Today, I read a new piece of Slavoj Zizek.
Here is the last passage.
At this point, some leftists are tempted to claim that today's China comes closest to such a mechanism of collective decision-making which regulates and constrains the market, taking care of the long-term interests of our survival. I am ready to accept that China is at this moment the least bad of the three superpowers (China, the US, Russia), but I think that the non-transparency of its system contradicts the Confucian harmony advocated by China as its model of social relations. Just recall the latest mega-purges in the Chinese army (half of the entire supreme command was removed): did Xi not do this as a supreme Predator acting without any public consultation? Again, I am not claiming I oppose this purge: there are good reasons to presume that Xi targeted the generals who were pushing China toward war (an attack on Taiwan), and in general, Predators do things which are necessary. What we all need are such strong acts, but not accomplished in a predatory way — if this is the only way left to us, we are truly lost.
I think this is a very controverisal take. I read Zizek's substack because his takes are often censored in the mainstream press. Friends of mine also debated which superpower is currently the least horrible. Both agreed Russia is the worst. But they were not sure whether China or the US is actually worse. I think to claim China was the least bad choice isn't the most controversial thing he expresse. It seems to be more controversial to say he is not claiming to oppose the purge within the Chinese apparatus. He gives a dictator like Xi the benefit of the doubt. I think the text should be thought-provoking anyway and well it is.
I am not sure where I position myself. The US revives imperialism and gives China and Russia a good excuse to invade Taiwan and Ukraine. Though, thus far China did not act on it. China is supporting Russia in its war against Ukraine. It helps Russia to circumvent sanctions. However, I think the US foreign policies have the potential to lit the Middle East on fire. And destabilize a region with an extreme fallout risk for generations to come.
Considering domestic politics I think the US is still better than China. There is an opposition. There are free media outlets. I don't deny the media system is under severe pressure. But imagine the Daily Show, New York Times, Substack authors within China's system. That's unimaginable.
I am not fully sure. And I had no time to consider all the arguments. But the impact on the global order the US seems to be more aggressive and worse. Imagine what our media outlets would report if China threatened Greenland, Cuba, Denmark let alone invade/abduct foreign leaders. Considering domestic politics there still seems to be more freedom in the US compared to China.
What do you think?
Here is the last passage.
At this point, some leftists are tempted to claim that today's China comes closest to such a mechanism of collective decision-making which regulates and constrains the market, taking care of the long-term interests of our survival. I am ready to accept that China is at this moment the least bad of the three superpowers (China, the US, Russia), but I think that the non-transparency of its system contradicts the Confucian harmony advocated by China as its model of social relations. Just recall the latest mega-purges in the Chinese army (half of the entire supreme command was removed): did Xi not do this as a supreme Predator acting without any public consultation? Again, I am not claiming I oppose this purge: there are good reasons to presume that Xi targeted the generals who were pushing China toward war (an attack on Taiwan), and in general, Predators do things which are necessary. What we all need are such strong acts, but not accomplished in a predatory way — if this is the only way left to us, we are truly lost.
I think this is a very controverisal take. I read Zizek's substack because his takes are often censored in the mainstream press. Friends of mine also debated which superpower is currently the least horrible. Both agreed Russia is the worst. But they were not sure whether China or the US is actually worse. I think to claim China was the least bad choice isn't the most controversial thing he expresse. It seems to be more controversial to say he is not claiming to oppose the purge within the Chinese apparatus. He gives a dictator like Xi the benefit of the doubt. I think the text should be thought-provoking anyway and well it is.
I am not sure where I position myself. The US revives imperialism and gives China and Russia a good excuse to invade Taiwan and Ukraine. Though, thus far China did not act on it. China is supporting Russia in its war against Ukraine. It helps Russia to circumvent sanctions. However, I think the US foreign policies have the potential to lit the Middle East on fire. And destabilize a region with an extreme fallout risk for generations to come.
Considering domestic politics I think the US is still better than China. There is an opposition. There are free media outlets. I don't deny the media system is under severe pressure. But imagine the Daily Show, New York Times, Substack authors within China's system. That's unimaginable.
I am not fully sure. And I had no time to consider all the arguments. But the impact on the global order the US seems to be more aggressive and worse. Imagine what our media outlets would report if China threatened Greenland, Cuba, Denmark let alone invade/abduct foreign leaders. Considering domestic politics there still seems to be more freedom in the US compared to China.
What do you think?
