Horowitz-Zizek: Episode Two
-
-
Cypherpunks: Episode Eight, full version, pt.2 -
Cypherpunks: Episode Eight, full version, pt.1 -
Ibrahim: Episode Eleven -
Chomsky-Ali: Episode Ten -
Khan: Episode Nine -
Cypherpunks: Episode Eight, pt.2 -
Cypherpunks: Episode Eight, pt.1 -
Occupy: Episode Seven -
Correa: Episode Six -
Begg-Qureshi: Episode Five -
Rajab & Abd El-Fattah: Episode Four -
Marzouki: Episode Three -
Nasrallah: Episode One -
Revealed: Assange pre-show full interview -
Warning: Assange! Controversy! -
Episode Two: Teaser -
Assange: Official trailer -
Unravelling: Promo Two -
Hourglass: Promo One
Comments
fasdfsdf
April 24, 2012, 21:40
Why does it always tell me, that the video hast been removed from the server..
Fred Magovern
April 24, 2012, 21:32
Very unproductive. Couldn’t you find a more sophisticated conservative?
Donald
April 24, 2012, 21:31
I completely agree with d00dsauce. None of the existing and past self-defined Communist governments has ever successfully implemented Communism. Most of them not even tried to. As always happens in Politics and when power is involved good ideas are exploited for selfish interests. In a way, from that point of view, I agree with the Zionist guest who states "You do not know human nature" in the sense that it is incredible what we, humans, are capable of. But on the other hand, since I am a human myself, I can look introspectively inside me, and through my consciousness and easily tell what I would be capable of. No need to be a Zionist to understand that whatever the Zionist party is up to is not good and not acceptable in a conscious world. The ethnocentric comments made by our Zionist, pro-war, racist friend who blatantly promotes the killing of thousands in Iraq, Iran and Syria in the name of self-denfence are astonishing. No wonder why the Rockefellers wanted him to write their biography. What he said about the Swedish (not Swiss as he says.. those are the inhabitants of Switzerland mate not Sweden) people, and I quote " they have no morals", is an incredibly superficial and stupid remark to make, and I have no doubt that this guy does not understand the concept of bias in a discourse. It is incredible that this person is allowed to lecture at universities. I would suggest to our Zionist friend Horowitz
to read Marx and Engels again (if he ever did).
to read Marx and Engels again (if he ever did).
lmllr1
April 24, 2012, 21:06
Both men are wrong. Ideologies of any kind never work in real life - that’s why we call them ideologies. Both the Left and Right misunderstand human nature - and each other - just in different ways.
And all systems of government devolve into oligarchies over time. It does not matter whether Obama is Left or Right because he’s not the one really running things. Similarly, it is not that one political system is better than the other, it is that ALL systems become corrupt over time.
And all systems of government devolve into oligarchies over time. It does not matter whether Obama is Left or Right because he’s not the one really running things. Similarly, it is not that one political system is better than the other, it is that ALL systems become corrupt over time.
Uruguayan
April 24, 2012, 21:01
Congratulations Julian, please keep doing the good work.
And democracy in South America is now for the north to learn and apply. We have people rescuing their elected presidents from coups d’etat sponsored by the North in South America...If that is not the government of the people...
And democracy in South America is now for the north to learn and apply. We have people rescuing their elected presidents from coups d’etat sponsored by the North in South America...If that is not the government of the people...
Augustine
April 24, 2012, 20:49
It seems to me that foreigners fail to see Obama as a socialist because they see mostly his foreign policy, which is not significantly different from Bush’s, which lead them to mistakenly conclude that it’s a conservative foreign policy.
Understandably, talking about socialists and conservatives these days is difficult, because such terms have been molded by rather bad examples in the past few years. I’d prefer to use the terms statists and subsidiarists instead, respectively.
So, while American imperialism is nothing but a result of statist policies, seemingly favored by Horowitz, both Bush and Obama are quite happy to use the power of the state to support the American military-congressional-meidatic-industrial complex.
On the other hand, when it comes to use state power inwards toward Americans, both Bush and Obama are again happy to treat citizens with suspicion and heavy-handedness, usurping their constitutional rights.
And I believe that this is the reality that we got to, when the major political forces are both statist (a historical trait of the left) and the principle of subsidiarity (so cherished historically by conservatives) has been all but extinct, if it weren’t for lone voices like Ron Paul’s in the US, but practically extinct elsewhere.
And for the question about which country should have the hegemony, it’s a moot question. Historically peace was indeed achieved when a major military force subjugated others like in the Pax Romana and more recently in the Pax Americana. But I think that we have the historic example of Latin America, where there’s no military force particularly more powerful than others and whose peoples have had no vocation for military conquests in the last century.
Good show. Unlike any other anywhere.
Understandably, talking about socialists and conservatives these days is difficult, because such terms have been molded by rather bad examples in the past few years. I’d prefer to use the terms statists and subsidiarists instead, respectively.
So, while American imperialism is nothing but a result of statist policies, seemingly favored by Horowitz, both Bush and Obama are quite happy to use the power of the state to support the American military-congressional-meidatic-industrial complex.
On the other hand, when it comes to use state power inwards toward Americans, both Bush and Obama are again happy to treat citizens with suspicion and heavy-handedness, usurping their constitutional rights.
And I believe that this is the reality that we got to, when the major political forces are both statist (a historical trait of the left) and the principle of subsidiarity (so cherished historically by conservatives) has been all but extinct, if it weren’t for lone voices like Ron Paul’s in the US, but practically extinct elsewhere.
And for the question about which country should have the hegemony, it’s a moot question. Historically peace was indeed achieved when a major military force subjugated others like in the Pax Romana and more recently in the Pax Americana. But I think that we have the historic example of Latin America, where there’s no military force particularly more powerful than others and whose peoples have had no vocation for military conquests in the last century.
Good show. Unlike any other anywhere.
Lars Printzén
April 24, 2012, 20:35
I was looking forward to this program after the insightful discussion with Hasan Nasrallah but was deeply disappointed. It needed a theme and a referee.
Actually I agree! There was just to much slandering from two quite ignorant extremists.
Actually I agree! There was just to much slandering from two quite ignorant extremists.
Chris Roberts
April 24, 2012, 20:26
I was looking forward to this program after the insightful discussion with Hasan Nasrallah but was deeply disappointed. It needed a theme and a referee.
Lars Printzén
April 24, 2012, 20:20
Horowitz neglects to mention the hundreds of Pro Zionist, Double Nationalist, Neo Cons that lobbied for the war on Iraq. My most personal conviction is that these Pro Zionist infiltrators were behind the 911 plot.
Glenn Allen Nolen
April 24, 2012, 19:57
That was truly fun to watch. Continuity in the United States two party system of today does not allow for alternative solutions. We, the citizens of the United States, are, therefore, on a path of failure. A spark of change must be ignited. That fire will guide our world through the twenty-first century.