Pandemic!: COVID-19 Shakes the World

The pre-COVID condition is supremely unprepared to handle crises on the level of global pandemics. This statement seems entirely uncontroversial: everyone from rational capitalists to undergraduate revolutionaries agrees we need to change something to address the massive scale, unbound by national borders and economic theory. Exactly what change must occur, though, remains subject to high debate. And the virus continues spreading, while humans keep talking.Anglo-Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek avoids the common trap of getting prescriptive, demanding innovations that look good on graph paper. Instead, he looks at what political leaders and economic drivers are doing right now to improve, or fail to improve, the situation. (In this case, “right now” means late April and early May of 2020.) Žižek finds plenty of reason to hope, but he acknowledges the accomplishments of this controversial season are still ours to lose.Two threads alternate in Žižek’s accounting of the COVID-19 crisis. First, his fellow philosophers discuss the crisis in solemn tones, failing to agree on premises, much less meaningful solutions. Giorgio Agamben, for instance, thinks the crisis mentality creates a counter-revolutionary mentality that allows government power grabs by creating permanent emergencies. Benjamin Bratton thinks we mainly need a vocabulary shift, not a truly new paradigm.Second, Žižek describes actions which powerful people and organizations have already undertaken, or talked about undertaking. These actions often correspond, he notes, with the Five Stages of Grief: including Denial, where national leaders dismiss the threat altogether; Anger, like the famous video of wrathful Italian mayors; and Depression, where communities and economic actors simply surrender to existential dread and paralysis. We haven’t, Žižek says, reached Acceptance yet.Much of our problem, Žižek believes, stems from the radically individualistic responses we’ve seen to the issue. Demands that people wash their hands and wear masks, demands easily circumvented by petulant people, shift the burden for dealing with the crisis onto individuals while leaving dysfunctional systems intact. This toxin permeated our nations, Žižek says, because our institutions were unprepared. Unless our institutions evolve appropriately, nothing will ultimately get better.A longstanding Marxist himself, Žižek claims we’ll only successfully address this crisis by adopting “a form of Communism.” He repeatedly stresses, however, that he doesn’t mean Twentieth Century capital-C Communism. State control in China handled the original Wuhan outbreak poorly, censoring the first whistleblower doctor and condemning him to die of his own disease. The Maoist desire to restore pre-crisis economics then pushed bureaucrats to falsify reports of supposed recovery.Rather, Žižek believes we’ll need a small-C communist revolution, an outbreak of communitarian feeling and dedication to shared values of interdependence and confraternity. We must relinquish our principles of individualism (though not individuality) in favor of cooperation and collaboration, placing the common good above our personal acquisitiveness. We must stop believing we’ll personally get rich, and instead dedicate ourselves to lifting everybody up together. This is an excessively brief paraphrase.For what it’s worth, Žižek’s precepts sound nice, but remain reliant on a centralized decision-making authority, which makes me squeamish. The massive technical complexity of post-human capitalism is totally dependent on so many moving parts that a very tiny interruption can destroy the whole mechanism. Žižek himself acknowledges this by comparing COVID to the Icelandic volcano that grounded the entire European airplane fleet: late capitalism makes us more vulnerable to nature, not less.Writing about a world-shifting historical event, while that event is still occurring, creates possibilities for rift. Žižek describes the heights of COVID-19 as Italy being functionally shuttered, an event which seems impossibly distant now. He also cites evolutions in conservative capitalism, highlighted by President Trump moving to push the Defense Production Act to produce medical necessities like ventilators. Trump talked about doing this, but never actually did it.We cannot help changing when faced with global scale catastrophe. As Žižek acknowledges, we can either amend our actions, with an increased reliance on cooperation, or stay the course, a choice which dooms part of society to death. Do we believe, he asks, that our choices can improve human circumstances? Or do we preserve economic continuity, at the cost of the defenseless among us? “But we not only have a choice,” he writes, “we are already making choices.”Žižek sees the present as an opportunity. We can shed our illusions, embrace change, and thrive—though he admits he doesn’t know what that will look like. Or we can continue denying and bargaining, at vast human cost. Žižek remains guardedly optimistic. He just wants us to consider our options carefully.

One of the very few books in my life that I read, paused to catch my breath, and then went immediately back to the beginning to read again. Whole passages I could not understand, but still somehow I feel like (my) life during the plague now has meaning.

