Some months ago, a small miracle happened in the occupied West Bank: Palestinian women demonstrating against the Wall were joined by a group of Jewish lesbian women from Israel. The initial mutual mistrust was dispelled in the first confrontation with the Israeli soldiers guarding the Wall, and a sublime solidarity developed, with a traditionally dressed Palestinian woman embracing a Jewish lesbian with spiky purple hair—a living symbol of what our struggle should be.
When conservative fundamentalists claim that America is a Christian nation, we should remember what Christianity essentially is: the Holy Spirit, the free egalitarian community of believers united by love. It is the protesters who represent the Holy Spirit, while pagan Wall Street continues to worship false idols (embodied in the statue of the bull). Are the protesters violent? True, their language may appear combative (Occupy!, and so on), but they are violent only in the sense in which Mahatma Gandhi was violent. They are violent insofar as they want to put a brake on the way things are going–but what is this compared to the violence needed to sustain the smooth functioning of the global capitalist system? They are called losers–but are not the true losers those on Wall Street who had to be rescued with hundreds of billions of our dollars? They are called socialists–but in the US, there is already a socialism for the rich. They are accused of not respecting private property–but the Wall Street speculations that led to the crash of 2008 wiped out more hard-earned private property than anything the protesters would be able to achieve.
Slavoj Žižek - The Year of Dreaming Dangerously (2012)
It is the ultimate irony of history that radical individualism serves as an ideological justification for the unconstrained power of what the vast majority experience as an anonymous force that, without any democratic public control, regulates their lives.
We should […] save Europe itself from its saviors: the neoliberals promoting the bitter medicine of austerity and the anti-immigrant populists. There is, however, something wrong with this idea: the fact it is exactly the response of the archetypal European left-liberal moron - preferably a socially aware cultural intellectual - on the question of Europe today. […] The main, moronic idea here involves a return to the authentic Welfare State: we need a new political party that will return to the good old principles abandoned under neoliberal pressure; we need to regulate the banks and control financial excesses, guarantee free universal health care and education, and so on. What is wrong with this? Everything. Such an approach is stricto sensu idealist, that is, it opposes its own idealized ideological supplement to the existing deadlock. Recall what Marx wrote about Plato’s Republic: the problem is not that it is “too utopian,” but, on the contrary, that it remains the ideal image of the existing politico-economic order.