Fragen zu stellen， bewegt diese sich in Richtung Sektierertum （Stichwort: Identitätspolitik） ohne noch breitere Massen anzusprechen。 Das hat man so schon mal gehört und ist nicht unbedingt neu。 Interessant ist aber， was Žižek zur Erneuerung der Linken empfiehlt。 Gemäß dem Motto "Von Lenin lernen， heißt siegen lernen" holt er tatsächlich Lenin als Vorbild aus dem Mausoleum。 Lenin als Techniker der Machteroberung， ein leuchtendes Beispiel für die Gegenwart？ Das klingt verrückt， aber scheint nicht so abwegig， wenn selbst Ex-Trump-Chefstratege Steve Bannon offen bekennt， er sei im Herzen Leninist。 Denn "Lenin wollte den Staat zerstören" und "Auch ich möchte alles zum Einsturz bringen und das gesamte Establishment vernichten。" Bei Žižek klingt es nicht ganz so radikal。 Seine Antwort auf Lenins Frage "Was tun？" würde vermutlich lauten: "Egal， was。 Hauptsache irgendetwas tun。" Handlungsmacht zurückgewinnen und Freiräume außerhalb der kapitalistischen Marktlogik schaffen， sind das Ziel seiner Kritik。 Statt auf eine Haltung der political correctness， die sich in moralischem Rigorismus erschöpft， setzt er auf subversiven Humor à la Ernst Lubitsch （Ninotschka）。 Sehr sympathisch。Es ist oft nicht ganz leicht den sprunghaften Gedankengängen zu folgen。 Etwas mehr Struktur hätte dem Buch ganz gut getan。 Aber so ist halt der typische Žižek-Style。 Trotzdem handelt es sich um eine sehr originelle und kurzweilige Gesellschafts- und Kulturkritik。 Allein für die Filmanalysen von Blade Runner 2049 oder La La Land hat sich das Lesen gelohnt。 。。。more

Charles ，

I’ve got a lot of work to do。

Zach ，

。

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Like A Thief In Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Like A Thief In Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Like A Thief In Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0