Customer Reviews

Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism: Five Interventions in the (Mis)Use of a Notion

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?: Five Interventions in the (Mis)use of a Notion is an intensely searching evaluation and analysis of precisely what totalitarianism is, and how the term has been misused -- particularly in twentieth century political science and philosophical discussions. Individual chapter sections address diverse, unusual, and controversial topics such as "The radical ambiguity of Stalinism"; "A plea for material creationism"; and "The Pope versus the Dalai Lama". Deviously written by Slavoj Zizek (Senior Researcher, Institute for Social Studies, Ljublijana) to unweave conundrums about the cross-purpose classification of totalitarian power and governance, Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism? is a complex, thought-provoking philosophical accounting and a highly recommended addition to academic Political Science and Philosophy Studies departmental reference collections and reading lists.

"On the `Celestial Seasonings' green tea packet there is a short explanation of its benefits: `Green tea is a natural source of antioxidants, which neutralize harmful molecules in the body known as free radicals.' ...Is not the notion of totalitarianism one of the main ideological antioxidants, whose function throughout its career was to tame free radicals...?"

So begins Slavoj Zizek's book "Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?" Yes, the prolific Slovenian thinker moves from green tea to totalitarianism in a single paragraph, further cementing his reputation for building theory from the most banal of everyday objects. In this 2001 effort, Zizek's central thesis, as promised in the book's introduction, goes something like this: challenging totalitarianism as such is no longer a very fruitful endeavor. Instead, we should challenge the very designation `totalitarian,' the very consensus within liberal democracy that immediately stifles any project which is accused of harboring even the faintest totalitarian strain. We are all familiar with a standard bourgeois response to any radical, emancipatory political project: "However benevolent your intentions, my good friend, you are aware of course that this will inevitable lead to the gulag?" By leveling the `totalitarian' accusation in this way, existing power structures diffuse any challenge to their hegemony.

Ah, but this is Zizek. Which means that as soon as his wildly erratic, aphoristic endeavor gets underway, the `central' thesis will only figure briefly and tangentially into the text. As with most of Zizek's work, however, you won't miss it terribly. "Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism?" is packed with insights, each illuminated by Zizek's incisive wit and masterful balancing of postmodern jargon with economy of phrase.

Among the more brilliant investigations in the text is an analysis of Nikolai Bukharin's trial and execution by Stalin in 1937, in which Zizek exposes the `inverted logic' of Stalinist ethics. Bukharin is at ease with the idea of dying for crimes he didn't commit, as long as Stalin does not actually believe him guilty - both parties willingly go through with the execution for the good of the Party. What is unbearable to Bukharin, however, is the chance that Stalin might actually believe he is guilty. Thus the generally accepted logic of ethics is neatly inverted - believing that an innocent man is guilty is generally considered pardonable, but the grave sin would be to condemn a man you know to be innocent.

Zizek performs another excellent analysis by exploring the rising battle between `Cultural Studies' academics and the `neo-Darwinists' (Dawkins, Dennett, et al.) who are churning out popular science bestsellers. This battle, Zizek argues, is one for intellectual hegemony - for how the figure of the `public intellectual' will be defined. As capital `P' Philosophers retreat into an ever more elitist and self-enclosing jargon, scientists like Dawkins encroach into the realm of what it means to be a public intellectual, the "other who is supposed to know." We must be careful, Zizek argues, not to forget the ever-important question of truth-value when staking our position in this contest. However thoroughly we might understand Derrida's or Descartes' or Dawkins' theories, we must remember to confront them with the ontological question: yes, well and good, but is this how things actually are? Zizek doesn't outright reject either position in this struggle. The only thinkers he ridicules outright are what he calls "New Age obscurantists" - those who try to appropriate modern science for use in promoting whatever ancient Eastern teaching is fashionable at the time.

All said, a wonderful read. As usual when reading Zizek, a solid foundation in Marx, Hegel, Freud and Lacan is immensely helpful. He is better in this text at holding the reader's hand through his many obscure cultural references than he usually is. I am glad Verso published this attractive new edition of this work, and it is a welcome addition to the Essential Zizek series.

this is wonderful.i read it in one week.persuade readers to go on and on.

I found this in the philosphy section of a local store and was intrigued by the timely theme and title. Nothing else proved commendable about this book. This is the sort of book that gives philosphy a bad name. A dense fog of jagron so abstract that it almost seems like a parody. I must admit I could not finish this book. I was barely able to penetrate the first two chapters. Several honest attempts to scan the rest of the book read like pure gibberish.