Žižek in a moment of weakness

Clarification: The moment of weakness belonged to me, not Z.  (It was weakness that led me to listen to Z.---and, perhaps, to write this comment)...

Apologies:  I had typed a comment on my mother's IPad, but, as happens too damn frequently,
the thing mal-functioned.

I shall try to reconstruct the comment tomorrow.

I'm starting to think Z. is historically naive, and needlessly misanthropic.
We can learn something about how real changes happen by consider the history of science and technology---which Z. does not.
Also, in the snippet I saw on "Youtube", Z's audience let him talk without interrupting and
failed to ask the most elementary and obvious questions......

recommended reading:  "Not by Genes Alone", Boyd and Richerson, U. Chicago---on how it takes time and many failures to achieve technological progress.....

Link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APDGh43VCxs

further comments forthcoming

Reconstruction:

Rough over-view of my comment:
1.  What makes Z. so sure that any movement /attempt at revival is doomed to fail?
Pretty comparison to sex/romantic love/Hollywood---but that's not an argument.

Why think that the specific constellation of events called "Prague Spring" was doomed
to fail?

Is it mere "pessimism"?  That's no argument and is historically naive given the nature of
progress in technology. --Esp. the need for many false starts before success is achieved.

Secondly, we know from the history of science that a bad theory can persist with problems.
The problems can be known, and no one can see a solution.  Until one day, a new theory arrives.

2.  Why is no one asking Z. hard questions?  ---.e.g., "What is your reason (other than loudly labeled but undefended "pessimism") for thinking the Prague Spring would have failed?

3.  Why is Z. dismissive of worker-owned businesses?  He mentions a few cases where they failed.  A famous counter--example is Mondragon, in the Basque Country.  Why did no one ask him about that obvious counter-example?

In any case, Richard D. Wolff claims there are lots of worker-owned businesses in the USA, and he thinks it is an idea whose time has come.  To be responsible, Z. would need to address that suggestion in detail.  To be fair, at the time of this interview, Wolff's book had not yet appear.  On the other hand, Z. does not give a real argument or explanation, he only registers his doubts. But doubts are not identical with reasoned argument.  Someone should have asked him to say more.  It is a failing of his audience that they did not.

to repeat:  Someone should be asking Z. questions, but no one does.  Very disappointing on the part of L.N........