We ended with Bargaining, parts I and II, which was a Marxist critique of the ideological notions surrounding late Capitalism, and this leads us to the fourth stage of grief in Elisabeth Kubler-Ross's psychological model of how the human subject deals with grief: Depression.
Again Zizek's critique is aimed at late Capitalism, as its ideological grasp has led us toward the 'End Times' in the first place (again, the ecological crisis, the consequences of the biogenetic revolution, growing imbalances in the system itself, and exploding social divisions). Developing a great postmodern insight, Zizek writes, "(I)n the postmodern universe, pre-modern 'leftovers' are no longer experienced as obstacles to be overcome by progress towards a fully secularized modernization, but as something to be unproblematically incorporated into the multicultural global universe - all traditions survive, but in a mediated 'de-naturalized' form, that is, no longer as authentic ways of life, but as freely chosen 'life-styles'" (283).
Of course! In the past, prior to multiculturalism and secular society, modernization involved a bloody struggle to overcome the other. Native American tribes were wiped out, the Trail of Tears was walked, concentration camps were established, racism abounded, and xenophobia prevailed. What is happening now? The Capitalist nations do not fear the Native American, his spirituality, his oral traditions, his sense of belonging or not belonging. Capitalist nations try to turn those deep seeded truths into commodities. They try to overcome the other through a bill of sale. What's left over in the end is a washed up reflection of the Idea. How else can we explain Tibetan Flags sold at REI, Penguin Books publishing of the Dalai Lama, the success of New Age bookstores and the great variety of their overpriced products, and the coveted copy of the I Ching sitting in my bookshelf? Check out this article on Narcissism and Spirituality by Kabutsu Malone.
There was a time when these items would have left one ostracized, punished, or burned, but now they pose no threat. Why? They are the "leftovers" Zizek refers to - those traditions that have survived globalism. As posing no threat, they are sold for profit, and one can freely choose to buy them or not. Should one take it a step further and really try and take on the tradition, one is not seen as privy to truth, but rather as having freely chosen one lifestyle over another. Just like we can pick a major to study at school, we can be a Buddhist or a Pagan or a Christian or an Atheist, and as such, we become part of a larger marketing scheme: an Atheist, as self-expressed on Facebook, should certainly get the advertisement that Sam Harris is coming to your town in a book tour...
Zizek argues that in a global capitalist world, actual lifeworlds are lost. So long as we sell our labor-power, we may perceive our actions as tied to a traditional lifeworld, but with modernity, "the lifeworld loses its immediacy." He provides a vivid example: "the Indian programmer thinks that in the core of his being he remains faithful to his traditional lifeworld, but his 'truth' is his inclusion in the global capitalist machine" (285). What does Zizek mean by 'truth' here? He is referring to The Act. So long as we act in allegiance and accordance with the imagined "Big Other", the "Big Other" is our 'truth'. The Big Other is global capitalism and multiculturalism, and so long as our identities are riddled with "gaps, failures, and antagonisms," we can understand ourselves as serving something other than a local, authentic lifeworld. Our labor, as given value by a machine much larger than us, as given a specialized job not imagined by us, as working toward a goal not determined by us, puts us in the position of being far more universal than we'd like to think. Zizek writes, "But what if it is our particular identity which does not exist, that is, which is always already traversed by universalities, caught up in them? What if, in today's global capitalism, we are more universal than we think, and it is our particular identity which is a fragile ideological fantasy?" (285). Zizek sees this fragile ideological fantasy amidst the all-powerful machinery of global capitalism as a source of depression for the postmodern subject. Zizek writes, "no matter how much we see ourselves as embedded in a particular culture, the moment we participate in global capitalism, this culture is always already de-naturalized, effectively functioning as one specific and contingent 'way of life' of abstract Cartesian subjectivity" (291).
Zizek provides an amazing example of "the political consequences of the loss of an authentic lifeworld in a global economy": China. In 2007, the Chinese State Administration of Religious Affairs passed 'Order Number Five' which gave the Chinese government the power to 'manage' the reincarnation of living Buddhas in Tibetan Buddhism. Monks are no longer allowed to reincarnate without government permission. Why would the Chinese government do this? Zizek argues, paradoxically, that it's to support religious and traditional ideologies in the midst of a prevailing modernity. That is, it's to support Tibetan Buddhist Religious Traditions in the modern world. He argues that the Chinese government, above all, wants social harmony. That is, after all, what keeps them in power. In the onslaught of Capitalist influence and expansion, social sustainability relies on religious and traditional ideologies to keep people ostensibly happy. The Chinese government, in addressing this, began a Cultural Revolution, in which Ye Xiaowen said, "religion is one of the important forces from which China draws its strength". He also said that Buddhism had a "unique role in promoting a harmonious society" (287). The Chinese then went on to protect Tibetan traditions against modernization. In November 2007, the Dalai Lama said that, most likely, his successor would not be chosen by reincarnation, but rather by more democratic means. This would end an ancient tradition in favor a modern political phenomenon. The Chinese government came out against the Dalai Lama, saying that his successor should be chosen through reincarnation, and that the Dalai Lama was being influenced by vested political interests.
What does this tell us? That the Chinese 'support' is informed from having learned from the European powers. Previously relying on military might, they are now relying on ethnic and economic colonization. A belligerent policy towards the Tibetans will only make their cause stronger. The best way to colonize a people is by turning them into a theme park. Treat them as we have the Native Americans. Give them their space and encourage a touristic gaze upon them. Bring them into the fold of a Capitalistic, Modern society.
What's lost is the authentic lifeworld, the deep-seeded identification beyond or before Capitalist exploitation. As Zizek details throughout this chapter, such a loss has resulted in a new subject: a depressed subject. Zizek cryptically notes, "This subject lives death as a form of life - his or her life in the death drive embodied, a life deprived of erotic engagement; and this holds for the henchmen no less than for his victims" (294).
No comments:
Post a Comment