Following is a link to a talk he gave in November 2009 in London. After opening with a somewhat general discussion of modern capitalism, particularly the fact that consuming is now a lifestyle activity, he discusses basic income. That part of the talk is great. Zizek mentions developments in Brazil, South Africa, and Europe, and then discusses the work of Philippe Van Parijs, who’s cited in several places at www.IncomeSecurityForAll.org.

This mostly theoretical talk, which is increasingly abstract after the section on basic income, was featured on New Year’s Day on a popular progressive political website, CommonDreams.org. The basic income idea is spreading, even in the United States.

After that section of the talk, Zizek returns to his theme of the contradictions in post-1968 capitalism, using the work of a contemporary German philosopher, Peter Sloterdijk (who I had not previously heard of). Sloterdijk and Zizek seem to believe that the modern social welfare state, with its taxes, infrastructure, rule of law, and so on, must be preserved by the good works of the rich, people such as Bill Gates and George Soros.

Zizek then states that he agrees most with some ideas from Oscar Wilde’s “The Soul of Modern Man Under Socialism,” specifically the notion that charity degrades and demoralizes and merely prolongs the contradictions and injustices of capitalism.

Thus, asserting that basic income is a form of charity that will leave people envious and demoralized, Zizek concludes that it’s an attractive idea but can’t work. His argument reflects three misconceptions about basic income. First, he seems to think that the basic income is little more than taxing the rich to subsidize the poor, and would therefore prolong or increase envy, greed, and demoralization. He thus ignores the fact that the rich will benefit enormously from basic income, because they will have greater security and a more stable and sustainable society, along with opportunities to become even richer.

Second, the funds don’t have to come from taxing income and labor. Society can charge some rent or fees on what people take from nature and the community. Such takings include oil, land, timber, minerals, electromagnetic spectrum, and so on. The opening section of Zizek’s talk suggests that he ought to be sympathetic to this point. This is the idea of carbon fee and dividend that I’ve posted about a few times in recent weeks, and the idea of Thomas Paine, Henry George, and other people who are discussed elsewhere on this site.

Finally, he seems to view basic income only as a form of charity. It’s not. Instead, it would ensure that everyone can participate as citizens within the economic, social, and political activities of the modern state. It would be transformative in just the ways Zizek and Wilde appear to desire.

I hope Zizek continues to read and think about basic income, and to spread the word. His criticisms, particularly because of their contradictions and blind spots, mostly serve our interests.

The whole tape is 29:24.

Here’s the link:

http://vimeo.com/8073858

(I tried to upload the video so you could view it here, but had some trouble with that. Sorry.)

Steven Shafarman

Last Monday, June 8th, was the bicentennial of the death of Thomas Paine.

Paine was a great champion of liberty and democracy, rightly celebrated for his writings that helped spark the American Revolution. His words and ideas continue to be powerful and relevant.

Especially important today, though mostly ignored, is his call for “Agrarian Justice.” He maintained that we will never achieve true individual liberty and a succesful democracy unless we provide opportunities for everyone to participate as citizens.

I was reminded of Paine’s anniversary a few days ago, while watching Bill Moyers’ Journal on PBS. The guests were historian Harvey J. Kaye and journalist Richard Brookhiser. Though Kaye is an avowed liberal and Brookhiser a renowned conservative, both expressed great respect for Paine’s ideas.

A very good discussion, and I recommend watching the 24-minute video. It’s posted with a transcript  here.

As the discussion went on, I kept wondering if they would talk about Agrarian Justice. It was almost over when they did:

BILL MOYERS: Toward the end of his life, Paine urged American citizens to renew their patriotism in reference to, he said first principles. Today, 2009, what are the first principles you think Paine, if he were blogging today, would be espousing?

RICHARD BROOKHISER: Well, I think he would say liberty. I think he would say opportunity. And economic opportunity. I think those are the things that he would hammer at.

HARVEY KAYE: I agree. But I think I would take it a step further. And I go back to what I said at the beginning. Paine was a small “d” democrat. He was a political democrat. He became a political democrat by what he recognized in American life. And later, when he did come out of prison, he wrote “Agrarian Justice.” And there he lays out a social democratic vision. That’s where he says, “Let us create real opportunity for young people. And not give them a life of poverty. Let us tax the landed wealth, and use that money in some kind of community chest, a national treasury, to provide stakes, S-T-A-K-E-S.”

You know, grants to young people, so when they reach twenty-one, and he said that of men and women, which was a very progressive thing to do at the time. And that way, they’ll have a chance to, you know, buy land, gain an education, set up a small business. And we can also then afford pensions to the elderly. So, he did very much sort of look ahead to the idea, absolutely, of economic opportunity, but in a social democratic way, I think.

RICHARD BROOKHISER: Yes, if he had thought that there were people who were permanently stuck in a, you know, servile or lower economic class, he would not have liked that. And he would have–

HARVEY KAYE: Right. And he did say–

RICHARD BROOKHISER: –he looked for means to–

HARVEY KAYE: He did say–

RICHARD BROOKHISER: –move them outside of it.

HARVEY KAYE: –everyone had to accept the payment, whether you needed it or not. You could give it back afterwards. But he didn’t want it to be a charity.

BILL MOYERS: Richard Nixon came up with something like that. Remember that? Is that part of Paine’s genius, part of his greatness? That we, each of us, no matter what end of the political spectrum we’re on, find a real American there, a true American there?

Paine’s ideas lead directly to Citizen Dividends, the universal, guaranteed basic income, the theme of this blog and web site.

In my timeline of American advocates of guaranteed income security (I say American because some of my friends begin with Jesus and other early thinkers), Paine is second after Thomas Jefferson, who, while a delegate to the Virginia legislature, called for homesteads for propertyless individuals.

A direct link to my historical review is here. The entry on Paine includes the summary text he put on the cover of Agrarian Justice.  The complete pamphlet is here.

My updated version of Paine’s idea, and my plan for making it happen, is in Peaceful, Positive Revolution,.

Additional information is on the home page and elsewhere on this web site, www.IncomeSecurityForAll.org.

Please comment on this blog and help spread the word.

Steven Shafarman