Having read “Panic(Pandemic) Covid-19 Shakes the World” by Slavoj Zizek and now having more a view of matters in retrospect, how ought we appoint ourselves in Samara? We all know that a catastrophe well beyond the potens of Covid-19 can and will come to pass. So, yes, we ought not avoid this fact and fate. If nothing other, we have at least learned a lesson in how to face such a fact and fate via reconciliation and with more the proper preparations.Alenka Zupancic is quoted and she points out how denial and deceit, such as Trump in saying: “let’s get back to work”, fails the task at hand.True. And more true, poor people cannot really reconcile with such a fate and fact, for they are too preoccupied with how and where they will obtain their next dollar in order to sustain themselves. However, perhaps “Trump’s economic policies centered around dismantling the welfare state” are an initial way in which to begin such the task, for such the welfare state is that in which much the poor take advantage of and depend upon and manipulate so not to have to work. Perhaps a dismantling and reconstructing a welfare state which has the poor get on their feet, get educated and trained and go to work and earn a decent wage is more the answer. On the opposite end, the super and lazy rich who live on some remote island and thus practice more the anti-social distancing from the rest of us ought to reunite and come and serve the public with real skin-in-the-game, too, instead of being more the hacks and Hollywood propagandists telling us how we ought to do the very.Finally, refugees, migrates and much the ecological crises can be curved by having many of these rather totalitarian nation-states end their regimes and power grabs. Ironically, the USA is a nation that is very conscientious in taking care of the environment and foreigners who “legally” want to enter; third world nations, including China, are more the culprits who dump most the plastics into the rivers which end up into our oceans, because their governments are more concerned about obtaining power, which then begets money and capital, and about controlling its people, they have neither the time nor interest in helping others, let alone humanity. Perhaps boycotts imposed on these selfish brats is the only initial way in which they will come to a consensus, for a true solidarity can only become manifest when everyone truly agrees and has skin-in-the-game. Indeed, the whole global socio-economic system has to participate. Since “the impotence of power is now laid bare” now is the time to act upon this exposure as the very open field in which “the man is a slave” becomes the place in which “the slave becomes a man”, as Frederick Douglas once proclaimed. In all due irony, “let’s get back to work”, each and everyone of us around the globe taking hold of the free and open field and change the way in which we live. So, in all due respect, Mr. Zizek, let us not point the finger at America when Trump says “America First”. Look at the remaining three fold of fingers pointing back at you, where, yes, national and personal independence becomes first and forefront, mainly these nations which are nothing of the sort, for then, and only then, solidarity becomes the projected field which can be sought. Let us remember how China was quite reluctant in allowing The World Health Organization (WHO) to enter into its nation during the more early stages of the pandemic, a country where its government keeps so much out of the eyes of not only international views but also from the eyes of its own citizens, much to the point where probably most the poor have yet to really know anything about what a conoravirus is let alone what it has done among them and their nation.

Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek has wasted no time in writing this short book in which he muses over the impact on the world of the COVD-19 pandemic. As always, Mr Žižek is challenging in his views and has a unique perspective. This is a book to read slowly and to think deeply about the future and what "normal" will mean when this is all over. The author points out that although we are in different ships we are all in the same boat when it comes to facing this pandemic and the reaction of respective leaders tells us a lot about the world and how it works. Some academics may shudder at the references to Wikipedia articles in the footnotes but this should not distract from Mr Zižek's thoughts and insights. This is not light reading by any means but it is eminently relatable and understandable. We are living in strange times and we need people like Slavoj Žižek to make sense of it for us.5 stars. Highly recommended.

Expectations are so incredibly high for new Zizek publications, but honestly I see nothing wrong with these types of books which are clearly marketed as lighter takes. If I wanted thick, heavy Zizek literature I would re-read one of his many magna opera

Rushed, incoherent, derivative. Give the money directly to a charity of your choice, there is nothing to read here beyond trite unreferenced ideas about coping with sudden fear and loss of lifestyle.

The reason i picked up this book is because I felt alienated by the current pandemic; friends and peers occasionally asked me my thoughts on the whole mess and I couldn’t allow myself to say anything since I deeply felt like I lacked perspective on the matter.This book by Slavoj Zizek brought a flood of interesting perspectives on the crisis. Even though I didn’t agree with all of them, I found them culturally nourishing.I wouldn’t consider myself a communist, in fact, I wouldn’t consider myself anything except an ‘’observer’’ when it comes to politics. I observe the situation and take a stance based on what I know, while deeply aware that this position is far from being unshakeable and can move itself with newer evidence.The reason why I put 4 stars instead of 5 is because, for a non-native English reader/speaker, I found some passages to be quite abstruse and elusive, but I’m confident that the book helped me hone my English comprehension and reading skills, and for that reason, I would have given a 4.5/5, had it been possible.Excellent book.

I am a long time Zizek fan that has bought most of his writings, but this is more like a "under graduate essay" than a "book". You would fail if you handed this in to any academic class. Literally all his sources are from wikipedia and he says almost nothing in this, no jokes, no critical theory, no insight. Don't get lazy Zizek, you are only as good as your last book. Don't be insulting to the readers that support you.