Slavoj Žižek

En este artículo abordamos las nociones de libertad, historia y subjetividad, con el fin de aportar una contribución original a los estudios sobre la ideología. Nuestra metodología consistirá en cruzar el psicoanálisis freudiano-lacaniano y la teoría de la interpelación de Louis Althusser. En la introducción, comenzaremos exponiendo dos grandes críticas al psicoanálisis freudiano, una formulada por Jean-Paul Sartre, y la otra por Gilles Deleuze y Félix Guattari, arrojando así la luz sobre cómo el psicoanálisis podría representar (a pesar de esos argumentos críticos), un campo de libertad en lugar de determinismo, y un dominio que es inherentemente histórico, en lugar de lo contrario. En la primera sección, examinaremos más de cerca las nociones de libertad, memoria e historia, avanzando una hipótesis preliminar según la cual, dentro del espacio simbólico, el pasado permanece abierto a los cambios, lo que hará posible tanto la ideología como la libertad. Además, veremos qué aspectos de la libertad podrían encontrarse dentro de la teoría althusseriana de la interpelación, y cómo el psicoanálisis lacaniano es compatible con ella o puede llevarnos más allá de sus limitaciones. En la segunda sección, veremos cómo puede haber un sujeto que precede a la subjetivación, y cómo la teoría del sujeto de Lacan que surge del resto traumático, sobrepasa el alcance de la teoría de la interpelación. La tercera sección abordará el núcleo pulsional-traumático del sujeto, tal como lo concibe Freud, no sólo como dimensión determinante del psiquismo individual, sino como condición estructural de la cultura. A través de estas consideraciones, mostraremos cómo el psicoanálisis puede proporcionar una explicación de los fundamentos de la ideología, al concebir el núcleo pulsional-traumático de la ley que reside en el Nombre-del-Padre. En la conclusión, veremos, a través de una serie de ejemplos, cómo la ideología aparece disfrazada de verdad, y por qué la comprensión psicoanalítica del inconsciente es necesaria para desenmascarar las ilusiones que produce.

"Is it meaningful to call oneself a democrat? And if so, how do you interpret the word?" In responding to this question, eight iconoclastic thinkers prove the rich potential of democracy, along with its critical weaknesses, and reconceive the practice to accommodate new political and cultural realities. Giorgio Agamben traces the tense history of constitutions and their coexistence with various governments. Alain Badiou contrasts current democratic practice with democratic communism. Daniel Bensaid ponders the institutionalization of democracy, while Wendy Brown discusses the democratization of society under neoliberalism. Jean-Luc Nancy measures the difference between democracy as a form of rule and as a human end, and Jacques Rancière highlights its egalitarian nature. Kristin Ross identifies hierarchical relationships within democratic practice, and Slavoj Zizek complicates the distinction between those who desire to own the state and those who wish to do without it. Concentrating on the classical roots of democracy and its changing meaning over time and within different contexts, these essays uniquely defend what is left of the left-wing tradition after the fall of Soviet communism. They confront disincentives to active democratic participation that have caused voter turnout to decline in western countries, and they address electoral indifference by invoking and reviving the tradition of citizen involvement. Passionately written and theoretically rich, this collection speaks to all facets of modern political and democratic debate.

Jacques Lacan coined the term “subjective destitution” to describe the concluding moment of a psychoanalytic treatment. This concept can also usefully be applied to art and to politics. In art, subjective destitution can be defined as a passage from being-towardsdeath to undeadness, in other words to the position of the living dead – this passage takes place between Shostakovich’s 14th symphony and his final symphony, the 15th. In politics, subjective destitution designates the passage of a political subject to a radical de-subjectivization, to becoming an object of a political cause.

In light of the threat of post-humanism as yet another “death of the subject”, this chapter is in search of the vestiges of the survival and new proliferation of subjectivity in the most unexpected places. First, the possibility of the formation of a revolutionary self in Buddhism is discussed, arising from the destitution of the human, humanist self. Then, even contemporary Hollywood film production can be of aid. Todd Phillips’s Joker is interpreted as an implicitly political film, inasmuch as it knows how to circumvent and subvert the common psycho-social genesis. The hero rather enacts a transition from madness to becoming a stand-in for the pure form of subjectivity. A direct emancipatory political project is absent from the film’s storyline: we, the spectators, are solicited to fill the absence that the hero in his inner void represents. It will be shown that what makes Joker so unsettling is that it does not engage in calling for political action, but ultimately leaves the decision to us.

Starting from the distinction between “ideal ego”, “ego-ideal” and “superego” structured from the Imaginary-Symbolic-Real triad made by Lacan, this study investigates how is possible to distinguish the a-sexual social space from the domain of libidinally-cathexed interactions. Through the analysis of Balibar’s, Miller’s, Schuster’s and Hägglund’s ideas, paths and strategies are defined to analyze the existing dynamics between symbolic power, law and superego. What emerges is the reconstruction of a new subjectivity which is capable, at the same time, to overcome the jouissance-superego dynamic at the basis of Lacanian reflection and face the challenges of contemporary post-humanism. Therefore, what subject stands for is the inhuman core of being-human, what Hegel called selfrelating negativity, what Freud called death drive. The text proposes, in short, how the Subject is what is in a human being more than human, the immortality of the deathdrive which makes it a living dead, something that insists beyond the cycle of life and death.

Contribution to a collective work called “Manifesto: A Struggle for Universalities” to be published soon and edited by Nicol A, Barría Asensio & Slavoj Zizek: _Foreword:_ Yanis Varaoufakis: _Epilogue:_ David Pavón-Cuellar and over 40 other contributors. In the words of Nicol A, Barría Asenjo: “The present Manifesto arises as an attempt to respond to the current political, historical, social and economic situation. The 21st century prevails, containing within itself the antagonisms, challenges and debates that the history of humanity has tried to overcome. The 21st century is a repetition of systematic failure, a living symptom of past epochs that have not learned to re-elaborate and re-signify their own symptom. We are and live in a repetition that must be stopped, if our goal is that the signifier "humanity" remains in the following centuries, the time has come to work in the present.”